First, please read the three assigned articles. Once you have done that, take a stab at the following questions: 1) Can you formulate a basic definition of parasocial relationships? 2) Do you think that TV audiences form "relationships" with media characters (including fictional characters)? If so, what are the nature of these relationships and how do they differ from real relationships? 3) What are the theoretical foundations of these relationships? Can you make an "effects" claim? 4) At what point does a parasocial relationship cross the line from being healthy to unhealthy?Due: Sept. 30 at 5 p.m.
1) The basic definition of a parasocial relationship is a relationship that is completely one-sided instead of being two-sided like a normal social relationship. For one person, the relationship has meaning and fills a need. This commonly occurs in situations where a person will develop a one-sided parasocial relationship with a character, media figure, or celebrity and this relationship will somewhat fill their need to belong.
ReplyDelete2) I definitely think that TV audiences form what could be defined as a “relationship” with media characters. These relationships vary in their degree of depth but these relationships often fill needs because individuals feel as if they have something in common with the people they admire or they feel that they understand someone else on a deep level. They often overlook and ignore the fact that their relationship is one-sided and that the other person does not feel the same level of engagement. A certain level of imagination or ability to make-believe is present in nearly any parasocial relationship.
3) An appropriate effects claim would be that people have a tendency to use media figures in similar roles as they do friends and romantic partners. They develop similar relationships because these relationships seem to give a certain sense of belonging. These relationships, however, only bear a resemblance to real relationships and do not offer all aspects of a full relational experience.
4) I think nearly everyone on Earth has the tendency to create parasocial relationships to some extent in their lives. Human beings naturally look to examples for how they should live their lives and for a sense of belonging. It is natural to look upwards to those we imagine to be ideal as they provide example behaviors and attitudes. I believe the line of unhealthy behavior exists when the relationship becomes an obsession and limits or prevents healthy social relationships. The research we read suggests that parasocial relationships often thrive in conjunction with real social relationship. Friendships are strengthened through a shared admiration of similar qualities or through a shared enjoyment in a particular TV show. However, when real social relationships are pushed aside or never pursued because of the presence of a parasocial relationship, the behavior becomes unhealthy. Likewise, when admiration pushes beyond the point of simply looking for an example of appropriate social behavior and becomes an obsession or a dependence, the individual's needs cannot be met through an absent individual and this behavior is also unhealthy.
I thought this was an interesting subject. I think of the tendency for some children to create imaginary friends (a parasocial relationship in its own right) and I see striking similarities with the creation of parasocial relationships with media figures. People idolize celebrities because they present a very idealized representation of how to live glamorous, desirable lives. Individuals learn social roles and attempt to follow the examples of their idealized heroes. To an extent this can be healthy. Growing up, I idolized my favorite sports heroes and tried to emulate their skills, moves, and aspects of their personalities. I also have at various times attempted to emulated musicians, movie characters, and other media figures. However, letting this imaginative thinking go too far at the expense of true, real-life relationships can be very harmful and damaging.
Parasocial relationships are, by definition, one-sided. This type of relationship exists in the mind of a person who imagines him or herself being intimately involved with someone who does not actually know them. The most common occurrence of parasocial relationships is between media figures and members of the audience.
ReplyDeleteIn my work in the media, I have seen people become attached to actors and on-air personalities, treating them with a familiarity typical of someone close to them, even though they have never even met the personality face-to-face. This is not entirely surprising, nor always negative. Television and radio stations build media programming and cultivate media personalities, striving to create a likeable, relatable character who will engender trust from their target audience. For example, in radio, announcers strive to focus on speaking to the audience one person at a time, in a very personal way, so that listeners will build a trusting relationship with the announcer and will start to feel like that announcer is a part of the listener’s life. Thus it should not come as a surprise when a listener encounters an announcer and can tell that announcer many details about their life, and desire to relate to them in person in the same way they relate to them remotely.
What makes these parasocial relationships different from regular relationships is their one-sided nature. The audience member has invested time and energy into learning more about the media figure, whereas the personality knows little or nothing about the individual audience member. If and when the two meet, there is often a jarring realization on the audience member’s part that the celebrity does not actually know them. This can be misinterpreted as not caring or being insensitive.
There are a number of communications theories that can help to explain parasocial relationships. Uses and gratifications can play heavily in this type of media usage. A person involved in a parasocial relationship with a television personality, for example, may be using that relationship to satisfy emotions such as arousal, escape, and companionship. They may see this personality as a dependable, safe, predictable companion. Media effects also come into play, as the on-screen life and activities of this character can influence the viewer to adopt certain mannerisms, support sympathetic causes, or wear similar styles of clothing and grooming.
A parasocial relationship crosses from harmless to unhealthy when fantasy tends to become reality in the viewer’s mind. The desire to interact with this imagined companion may override social propriety, and the viewer may go to extremes to make the relationship real. This can result in stalking behaviors, and in extreme cases, may actually cause physical harm to the celebrity. Even in mild cases of parasocial relationships, negative effects can arise from the viewer becoming isolated and shut off from real relationships because of their investment in and obsession with an imagined relationship.
1.) Parasocial relationship (PSR) is a term used to describe viewers’ long-term, one-sided responses to, and imagined interactivity with, media characters and personae (Horton & Strauss, 1957; Horton & Wohl, 1956) that specifically differs from parasocial interaction (PSI) in that it is perpetuated beyond the bounds of the moment of media exposure (Gleich, 1997).
ReplyDelete2.) I absolutely believe that TV audiences can form “relationships” with media characters. These relationships seem to have special relevance in TV, where the relationship is face-to-face (as opposed to books or radio), spatial distances are often intimate, the time spent with the personae is often extensive, and the exposition that characters disclose to the viewer spans several episodes (i.e. talk shows, sitcoms, news). Although many of these same “key impulses” listed are vital components of social relationships, the key difference in parasocial relationships is that the characters’ actions and communication reach the viewer, but the viewer’s reactions and feedback do not reach the characters, so a real relationship built on the fundamentals of interpersonal communication can never be implemented.
3.) It appears that PSR results from initial uses and gratifications that viewers have in interacting with a particular media source. This could be use of news for current events, or of a procedural drama for the cognitive problem-solving stimulation. Invariably, as frequency of selective exposure increases, the intensity of PSR is strengthened (Ruben & Perse, 1987). While this isn’t always unhealthy (i.e., identifying with a news anchor or talk show host as a source of credible, reliable information; mood management), it can reach unhealthy levels and classifications.
4.) Repeated acts of media consumption also lead to an increase in deficient self-regulation, or diminished self-control (LaRose, Lin, & Eastin, 2004). A person in this state helplessly consumes media, and since PSR is simultaneously being strengthened, the individual both loses the ability to cognitively activate the self-regulation mechanism (Bandura, 1991), and becomes more and more attached to the media personae. When what they are consuming has all of the key impulses of social relationships, it is conceivable that viewers could attach emotions like admiration to the characters on TV, and when the viewer inevitably feels the effects of asymmetrical interactions, that come when one party in a relationship doesn’t reciprocate feelings, it could lead to perceived self-deficiencies or inadequacies that could result in various maladaptive behaviors.
References:
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248-287.
Gleich, U. (1997). Parasocial interactions and relationships between television viewers and personae on the screen: A theoretical and empirical contribution to the concept of the active media user. Landau: Verlag Empirische Pädagogik.
Horton, D., & Strauss, A. (1957). Interaction in audience-participation shows. American Journal of Sociology, 62, 579–587.
Horton, D., & Wohl, R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observation on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19, 215–229.
LaRose, R., & Eastin, M. S. (2004). A social cognitive theory of Internet uses and gratifications: Toward a new model of media attendance. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 48(3), 358–377.
Rubin, A. M., & Perse, E. M. (1987). Audience activity and soap opera involvement: A uses and effects investigation. Human Communication Research, 14, 246–292.
There are two requirements for a parasocial relationship: 1) retaining self-identity and 2) interaction with the character. This is a broad definition that allows us to take in the range of such relationships. I have heard viewers in a movie yell to a character in a horror movie, “Don’t open that door!” At the other end of the spectrum are older women who refer to the Soap Operas as “My Stories.” Taken to an extreme, viewers can believe that news anchors, athletes, and fictitious characters are sending them personal messages. I once counseled with a young man who believed a figure skater in the Northeast needed his help after viewing a news story. He stole cash from his parents, boarded a bus, and went to help. He got as far as Chicago.
ReplyDeleteIt is undeniable that TV audiences form relationships with media characters, real and imagined. The degree to which they form these bounds vary based upon their loneliness and social situation (psychological and sociological construct), socialization skills (the inverse of social learning theory), and cultivation theory. In this last case, those media figures who seem to talk to a lonely person who has few healthy “real-life” relationships can begin to assume that the media is a reflection of reality. For those with no counterbalance to their constructs of reality, this view of the world can easily be perceived as complete but “virtual.” The observable effect of those becoming more dependent upon parasocial relationships in Japan is “Hikikomori” which means “pulling inward, being confined.” The lifestyle is a media effect as these hermits, male and female, mostly adolescents and young adults interact with no real human except, perhaps, a parent.
In this case, the manifestation of the “effect” is the transition from real-to-virtual relationships that are entirely facilitated by media. But the range of media seems large (television, books, radio, movies, internet in all its varieties.) There is a psychologist who claims 700,000 of them in Japan with an estimated 1.55 million on the verge of the lifestyle. In this case, Cultivation Theory would suggest that the longer people live in a television (or media generated) world, the more they will believe social reality portrayed on television. But this phenomenon goes beyond social relationships.
In my opinion, that “line is crossed” to unhealthy territory when media is no longer a supplement or interpretation of reality and supplants real relationships. But I would go so far as to say that this threshold has been crossed my many Millennials when they mistake virtual relationships for real ones. It probably started with pornographic telephone services and zoomed into anonymous on-line chat forums. I have counseled both men and women who have had on-line adulterous affairs with strangers they have never met. Porn addition is a kind of parasocial relationship. In Psychology Today (Feb. 2012), “Facebook Addition” has been reported to be harder to quit than smoking. Arnett’s theory of broad and narrow socialization seems to suggest that when family, peers, school, community, legal system, and cultural belief system are weakened, any only media is strong imbalance is likely.
And as a bit of tangent, the studies we read are of dubious standards for generalization when they rely entirely on college age students. The Social Desirability Theory that predicts men and women who would normally be pairing up in their 20s but don’t even into their 40s may have an entirely different meaning in terms of Identification and Parasocial Relationships. What does it mean to a person approaching 50 who has never been married or had a child when everyone else seems to have done so? Undergraduate students aged 19 to 22 are not a population to study to generalize media effects on these issues. Younger children, tweens, and middle aged/older adults may not have a convenience sample accessible when there is little budget but they would be a more fertile field to cultivate.
A parasocial relationship exists when a consumer of media establishes a one-way connection to a character in television, film, books, etc. This connection goes beyond merely finding a character appealing, and may include imitating the character in daily speech, dress, or assumed thought patterns and actions i.e. “How would my favorite character respond to this situation?” A strong PSR would include the consumer feeling nostalgic and comforted by the media presence of their preferred character.
ReplyDeleteAudiences can clearly form PSRs, but citing Eyal and Cohen, the relationships are not as intense or deep as real relationships. However, because I tend to do other activities while watching tv, I find myself establishing deeper PSRs with the characters in books because my attention is truly undivided. Like many of my peers, I grew up alongside Harry Potter. *Spoiler Alert* The deaths of Sirius Black and Albus Dumbledore throughout the series were quite sad for me, but had Sirius and Dumbledore been real people in my own life, I would have mourned for days at the loss of my mentors and parental figures. I also felt a loss when I said goodbye to the magical trio I’d grown up with as I finished the last page of the 7th book, sure I could re-read the books, but there isn’t any additional character growth because Harry, Ron, and Hermione have essentially finished their lives.
I think social learning theory is a big player in PSRs. As a media consumer identifies with a character in the media, they may be more likely to imitate the values and behavior of the character they identify with, depending on the level of consumption, attachment to the character, and loneliness in the life of the consumer.
I don’t see a problem with having an emotional response to a specific character’s actions or death. I think it’s the intent of any screenwriter or author to elicit an emotional response from the audience. But I do think it’s unhealthy when a PSA evolves into a relationship the consumer thinks and treats as a real relationship. If a consumer’s PSA gets in the way of normal behavior, i.e. they don’t go to work the day following a traumatic experience of the character of their favorite show because they’re grieving with the character or on a more extreme level, the consumer refuses to date someone because they believe it’s only a matter of time before they meet their character and start a romantic relationship.
Working in television news, Valentine’s Day was always a little awkward and creepy. The on-air employees would receive gifts of chocolates, flowers, teddy bears, and other romantic gifts from viewers who felt like they’d established a relationship with the anchors and reporters. For these people, this PSR had evolved into a very real relationship they could act upon even though it was still very much a one-way relationship with a set idea of what our personalities were like as experienced on-air.
I think that's interesting that your first reaction to witnessing news anchors receiving gifts for Valentine's day is "a little awkward and creepy". Only because I felt like that as well when I first heard that, but then thought about it a little more because I think the media (movies, stories we hear, etc.) has blown that up quite a bit to be an issue, because that's where it starts, etc.
DeleteHowever, I think that you could surmise that some of the people sending those gifts were really just trying to be sincere, and wanted to send their favorite news anchor a gift because they're saying something along the lines of "thanks for being there every night for me". It may sound a little extreme, but my grandmother watches the news every night without fail. I don't think she would ever send anything to the news anchors she watches, but if she wanted to, I wouldn't be weirded out by it.
Anyway, interesting thoughts. Should be a good class discussion.
1. A parasocial relationship (PSR) is a one-sided relationship involving a “spectator” and a “performer” (often a celebrity/character; Horton & Wohl, 1956). In these relationships, spectators identify with performers that they do not know personally but with whom they’ve built an emotional connection through television, books, movies, etc.
ReplyDelete2. I definitely believe that TV audiences form relationships with media characters. As Eyal and Cohen (2006) and Greenwood and Long (2011) point out, these relationships mimic the characteristics of interpersonal relationships but do not often replace or perfectly replicate them. I think the most prominent difference between PSRs and interpersonal relationships is lack the feedback in PSRs.
3. PSRs may arise as individuals use the media for specific purposes (U&G) and find that their needs are met through a character or a relationship with a character. Greenwood and Long’s (2011) work suggests that the need to belong and the lack of an intimate romantic relationship are uses that could lead to relatively strong PSRs.
4. I think it’s hard to delineate a specific point when a PSR goes from being healthy to unhealthy because there is such a large gray area between the two. That said, I believe there are healthy and unhealthy PSRs and that part of what contributes to a PSR’s health is the personality characteristics and situation of the spectator. When I was working with a group young women, for example, there were, from my perspective, PRSs that ranged from healthy to unhealthy. One young woman has a strong but healthy relationship with Sherlock. She connected with the character and mentioned him in person and on social media frequently. This relationship perpetuated and contributed to her real relationships with family members and friends who also identified with Sherlock. On the other end of the spectrum, there is a young woman who develops strong and seemingly unhealthy PSRs with most television characters she comes across. For her, these relationships provide a permanent escape from difficult family, school, health, and dating situations, allowing these characters to replace many real relationships and inhibit the development of social skills.
As I read about PSR this week, I thought a lot about social media (especially Twitter) and how it influences PSRs. It seems like social media provides a way for spectators and performers to break the one-sided barrier of these relationships in sometimes trivial but nonetheless real ways. I also thought a lot about bloggers and the quasi one/two-sided relationships that followers have with them and their families (read the comments on @taza’s Instagram feed for a remarkable example of how connected strangers feel to a blogger and her family). Any thoughts?
1) Parasocial relationships might be defined as an one-way relationship between the viewer and the performers/characters, in which the viewer keeps his/her self-identity and establishes a special connection with them. It relies on a foundation similar to a two-sided friendship, but the intimacy offered by the public characters is only at a distance and their influence is limited compared to close friends and family.
ReplyDelete2) I believe that TV audiences form PSR with media characters. One example is the relationship viewers maintain with William Bonner, a well-known anchor in Brazil. He presents the news and is also the editor-in-chief of the main Brazilian evening broadcast. I've heard so many people responding to his "Good night!" in the closure of the newscast every single evening. These viewers feel like they keep a personal connection with him, despite of the distance and the fact they never really a real dialogue. This kind of relationship is based on attractiveness. According to Greenwood & Long (2011), media figures may be particularly alluring to individuals with chronically activated attachment needs, because of their nonthreatening, accessible, and idealized nature. In order to temporarily obtain or complement real-life social relationships, individuals tend to invest in a parasocial relationship with these media personas. However, even if the viewer retains an imagined intimacy with the media characters in ways that parallel how they respond to real relationships, a PSR will preserve its one-sided nature and limited influence.
3) These relationships are simultaneously founded on interpersonal communication and mass communications theories. As long as viewers are attracted and establish a special connection with media figures, they tend to treat these characters the way they treat people in real life. For the viewers, even if it is an one-sided relationship, it is an opportunity to feed their social and emotional needs.
4) A parasocial relationship becomes unhealthy when it starts to replace real relationships, instead of just complementing them. In order to develop his/her cognitive complexity and socialize, an individual needs to engage in relationships which offer instantaneous feedback and a two-way relationship. If this individual devotes most of his energy and attention to PSRs, he might have a hard time adapting socially and dealing with the real-life situations.
The basic definition of a parasocial relationship is imagined intimacy with a media figure. Intimacy meaning mutual familiarity, affection, understanding, etc. TV audience members easily form relationships with characters that are based on character traits, on the character’s interaction with other characters, on the character’s “reaction” to given situations and all the communication that takes place during the show. To the audience member, these relationships create an emotional connection and offer comic relief or dramatic engagement or some level of identification that, based on U&G, provides something needed. An effects claim that I would make based on these readings is that the stronger the parasocial relationship, the less in touch with reality the audience member is and that the more the individual identifies with the media figure, the less that person is able to identify with real people in their tangible social circle. At that effect is when I would say that relationship crossed the line to being unhealthy.
ReplyDelete1) Can you formulate a basic definition of parasocial relationships?
ReplyDeleteParasocial relationships are imagined relationships with a media figure, whether that the figure is from TV, music, movies, books, etc. Viewers harbor feelings towards these media figures which make them feel that they have a special connection to those figures and that they "know" them.
2) Do you think that TV audiences form "relationships" with media characters (including fictional characters)? If so, what are the nature of these relationships and how do they differ from real relationships?
I strongly feel that TV audiences form "relationships" with media characters (including fictional characters) and that the nature of these relationships is one where the TV audiences have become like so attached to the characters that they're almost like family to them. They differ from real relationships in that they end unnaturally, like when a TV show gets canceled or when a show ends after being on TV for a long time.
One example that I can think of is "The O.C." which was one of my favorite shows like ever! I like loved that show, Ryan, Marissa, Seth (who I had a major crush on!), Summer, and the Cohen family, but I never loved them enough to develop a PSR which would affect my real relationships in my life, including with my friends who also loved "The O.C" as much as I did. When the show ended, I was bummed, but like not so bummed to the point where I felt like I was detaching myself from family or close friends or something.
3) What are the theoretical foundations of these relationships? Can you make an "effects" claim?
I think that the theoretical foundation of PSRs is uses and gratifications because I feel that once a person or the audience becomes attached to TV characters, for instance, he or she or they would want to keep in touch with those characters like they know them personally. Furthermore, the way that they do that is by watching the show every week and perhaps even talk about the show with other people who feel the same way about the TV characters. The effects claim that I'd make is that the stronger the parasocial relationship one has with media figures, the more likely that they don't have as strong of a relationship in their real lives because one doesn't put as much effort or care into their real relationships as they do their imagined relationships.
4) At what point does a parasocial relationship cross the line from being healthy to unhealthy?
I think that a parasocial relationship crosses the line from being healthy to unhealthy when it consumes the person's entire life. Moreover, I think that it gets unhealthy when it has immense and life-changing effects on the real relationships in that person's life, like with their family, friends, etc.
Hi mo
DeleteI never watched the O.C. but it is true that you build that parasocial relationship by talking to other people about it just as you would talk about a real friend. Watching sports we do it all the time. We talk about what certain player should work on. I remember with Kobe Bryant I would criticize him when he made a dumb defensive play on the court as if I would tell my brother he messed up. But that wouldnt work in real life. But I found that in my sports loving real family the basketball world became our family to an extent. I remember my mom noticing when obscure bench players were on another new team and I didnt even know how she would remember those guys. Like a grandma remembering her grandkids birthdays ha
Can you formulate a basic definition of parasocial relationships?
ReplyDeleteParasocial relationships mean “one-sided”. I would translate that to mean that only one side is putting effort into the relationship. And in turn, only one side is getting anything out of the relationship as well.
Do you think that TV audiences form "relationships" with media characters (including fictional characters)? If so, what are the nature of these relationships and how do they differ from real relationships?
Absolutely I do believe that TV audiences do form “relationships” with media characters. The nature is inherently natural. It’s natural to feel connected to something you continually subscribe to. If you didn’t, you most likely would not continue to subscribe to it. My roommate is a huge fan of the office, and he was so excited to find out that Michael Scott’s character returned for the final episode. He loves it so much, and feels that bond so much that he exposed his girlfriend to it. They watched every episode together in a row so that she could maybe gain a little insight into what his parasocial relationship was with The Office. In order for a relationship to not be parasocial, I believe you would need to be unique in what you’re putting into the relationship. And since media characters do not make anything unique with you, it’s parasocial, or one-sided. They differ from real relationships in that meaning exactly. It needs to be unique to each individual relationship.
What are the theoretical foundations of these relationships? Can you make an "effects" claim?
Uses and gratifications is a huge theoretical foundation for these relationships. The audience member may be able to feel gratified because of how the character on TV is being portrayed, and it just so happens to relate so well to how they envisioned themselves in a real relationship. Which is why they consume that television show in the first place. Numerous assassinations/assassination attempts have been triggered by these false delusions of the parasocial relationship they were in in the first place.
At what point does a parasocial relationship cross the line from being healthy to unhealthy?
That’s a hard question. I can’t exactly pinpoint where it would start to become unhealthy, however, it’s easy to classify the behavior as unhealthy as soon as it starts affecting the audience member’s attitude towards real relationships. But by the time you reach that point, it may be too far-gone.
1.In it’s most basic form a parasocial relationship is on one-sided relationship that between a spectator and an actor.
ReplyDelete2. I believe that audiences form “parasocial” relationships with media characters especially when the media character plays an important role in the socialization of the spectator. I know I was personally affected by the death of Kurt Cobain when I was a teenager. I also visit the grave of Ernest Hemmingway every time I play a show in Sun Valley. Cobain and Hemmingway are two examples of people who have played some kind of role in my socialization. Although I have never met them I have been influenced in one way or another by both individuals and I feel like I have a relationship with them, however, I know this relationship is on sided and I don’t feel like it is unhealthy in any way. I also feel like there are people who form unhealthy relationships with fictional and non-fictional personalities.
3. There are two theories that come to mind, uses and gratifications theory and social identity theory.
4. An effects claim could be made based on the above theories by positing that uses and gratifications theory assumes an active audience and offers insights into why the spectator would choose to form a relationship with a particular media personality. Applying social identity theory could bolster the argument. You could claim that parasocial relationships are formed because spectators derive their ideas of self -concept based on their perceived inclusion to a group embodied by particular media personality.
5. A parasocial relationship would be unhealthy when it effects your ability to function in your daily life (this correlates with the definition of a mental disorder) if an individual is involved with their parasocial relationships to a degree that they are neglecting actual their actual interpersonal relationships then the PRS would be unhealthy.
Here is an example of an unhealthy parasocial relationship. DISCLAIMER: This link is the trailer to a horror film based on the Stephen King novel Misery. If you are sensitive to that type of thing you should not watch.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNRXS-lDgYg
ReplyDeleteIn his article, Defining identification: A Theoretical Look at the Identification of Audiences with Media Characters, Jonathan Cohen focuses most on the relationship between one’s character, and the media that they regularly digest. It is very clear right off the bat that Cohen’s objective is to prove these factors are directly related, and by so doing prove that we become what we absorb. He discusses the definition of parasocial relationships, which is to formulate a relationship with an individual, that is only one-sided; in other words, one person makes all the efforts to establish the relationship, while the other is seemingly inexistent. This is most commonly seen amongst celebrities and other “untouchables”.
ReplyDeleteCohen presents this theory, along with some other very astute proposals, such as individuals getting “sucked in” to a novel or television program. It happens all the time, so much so, that it is considered normal. But what Cohen has done, is studied the psychological level of such individuals in these types of situations, specifically, spectatorship identification: “spectatorship identification is a mechanism through which audience members experience reception and interpretation of the text from the inside, as if the events were happening to them. Identification is tied to the social effects of media in general”. We can learn from such definitions, that these relationships, albeit twisted, are still relationships.
While Cohen’s research is sound, and his sources credible. I would have taken a slightly different approach to the prompt. You see, identifying the issue is just the tip of the iceberg. In such a profound and well-executed study, Cohen deserves to delve into a very many possible solutions to the matter. From there, your content skeleton is laid out for you. I really did enjoy Cohen’s approach to the matter, I would just take is a step further. Truths like this, once proven authentic, shed substantial light on issues that must be priorities of discussion, especially in our rapidly growing world of media.
The question still arises, are such relationships healthy? Why or why not? I will be the first to admit that I follow Taylor Swift on Instagram. I also have a somewhat unhealthy addiction to the TV sitcom Friends. That said, although I may play the fan girl at times, I understand these vicarious connections aren’t substantive. These relationships can just as easily be vices to an “untouchable” world. It’s fun to pretend that that world is our reality. And we’ve all done it at one point of another. The trick is to stay anchored. Or else we will begin to see or likes, and hobbies become unhealthy obsessive addictions.
1) “A seeming face-to-face relationship with spectator and performer” (Horton and whol 1965)
ReplyDeleteThe Greenwood study suggests people attach more to the actors themselves than the face characters they portray. However, the friends study certainly indicates some very real emotional connection to the fictional characters. The biggest difference I think from real relationships is the responsibility of managing our energy in the relationship. A parasocial relationship can take as little, or as much, energy on your part as you want to give. If you want more, turn on your computer, if you want less, shut it off. A real-life relationship can often mismatch our desired level of energy giving. We can feel pushed away when we want to give a relationship more, or we can feel like our energy is being demanded of more than we feel capable of giving at the moment. It’s messy, and even in the most compatible of relationships, it’s impossible to have your energy desires perfectly match the other person’s desires all the time.
1) What are the theoretical foundations for these relationships?
1) Likeability – similarity, attractiveness – fan-girl faints for the boy bands. These guys are literally engineered to have the highest likeability possible to their target audience.
2) Fundamental need to belong – “nerd culture” creates a belonging subgroup for a some of people who feel otherwise like misfits – they seem deeper in their fandoms and attachments to characters when it also builds this bonding with others.
3) Attachment styles – high anxiety attachers have greater susceptibility to attach with a media persona over low contact attachers.
4) Gender theory – guys not wanting to admit passionate attachment to same gender, while girls feel very comfortable with their attachment to girls. (girls hug each other fully – guys hug with pats).
5) Nostalgia – we talked about this in our persuasion class last week, how we can powerfully, emotionally attach to things that evoke past memories. I can hear Peter Cullen’s voice as Optimus Prime, and I’m transported back to everything about my childhood when I was first, and most regularly, around that voice. The parasocial break-up article reminding me a lot of our persuasion class discussion of expectations for a nostalgic event being violated, so…
6) throw in expectations violation theory too – especially about the end of a show being expected isn’t as traumatic as an unexpected end.
7) Identifying – feeling like our goals become one with the character’s goals.
4) There’s an excellent French film called “He Loves Me, He Loves Me Not” that explores the unhealthy extreme that a parasocial relationship could take with patients who have erotomania – or delusionally formed relationships. They believe there is a secret love with a person and that the slightest glances or communications from their love (even sent by a star in their movie performance) will be interpreted as secret messages meant just for them, reinforcing this false-relationship-delusion. The most extreme cases involve stalking, harassment, and violence.
At a gentler level anything can be diagnosable unhealthy if it reaches the point of regularly interfering with ability to perform normal daily life tasks. It would be one thing for a fan to go regularly a local musician’s shows and need a sleep in the following Saturdays when they have no obligations, and they’re still able to maintain healthy relationships with friends and family. It’s another thing if the fan goes to these shows, and is regularly late for work the next day, and would rather go to a show instead of their brother’s wedding.
At a still gentler level, there’s a lot of good in the world that we could be doing instead of having parasocial relationships. Maybe they’re not unhealthy, but maybe their not the absolute best use of our precious time.
Most young guys have had a crush on a certain girl. You’re totally infatuated with the girl, and you know you will never get her, but it feels good to dream. Essentially, a parasocial relationship is similar. According to Eyal and Cohen (2006), “PSRs are a set of feeling viewers develop toward media characters that allow viewers to think and feel toward characters as if they know and have a special connection with them.” Greenwood and Long call it “imagined intimacy” with media figures. Eyal and Cohen state most viewers know their relationship with those on television is only imaginary. Hence, PSR is like having a crush on an unattainable girl or guy.
ReplyDeleteI know from personal experience TV audiences form these parasocial relationships with media characters. I saw this when I worked in television news. My coworker use to get lavish floral arraignments from a “mystery” viewer with notes. She also received gifts that included fancy scarfs and knitted hats. This creeped her out. Myself, I was well known in the community. Once, a lady asked me out on a date after I finished interviewing her mother. (Fortunately, I was dating my future wife at the time and used that as an excuse to decline the date.) I can’t remember what the story was about, but months later a Washington State Trooper accidentally shot the woman’s daughter in the shoulder during a drug raid for crack cocaine. The woman was pregnant at the time. She went into surgery that day and delivered the baby. Unlike real relationships where couples share a common bond and space, PSRs are one-way. Eyal and Cohen state, “Television characters provide viewers with one-way relationships, and the intimacy they officer is . . . only at a distance.” It’s like a guy having a crush on a girl and fantasizing about the two of them being in a relationship, and the girl remains clueless about his lust.
One theoretical foundation of PSRs is uses and gratifications theory. People watch television and consume media to satisfy a specific need. In the case of television news, viewers may watch a station for a variety of reasons, but one big reason is because they feel personal connection with the anchors and reporters. This connection could be based on them liking the talent’s reporting style, finding the talent credible, or simply having a crush on the news personality. For these various reasons, news talent are called on regularly to emcee events. I did my fair share. According to Eyal and Cohen, an effects claim by some scholars is imaginary relationships with members of the media could result in increased persuasive power of public service announcements “when they feature celebrities with whom viewers have PSRs.” People who had a connection with me through their television sets probably were more likely to make donations when I emceed events they attended.
Lastly, PSRs may cross the line from being healthy to unhealthy when infatuation turns to obsession and leads to action – that is the when the viewer tries to make contact with the media personality in person. You hear of celebrities being stalked. Here are a few examples from the popcrush.com webpage.
1) Britney Spears – Masahiko Shizawa said he was madly in love with Britney and tried to enter her home.
2) Miley Cyrus – Jason Luis Rivera reportedly told police, “"I am friends with Miley Cyrus….She’s my wife. Me and Miley have been friends for five years." Authorities say he tried to get into Miley’s house with a pair of scissors.
3) Madonna – Robert Dewey Hoskins had been obsessed with Madonna. Her bodyguards shot him when he hopped a fence at her home.
4) Justin Bieber – An inmate contacted his prison buddy, Mark Staake and Staake's nephew, Tanner Ruane, to have them find Bieber and castrate him with garden shears so he could have his "parts" as a souvenir. Martin admitted he was attracted to Justin saying, "He's a good-looking kid. Would I go to bed with him? Yeah. He's legal, so probably."
I’m not sure if there can be a basic definition of parasocial relationships, but I can try. From the three articles read, my understanding of a parasocial relationship is a developing relationship imagined by an avid observer of media like TV shows, movies, and music that continues to grow the more they are attached to a specific media.
ReplyDeleteI do believe TV audiences form “relationships” with media characters including fictional characters. I think the more you stay connected to a TV show and with its storyline, the more connected the viewers become. They not only see the storyline, but they are able to connect, in some aspect, with the characters because in the episodes, you learn more things about them. The nature of these relationships is that it is a one-sided relationship. We, as viewers, learn all the things we can about the characters and even the actors that we tend to create fantasies of what life would be like with them in our life. Not gonna lie, I’m a culprit of this. Just to be clear, I’m not one of the crazy ones, but I have always thought how cool it would be to just meet them and hang out and be friends. I wouldn’t mind life happening that I would date an attractive guy (Chris Evans or Tom Hiddleston, whatever. I actually can keep going, but I won’t.). These kinds of relationships differ from real relationships because they are not physically in the same room, breathing the same air. A real relationship is tangible; both partners get to know one another and learn together.
I am still learning about theories and understanding them, but I think the theoretical foundations of these relationships come from the cultivation theory whereas the observer spends an amount of time in the media from movies, TV shows, etc. and learns the things that are portrayed by the actors. I also believe that by spending so much time encapsulated by the characters, the viewer believes things shown on TV and screen that that is how relationships and life is in the real world.
A parasocial relationship crosses the line from being healthy to unhealthy when, to my beliefs, that the observer wants to either do something to look like a character, moves to be closer to where they may live, or even want to wear and say and do the things the characters do.
Parasocial relationships "(PSR's) are a set of feelings viewers develop toward media characters that allow viewers to think and feel toward characters as if they know and have a special connection with them (Eyal & Cohen). I don't believe that this definition is all encompassing but it gives a great summary of the general idea. These PSR's are developed overtime when a person spends a significant amount of time watching or thinking about a character in the media.
ReplyDeleteI 100% believe that viewers create relationships with TV characters. I am a culprit myself! Last semester, my roommates and I got into Gilmore Girls. We watched it religiously and eventually finished all of the seasons! We watched about one episode a day for nearly six months; Rory and Lorelai became our friends! We would have a crazy week with school, or go out of town for awhile and wouldn't be able to watch...we all agreed that we missed Rory and Lorelai in our lives! After we finished the last season, we honestly felt a weird emptiness. Their lives had become part of our lives. It was hilarious. Luckily, we never got to the point where Gilmore Girls came before school, real relationships, dating, etc. We were pretty healthy about it (as healthy as a situation like this can be hahah). The "relationships" we formed with the characters from Gilmore Girls were very different from the real relationships we had with others. Rory and Lorelai couldn't comment on the things happening in our lives--there was definitely no mutual benefit (which I think is a major part of having a real relationship!).My roommate and I noticed that when we were single, Gilmore Girls was a very important part of our days. We loved vicariously living through the relationships of Lorelai and Luke, Rory and Jess, etc. As soon as we were both dating people, Gilmore Girls stepped down as super a super important thing we did each day. We would go weeks without watching or thinking about it. I think before we were dating people, we needed to live through those media relationships to fulfill that need for romance, etc. (This sounds so lame as I type it). But once those needs for belonging were being fulfilled in real life we didn't need our virtual relationships.
I don't know about theoretical explanations, but perhaps my need for belonging and a relationship was being fulfilled through the media until it was being fulfilled in real life. Once it was fulfilled in real life, I didn't need Gilmore Girls anymore!
I think parasocial relationships can easily become unhealthy. Luckily, my roommates and I were smart and didn't just watch Gilmore Girls all the time to have virtual friends. First, we had each other. We weren't just watching alone all the time. Second, we never let it take over our desires to go out and meet new people. Parasocial relationships can become unhealthy when watching the show is all that a person wants to do, and when they decide that real relationships aren't as good or easy as the virtual relationship with a TV character.
To put it simply, a parasocial relationship is a one-sided relationship, often between a celebrity and a spectator. This relationship only exists to the spectator rather than the celebrity, character, etc.
ReplyDeleteI think that we all, to some point, form relationships with different characters through out media. Maybe this is an assumption that could use research to back it up, but I feel that most relationships with media characters fall under a platonic, able to relate type of category, rather than romantic or extremely personal. I think these relationships differ because they are one-sided, causing them to really only be half of a relationship.I think that we can develop feelings of attachment, but deep down, most people know and understand that these relationships are not real.
I think we develop these relationship within almost any media based on which characters we connect with. I really love The Walking Dead. Although I am a female, I have felt a connection with Darryl. He is more of a guarded, tough, country boy. He doesn’t always seem like the best representation of good moral character, but when push comes to shove, he always makes the right choice. For some reason I related to that. I may be from a small town and come up a little rough around the edges, but when it comes down to it, I think I am a good person who would make decisions with others in mind. My relationship would feel more like a friendship. I like him because I feel a similarity between us. He is my favorite character, but I also understand that his character is not real and that he has no idea who “Shae`la” is. I think we can all think of a character in which this may be the same case. I would consider this a healthy parasocial relationship.
With any relationship, lines can be crossed. I think a key identifier of a parasocial relationship crossing the line of health/unhealthy is when you begin making decisions based off those characters. When you are changing your behavior to fuel that relationship, in hopes that something may come from it. When we begin to think that this relationship is real to the character or celebrity, we are losing our sense of reality. When we begin making decisions and acting upon that belief, things get scary (stalker claiming they are in relationships with celebrities, committing crimes to get attention/interact with the characters).
It is really interesting how the mind works and how we interpret our relationships, both legitimate and parasocial. I wonder when someone gets to the point where they are vulnerable for an unhealthy parasocial relationship, and the approach to cure themselves from that emotional trap.
On face value, I almost hastily conclude the topic is just a social sophistry until i read the assigned articles. Then i realized how i was almost scandalously entangled in a "Parasocial Relationship"in 2003. Parasocial Relationship (PSR) mirrors the real world attachment style where an avid TV viewer typically think, feel, and act in a one-way relationship with TV character.
ReplyDeleteIt is gratifying to know that this term predates Mass Media, when citizens established "parasocial interaction"(PSI) with political figures, gods and even spirits. Horton and Wohl (1956). Initially viewed parasocial interactions as abnormalities resulting from a lack of time spent with others. Perse and Rubin (1989) contested this view, proving that parasocial interactions occurs as a natural byproduct of time spent with media figures. Schmid and Klimt (2011) further argue that PSI/PSR are progressive states such that what begins as parasocial interactions has the potential to become a parasocial relationship.
In 2003, a huge man, about 6.5'' in height came to my office where i work as a News Anchor and demanded to see me asap. His request was decline because he had no previously appointment then he dropped a bombshell..."Bayo is having an affair with my wife, and that ends today!". Commotion ensued! Partly because few of my colleagues struggled to find a correlation between such damning allegation and my values. Others, simply want to see how i wriggle out this "scandal".
My Boss immediately initiated a meeting between my accuser and I, in company of other Unit Heads, Supervisors and Departmental Directors basically, not to exonerate me as much as protecting Corporate integrity. When i was ushered into the impromptu conference room, everyone could see the noticeable shock and disbelief on my my accusers countenance.The man apologized as he struggle to explain how the wife fantasize about me, get extremely emotional talking about my gesticulations, dentition, smiles and dress sense, suggesting i represent what an ideal man should look like. He said he had tolerated it all, until the wife recently mentioned my name and signature sign-off phrase in her dreams. Then he concluded, with your body frame and height there was no way in the world my wife would date or have an affair with you because she is 6.4'' and height, has always been a factor to her. ( Just picture me standing beside Shae'la Stautmeister, and you get what my accuser meant). Sometimes, it pays to be short, I thought to my self... my 5.4" height just exonerated me! I really wished i knew what i know now, i would have been a "sage on a stage'" educating those with genuine concerns and those with sinister motives on "parasocial relationships".
A theoretical foundation to establish an "effect" claim in my opinion would be "Identification Theory" propounded by Burke, Kenneth D. 1950. This suggests that "persuasion can be achieved when TV character and the audience share common interests.
Granted that we tend to be naturally hard-wired to believe what we see, though we know it is fiction, i still have reservations that Parasocial relationships should cross the line from being healthy to unhealthy. This so because those who feel confident and comfortable in inter-personal relationships are not likely to go overboard with parasocial relationships but this might not be the case with those who feel insecure in normal relationships. These class of people out of being lonely and alone, become "Anxiously attached" to TV characters. The result of that will not be far from the examples highlighted by Othello Richards Jr.
Wow, Bayo. That's another crazy story of yours. Unfortunately, sometimes situations and allegations like that turn into assault deadly violence on the accused. PSRs can prove dangerous in that regard.
DeleteI see a parasocial relationship as a one-way relationship that feels almost like a two-way relationship in some instances. The bonds and feelings in these relationships can be strong on the part of the viewer who can develop a dependency on these one-way interactions that become meaningful to them.
ReplyDeleteAs I was initially reading about parasocial relationships, my first thought was “how can people be so dumb as to have relationships with TV characters?” As I continued to read and ponder, I realized that throughout my life I have had countless parasocial relationships with celebrities and sports stars. A few of my parasocial crushes have included Brittney Spears (from a long time ago), Jennifer Aniston, and Carrie Underwood. These were mainly parasocial relationships that I had during my teenage years that were based on the “hotness” and likeability of the individual.
While many of my early parasocial relationships have faded, my parasocial relationships with athletes have extended into my adult years. As a child I idolized every member of the Phoenix Suns basketball team. Danny Ainge was my idol; Dan Marley, AC Green, and Charles Barkley were considered some of my best off-court friends though we never did hang out. Every time I went outside to play basketball, I imagined that I was stepping into the shoes of these athletes. As an adult, I have similar relationship with college and NFL athletes who I feel are fulfilling my actions on the field. Obviously, these athletes wouldn’t know me from Adam if I met them off of the field, but there is some form of satisfaction that comes from supporting and talking about them as if we were friends.
I do think that TV audiences form relationships with those they see on-screen. However, I do see a substantial difference between parasocial relationships and the relationships we enjoy with family and friends. It goes back to the one-way and two-way communication that I mentioned earlier. I think only the deepest relationships can be formed based on two-way communication. However, in some ways, I would say some of my real life relationships are more one-way than they are two-way. For example, I love my grandpa, but he has never been much of a listener. He typically tells whatever story he has in mind but doesn’t do much in the way of listening. Perhaps parasocial relationships can be so deep because of the fact that two-way communication may not be as valued or needed for certain individuals.
I think that there are a few theories that apply to the phenomenon of parasocial relationships including the uses and gratifications theory. It seems that the level of dependency on parasocial relationships correlates with the needs of the person seeking the relationship. Those that are most lonely may turn to this type of pseudo relationships with individuals that they see as near flawless. Social learning theory may also play a role in the way parasocial relationships can influence our real lives. If our favorite characters portray a certain type of behavior as normal or acceptable, one may feel a greater motivation for participating in that behavior. Individuals may turn to parasocial relationships in order to establish normative beliefs that will help dictate future beliefs.
Parasocial relationships become unhealthy when they replace or hinder real relationships with family and friends. A Parasocial breakup can take place when a show ends, a character is taken off of a show, or because something happens to the actor or actress. It was fascinating to read that the in some instances, the dissolution of a close character can lead to depression and even the need for counseling. Some relationships with TV personalities and popular characters have been built over a long period of time and the sudden departure can be a serious disturbance. It seems to me that in these instances, the parasocial relationship was taken to far. Depression based on the departure of a favorite character is a sign that the reliance on the parasocial relationship was extreme and unhealthy.
Based off what I read, a parasocial relationship is a type of psychological relationship one has with a person whom they have never met personally, usually some person of fame. It can derived from a need of belonging or lack of other social relationship or simply can be the result of noticed similarities the viewer has with his or her favorite character. It can be romantic or platonic. As in other relationships, more attachment within a parasocial relationship can lead to some distress when the character is removed from program or misfortune happens to a real life person, but it usually is not as great as more interpersonal relationships (i.e. family members, friends, romantic partners).
ReplyDeleteI don’t think that I have had a relationship with too many TV characters or stars, mainly because I don’t watch TV that much. But I certainly have had several sports heroes that I could consider having a parasocial comradery with. So I do believe that people can have very real relationships with TV characters. Nevertheless, I do agree with Eyal and Cohen’s (2006) assumption that parasocial breakup is not of such a dramatic and distressful nature as “real” relationships can be. The programs will always be reruns and DVD collections (Eyal and Cohen, 2006, p. 517). On the other hand, as people develop PSR’s with actually movie stars or celebrities, the distress can be greater if misfortune befalls their friend or beloved. Eyal and Cohen referred to Meyrowitz (1994) in highlighting the reactions after the deaths of Elvis and John Lennon. I feel that the reason for such distress is due to the identification process of PSR’s. Cohen (2001) explains that the difference between parasocial interaction and identification is that in identification, one forgets self-awareness, basically become the character. To whatever extent a person has a parasocial relationship a real person then, when that celebrity suffers misfortune, so does the parasocialite (that’s my word). As a young kid, I highly identified with Kobe Bryant, probably because of my poofy hair and his young age. Several years later when he was accused of sexual assault, I was greatly saddened, felt betrayed, and still supported his innocence as I would a close friend even though I never met him. But I lost a lot of identification with him during that time and I think that was the most distressing thing. He was just like all the rest of superstar athletes. The funny thing is even to this day, although I have come to grips with his “athletic superstar” lifestyle, whenever something on sports news shows up about him, I tune in intently.
Cohen (2001) cites Erikson (1968) in explaining that part of adolescents’ identity forming is to imitate their peers. Cohen then explains that for teens those peers can be virtual from T.V. shows. Or in my case athletic peers. For example, as a young man I identified strongly with my favorite basketball players. I wanted to wear their jersey replicas and play the game like they did. I would watch NBA highlight specials several times a week to better learn how to be like them on the basketball court.
In regards to romantic relationships, Greenwood and Long’s (2011) study indicated attachment anxiety and the need to belong were positively correlated with imagined intimacy with media figures of the opposite sex. I think a possible media effects claim that is signaled to me is that all of our relationships are based off a need, and the more relationship needy we are the more places we will look to fill those needs, even in the TV.
Since Eyal and Cohen (2006) assumed that parasocial breakups do not cause as much distress as real breakups, it would be safe to say in my mind that PSR’s become unhealthy when a breakup or some misfortune caused the same depression or distress that normal breakups might. If we cry bitterly because one of our favorite TV shows ends, if we get into serious depression after a celebrity hero dies, or if we actually think we are that person without a doubt, we have gone too far.
Parasocial relationships, defined basically, involve a relationship between media user and performer; mediated and one-sided. It is obvious based on the readings that "relationships" are formed with real and fictional TV and other media characters.
ReplyDeleteAs noted in Eyal and Cohen (2006) these relationships develop similarly to interpersonal relationships over time, but serve as non-dependent relationships that keep the viewer company or give them comfort in some way. As mentioned in Eyal and Cohen (2006) the effects of relationship drama (such as a breakup) are felt by viewers, however, the relationships are seen as more distant than close friends and thus the effects of a breakup or similar relationship conflict may not be quite as serious for most. LIkewise, a major part of PSRs is that the media user is aware that the character is perhaps not real or an actual, physical and dependent part of their life. Thus, when conflict arises, they may be able to comfort themselves better or recover quicker from this relationship than others because of the distance and lack of grounding in reality. I feel like a parallel can be drawn between the show Friends and Gilmore Girls in terms of popularity and the formation of parasocial relationships. Lorelai Gilmore was one of the few fictional personae that I secretly wanted to emulate, and can remember sometimes thinking "WWLD"? (What would Lorelai do?) as my basis for reaction or interpretation of a situation for the brief stint of my life that I was a devoted fan. However, I do not feel that I lost my sense of self completely in the process. When I stopped watching Gilmore Girls, the relationship became as a memory, a friend in the past. Interestingly enough, however, these relationships can be reaffirmed when I see Gilmore Girls episodes again. Perhaps the same happens with insane fans of pop stars (i.e. Elvis, John Lennon) who desire to keep the stars alive through their art.
Theoretically speaking, Cohen (2001) mentions that in order for media effects to exist, there must be some sort of identification of the recipient with the mediated message. Thus, I believe that there are a few key players in media effects and parasocial relationships: 1) Uses and Gratifications (because viewers are seeking out the media for some need or desire) and 2) Social Learning Theory (because viewers are looking to socialize and benefit/learn from these relationships). Uses and gratifications explains what gets media users involved, while social learning theory can explain what keeps them coming back for more (particularly in the case of the show Friends where viewers grew up with the characters).
I believe that there is definitely a line between beneficial parasocial relationships and harmful ones. Eyal and Cohen (2006) assert that generally parasocial relationships are complimentary to real relationships and serve to keep one company. It would seem that in some cases a PSR might be a good thing when someone can't find other people to identify with. However, When an imaginary relationship takes precedence over real relationships, some re-evaluating should be done. Cohen (2001) speaks about identification (where one begins to adopt the perspective of the media character and essentially blurs the line between self and this media character) vs. Parasocial Interactions (where there is still a concept of self). A haunting example is Heath Ledger's portrayal of the joker in Batman and its effect on him. The Joker did not even exist, but because Ledger was committed to his job and to put himself in the Joker's shoes - this relationship eventually took a major toll, and possibly was the cause for his suicide. And I end this epistle on that unhappy note.
I suppose I would say that parasocial relationships are basically any form of emotional attachment a real person makes with a character or personality in the media. In reality, they are one-sided (although I’ve seen some evidence of a little 2-way-ness), but perhaps feel like they could be a two-way relationship.
ReplyDeleteI have no doubt that people form relationships with TV characters/personalities, mainly because I have so many myself. I’ve got the kind of personality that can’t help but make emotional attachments with people –real or fictional. It started with my first celebrity crush (Ryan Gosling – from way before The Notebook) and continues now with probably dozens of people. In fact, I was literally BFF with Jack Hodgins from Bones and President Uchtdorf in a dream the other night. It was awesome.
Anyway, I think these relationships can manifest themselves in many different ways and arise for a variety of reasons. The readings mentioned a lot of them: loneliness, affinity, need to belong, admiration, etc. While I agree that they aren’t as strong as real relationships, they still serve a purpose. I personally developed a lot of parasocial relationships just for fun, but also out of loneliness. Not that I don’t have friends, but while I was living alone (no roommates or family) in Korea, I would run through entire seasons of old TV shows like Frasier, Boy Meets World, and numerous Korean dramas, just for the company. And with all that “quality time” spent together, I definitely got a little to those people.
I still generally believe that parasocial relationships still rank lower on the scale than real, two-way social relationships. Like the article about PSB indicated, the trauma of “breaking up” and the intensity of feelings are more fleeting and less significant than that of real relationships. As far as effects goes, I think the principles of extended exposure, a synchronization of thoughts, shared experiences and feelings (or at least the illusion of them), naturally lead people to develop real, although probably limited, emotions/relationships with TV personalities/characters.
I do think that it is very possible that people can let these relationships get out of hand though. I’ve heard people joke about a TV character or celebrity being their “BFF” or “boyfriend,” but I’ve also seen evidence of people really believing that that is the case. I once did a study on the Twilight phenomenon, and found several fanatic fans staking claims on both characters and actors, and posting threatening, delusional, comments online to others who were seen as competition (and not as jokes).
I think the point where a parasocial relationship begins to get in the way of real relationships (or expectations of real relationships) is where things start to get unhealthy. When the relationships moves from a “complimentary” function to one of “dependency,” that is where there is more reason for concern. But, it doesn’t seem that too many people make it to that level.
Finally, I wanted to note, that a lot of media I’ve been exposed to recently has led me to think that parasocial relationships might be changing a little with new technology/uses of technology. I don’t know what American celebs are currently doing, but a lot of Korean idols/actors, post tons of pictures and videos taken on their cell phones or company video cameras that they take around and basically just have conversations with the camera like it was you. They let you in on their dance practices, behind the scenes, their homes/hotel rooms, and interact with fans in real-time via online chats while broadcasting live. Some have even simulated short, fake “skyping” scenarios to help fans feel closer to them on a personal level. These changes make me wonder what affects that type of interaction has on parasocial relationships.
1) Gathered from the readings, parasocial relationships are pseudorelationships between media characters and viewers; it is important to note that though these relationships are not real (due to the media characters not being real), these emotional connections provide support to viewers, as do actual friendships.
ReplyDelete2) I think parasocial relationships are an absolutely real phenomenon. For instance, I have experienced this in my personal life—in the TV show Friday Night Lights, there is a character named Tim Riggins who I am convinced I am in love with (regardless of the fact that I am married—my huband is aware, FYI). Though there is no actual relationship between us, I definitely feel a connection to this fake character. This relationship is similar to real relationships in that there is a degree of emotion and interest in the character’s life (i.e. decisions, interpersonal interactions, etc.). However, parasocial relationships differ from real relationships in that they are on-sided and cannot account for or offer reciprocated feelings, emotional support for specific life problems, or any type of physical support (i.e. hugs, hand-holding, kissing, etc.), as real relationships do.
3) Theoretically, parasocial relationships are tied to identification with media characters (Cohen, 2001), as well as personological variables of viewers, including loneliness (Eyal & Cohen, 2006). Based on the articles read for class today, paired with my own research interests and experience, I infer that viewers will be effected by the events that media characters experience in a variety of ways, depending on the nature of the characters’ experience, whether it be positive (i.e. feeling happy, supported, and/or justified) or negative (i.e. feeling angry, sad, disappointed, ect.).
4) I think parasocial relationships are mostly fine, though there are some negative implications for viewers who do not have many social ties, or for those who consistently have overwhelmingly negative social interactions with others. Specifically for these individuals, it may be possible that these individuals may emotionally invest too much in media characters, to the point that they sacrifice or give up real relationships with others. Or, it may be possible that people in either situations may react radically to the ending of a character’s involvement with a show, perhaps leading to suicide ideation, substance use, or other internalizing and externalizing behaviors when the viewer has no one to turn to.
Simply defined, a parasocial relationship is a relationship that is one-sided instead of two-sided like a normal relationship. A parasocial relationship occurs most commonly when a person, in his or her mind, creates or develops this relationship with either a fictional character in books, movies, or television shows, or a celebrity. This relationship may lead to that person wanting to be like this character, in how he or she may act, dress, talk, etc.
ReplyDeleteI do believe tv audiences form relationships with media characters to a certain degree, and some more than others. Some people may really like a show and he or she may get really into the characters and go online and read all about them and the actors who portray them; they may get to a point where they feel like they really know the people on their tv screens and maybe even imitate them. Another thing I mentioned in the definition is that normal relationships are two-sided and these relationships with characters are not; tv audiences are not usually interacting with the people on tv.
In terms of effects, we could apply the social learning theory or uses and gratifications theory to these relationships. These characters can serve as role models for children and teens; young viewers may use the characters to learn how to act or who they should be in society. In regards to the uses and gratifications theory, these "relationships" may be created to feel a sense of belonging or they may be using the relationship to fulfill emotions, even though in reality none are reciprocated.
In my opinion, the line is crossed when these relationships turn into reality for people. It's unhealthy when people consider their "relationship" with characters or celebrities to be real and to prefer them over normal social relationships with people around them. For me, television shows and their character have never really had this kind of effect on me, but books have. I think it has a lot to do with the amount of effort you put to becoming involved. When I read a book, my mind creates these characters and images for me instead of giving them to me like television does. I feel a part of the story and a as if I had a stake in what plays out. I remember crying and feeling betrayed as I read one of the Harry Potter books where Harry's godfather is killed. I felt like I was living those emotions with him, and when I finished the series it did feel like that "break-up" we read about. I always come back to reality in the end and when someone doesn't, that's unhealthy.
Parasocial relationship is basically a one-sided relationship in which one person is emotionally invested and the other does not know of the first person's existence. While media personages and celebrities are the most common objects for such relationships, regular people can also become a part of those.
ReplyDeleteTV personages are often carefully thought through in order to be appealing to the audience. Hyper romantic men, hyper sexual women.. every detail is added in order to draw the viewer in emotionally. Emotional connection created with a show character is the best guarantor that the audience will keep watching the series. The question of dynamic in such relationships is a very interesting one. If I have a "relationship" with Jake from Twilight, what does Taylor Lautner have to do with it? My relationship with Jake can totally be classified as a two-way relationship. He can comfort me (by being amazing on the screen), provide emotional support, thought indirectly, yet tangibly, help me get over a break up or just help me feel like I have a male companion when I don't have one. On the other hand, Taylor Lautner really has nothing to do with this relationship, and is therefore not required to participate in it.
I agree with what Madison mentioned in her comment, stating that parasocial relationships can only cross a boundary or get out of hand for people who do not have healthy social interactions in real life. A stay at home mom, for example, who is deprived of adult human contact and only sees her husband late at night might really get attached to a TV character and eventually even leave her husband. I have a friend, who is obsessed with an actor and she truly believes that the two of them have a connection. She keeps making plans to go to Hollywood and sincerely believes that she has a chance. Sometimes she even feels like she is having an emotional affair with him, which makes her a cheater. If you ask me, a healthy individual in a committed relationship is better off having a parasocial relationship than a real-life affair.
1) Parasocial definition: when a personal forms an attachment or psychological relationship with a character (fictional or otherwise) in the media. Too simple?
ReplyDelete2) I think they do. They differ from real relationships in a number of ways. The most important being that the viewer usually invests time, energy and emotion into the character, but the character doesn’t reciprocate this or even know of this viewer's existence. In a real relationship, even if the friend doesn't reciprocate, they would at least know of the person's existence. One of the articles also says that "the one-way nature of the intimacy involved in PSRs allows for enjoyable relationships that keep one company and entertain but do not facilitate great dependence, which would make the anxiety at the end of the relationship very strong. This finding is in line with Koenig and Lessan (1985), who suggested that television characters are closer to an individual than mere acquaintances, but not quite as close as friends."
3) I'm not exactly sure what is being asked here...sorry. I'm assuming you are referring to the results of these studies, like how big predictors of parasocial relationships include commitment and affinity to the show, the character’s perceived popularity, and the participant’s loneliness.
4) I would say that the unhealthy line would be crossed in much of the same way that most behaviors move from normative to non-normative. If the parasocial relationship 1) dominates the persons life, 2) provides a high/reduction of unpleasant feelings, 3) causes the person to suffer effects of withdrawal, or 4) gets in the way of real relationships. Often these same four things are seen in those with drug addictions, video game addictions, etc.
Parasocial relationships are formed when an audience member builds a strong emotional relationship with a media personality--either fictional or nonfictional. These relationships, while one-sided, are perceived as almost two-sided. These relationships do mimic relationships from real life. They can be platonic or romantic.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that TV audiences do form relationships with media characters. I do think these relationships vary vastly however. In today's readings we learned about identification, parasocial interaction, and more. Each time of relationship varies in intensity and, from a Uses and Gratifications perspective, in purpose. I do also see people build relationships with other media characters who aren’t on television. I was once at a party where my friends began discussing two different bloggers. I was surprised by the strength of emotion my friends expressed (negative toward one blogger and positive toward the other). Honestly, it seemed that one was a personal friend and the other was an enemy despite the fact that no one in the group had met either blogger.
Uncertainty reduction theory is important in this discussion. One reason that some people form relationships with media characters is to reduce their uncertainty about social norms. They use a media character as a stand-in for peers as a way to learn how others react and are expected to react. By using media as a way to learn rather than just to entertain, I think it helps set the groundwork for parasocial interaction.
Parasocial interaction becomes unhealthy when it gets in the way of other relationships. For instance it becomes a problem when a parasocial interaction friendship is stronger than personal friendships. I also think it gets unhealthy when someone feels they have the right to access interact with a celebrity or media personality. I knew another blogger who had people try and find her house and some other weird things. That is definitely crossing a line for me.
Parasocial relationship: a one-sided relationship that causes thoughts and emotions, usually experienced in real relationships with people, to be developed by the viewer with a media character.
ReplyDeleteViewers do form relationships with the media characters they watch; however, these relationships are seen as less intense than normal social relationships. Ending parasocial relationships are seen as less disturbing than social relationships. However, some individuals do sense higher disturbance similar to that of breaking up a social relationship. Greenwood's study shows that same-gender parasocial relationships are complementary to friendships while opposite-gender relationships sometimes compensate for non-fulfilling relationships.
Developing parasocial relationships can have positive and negative effects. Developing relationships with media characters that are very different than the viewer could expand the viewer's perspective. Furthermore, a positive impact can be seen in a parasocial relationship that is developed with characters like God or Jesus Christ from religious texts. These relationships are seen as eternal and two sided in nature. The possibility exists that it could be one-sided therefore classifying it as a parasocial relationship is subjective.
On the other hand, parasocial relationships could be negative. The Greenwood study explained how parasocial relationships could be compensatory in unsatisfying intimate social relationships with the opposite gender. This compensation arises from the unsatisfying elements of the relationship that should be resolved, not compensated for by media characters. Forming parasocial relationships with media characters also leaves us more vulnerable to persuasion by their opinions and ideals. This is used by advertisements that pay a substantial amount of money to celebrities to feature in them.
Parasocial relationship is an imagined intimacy with a personality found in the media. Forming a parasocial relationship is necesary for a viewer (or perhaps listener for radio or reader for a book) to do so that they can be immersed in the story. It is key to do this in order to suspend disbelief for the duration of the program. This might also be important for non fictional characters like news anchors. A viewer of a news program on TV must believe that the anchor or other personality is trustworthy and knowledgeable. This is not always the case; ofter the reporter or anchor is simply reading a teleprompter and has no real knowledge of the news they report. These sorts of relationships are different than 'real life' relationships in a few ways. One way, and the biggest, is the ability of the viewer to fill in the gaps of a parasocial relationships. The background of a character might be unknown (or at the very least, there are blank spaces in their background) and the viewer can fill them in in a way that best satifies a need. In real life, there are no holes or blank spaces. A person filling in blank spaces in a real life person's background is setting themselves up for a shock. Filling in the blank spaces of a real life person's background with unreasonable and imagined information, ie, 'she is perfect' or 'she must be a great mother', sets expectations that will only disappoint when reality invades.
ReplyDeleteHaving parasocial relationships can be helpful if the person forming the relationship keeps reality separate from fantasy. You could look at it as being creative or expanding your imagination. Once the line between reality and fantasy is blurred, you end up as Kathy Bates in 'Misery' or worse, James Caan.
1) Can you formulate a basic definition of parasocial relationships?
ReplyDeleteA parasocial relationship is a one-way relationship and, in media, is usually formed by the viewer to a fictional character or TV personality.
2) Do you think that TV audiences form "relationships" with media characters (including fictional characters)? If so, what are the nature of these relationships and how do they differ from real relationships?
Absolutely! In real relationships, I think that the strength of the relationship is determined by 1) frequency of contact and 2) depth of knowledge about the other person. For example, the strongest relationship in my life is with my husband, whom I see every day and whom I know almost everything about, and vice versa. In parasocial relationships with media characters, the frequency of contact (viewing) may be very high - probably daily, and for a solid length of time. Also, over time, the viewer will feel that they know the character very well and very thoroughly.
3) What are the theoretical foundations of these relationships? Can you make an "effects" claim?
Uses & grats would be a huge one because if a person who has formed a parasocial relationship watched TV in order to “connect” with that character or person, that would be fulfilling some social need for them.
4) At what point does a parasocial relationship cross the line from being healthy to unhealthy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTEydknL3no
Maybe that isn’t “unhealthy”…but it is crazy. I think unhealthy comes when it permeates every aspect of your life, influences you to make decisions based on the relationship, or when you forego something in your real life in order to attend to something in this parasocial relationship. (i.e. can’t go to dinner with family because the show is on…)
1) Can you formulate a basic definition of parasocial relationships?
ReplyDeleteCan I? Yes I can.
Oh, Yes I will. I think a basic definition would be from the perspective of a viewer a one-sided relationship with a media figure. If it wasn't with a media figure, it would just be stalking. This "relationship" formed as such creates an emotional attachment for the viewer who suffers the consequences of such. One thing I think is important to argue is that I don't think that both parties necessarily should have "never met" as some of my classmates are positing. I don't see why if a fan were to go to a celebrities book-signing that the para-social relationship must end. The definer of the relationship is that it is one in which a party is unknowing OR unattached of the specific user. If a stalker makes his unfounded fantasies known to the celebrity, does it make it any less detached?
2) Do you think that TV audiences form "relationships" with media characters (including fictional characters)? If so, what are the nature of these relationships and how do they differ from real relationships?
I think we have to use the term "relationships" a little like we use the term "friend" as it refers to Facebook. I do think there can be a relationship formed. In part because the identity of a celebrity is founded on the idea that there is an audience. Without an audience, there is no celebrity to attach to. So in that sense, I can perfectly buy into the concept of "relationship". Even to the extent that the star owes their audience something (which is why Mylee Syrus (I don't care to Google her name) betraying her Hannah Monnata fan-base was such a cognitive disruption- their relationship was negatively violated.)
3) What are the theoretical foundations of these relationships? Can you make an "effects" claim?
One theoretical foundation I enjoy is one of Normative Expectation. It is a person to person theory based upon the idea that we have set normative beliefs that we can expect either because of cultural understanding or personal conditioning. If we are in a relationship with someone, we have set expectations for what the other person will bring to the relationship. Every time we come in contact with that person, we bring our expectations andI personally believe that when negatively or positively violated by a celebrity is what makes the relationship both adventurous as well as safe (considering the physical distance). By contrast, a celebrity is not like a person who is within our reach, the star has the opportunity to salvage the relationship over a very long period of time and exposure.
4) At what point does a parasocial relationship cross the line from being healthy to unhealthy?
Again, similar to Facebook "Friends", when these relationships come to the point of interrupting or replacing a healthy naturalized life, it's gone too far. I have a horrible example- I love anime. I have to admit I don't like to socialize with a lot of other anime-nerds (called Otaku) because of their tendency towards a deep phycological need for escapism. They cling to the heightened "otherworldly" sense that Japanese animation creates so tightly that they lose their sense of self. The scariest manifestation of this is when an Otaku replaces human relationships with an animated character by way of merchandise.
Admittedly, I have a deep and abiding love for certain characters but if I was trapped in a fire, you can bet I wouldn't be saving my Sailor V body-pillow before my photo album of friends.
Ps. I don't know why this didn't post when I was on campus today... I feel so left behind. ;-;
Reading over this, I should add part of Expectations Violations Theory is that when violated, the partner in the relationship must have a reaction. Thus, the 1-1 mode of parasocial relationship is expressed in the emotional attachment of the partner (in this case the viewer).
Delete