THE IMPACT OF THE NEWER TELEVISION TECHNOLOGIES ON TELEVISION SATISFACTION

By Elizabeth M. Perse and Douglas A. Ferguson

This study focused on the gratifications of some of the newer television technologies. Specifically we expected that cable television, videocassette recorders, and remote control devices would increase the gratifications people receive from watching television and the satisfaction they derive from television use. Telephone interviews were completed with 615 respondents in a Midwestern totvn. There was only limited support for our expectations. Use of new technologies had an impact on receiving, pass-the-time, and companionship gratifications from television viewing. Instrumental viewing motives, television exposure, and receiving informational gratifications from television viewing were the strongest predictors of television satisfaction. The discussion relates thesefindings to the ambiguous meanings that the new technologies have in U.S. sodety. Satisfaction is an important concept in consumer research because it directs product purchase and consumption. The concept includes elements of pleasure, need fulfillment, and evaluations of product and consumption benefits.' But, mainly, satisfaction is an affective reaction to product use.^ This study examined whether the newer television technologies inCTease satisfaction with television viewing. Because cable, videocassette recorders, and remote control devices increase availability of program options, allow viewers greater control over their exposure, and make it easier for viewers to connect their preferences and their program choices, we expected that use of new technologies would increase the benefits that people receive from television viewing cind their perceptions of television viewing satisfaction. Satisfaction is n important variable in mass communication and consumer research. Satisfaction has been related to mass media use; e.g. to predict cablesubscriptionandnewspaper readership.' LaRose and Atkin, for example, found that intention to disconnect cable was related to less satisfaction with the cable company's customer service.^ Burgoon and Burgoon noted that those who were satisfied with the newspaper's cost and information spent more time reading the newspaper.' Although several theoretical approaches contribute to understanding the area of satisfaction,* most mass communication research has considered this to grow out of an expectation-confirmation process: when media content is consumed, if expectations are met, satisfaction results and consumption Satisfaction ^

ElizabethM.PerseisonthefacultyoftheDepartment ofCommunication at theUniversity loumilism Quarterly cf Delaware and Douglas A. Ferguson is in the Department of Telecommunications at *'' ^' '*'" * Bowling Green State University in Ohio. ^ ^ ^ ^
I9MAE7MC THE lumoT or THE NEWER TELEVISION TECHNOUXIES ON TELEVISKM SAnsFAcnoN 843

continues; if expectations are not met, dissatisfaction results and use discontinues. Palmgreen and Raybum tested several variations on the expectationdisconfirmation model of television satisfaction.' They found the strongest predictor of television news satisfaction was gratification obtained, or the benefits people reported they derived from television news vievsring. Discrepancy scores created between expectations about news viewing and how well those expectations were filled accounted for far less of the variance in satisfaction. These results were mirrored in Dobos' study of satisfactiim with communication technology use in organizations.* Shefoundthat perceived benefits (gratifications obtained) of a technology were stronger predictors of satisfaction than expectations and measvires of expectation-outcome discrepancies. These researchers suggested that models of media satisfaction should focus on outcomes and benefits of media use, rather than expectations. Expectations may be less important to imderstanding television satisfaction because expectations about mass media are normative in our society.* That is, most people share generalized beliefs, or expectations, about the role of different mass media sodety in society. This study focused on two major infiuences on satisfaction with television exposure. First, actual use and experience with television is important to satisfaction because consumption may have some rewards. Seccmd, the benefits, rewards, or gratifications that people obtain fixmi exposure affect satisfaction because they represent evaluations of the benefits derived from use. New Television . . Technologies This study focused on the influences of cable television, videocassette recorders (VCR), and remote control devices (RCD) on satisfaction. We anticipated that these newer television technologies would be associated .^^ greater television viewing satisfaction because cable, VCR, and RCDs would increase perceived benefits from television viewing. In general, there are good reasons to believe that peoplefindcable, VCR, and RCD beneficial. These technologies have been widely embraced by the audience. Between 1980 and 1990, cable subscription increased from 22% of the U.S. population to 59%; VCR ownership increased from 1% to 73%; and remote control penetration increased from 18% to 66%.' Qearly, people adopt these tedviologies because they fulfill some needs." These new technologies should also increase the benefits from television because they increase the ease vtiitx which viewers can locate appealing content and allow people greater control over television viewing. Cable. An early study found that cable subscribers report higher television satisfaction tiian nonsubscribers.'^ Cable should increase television satisfaction because cable television increases the programming options available to viewers. Subscribers make use of that increased variety. Cable subscribers have higher channel repertoires, that is, they watch more different channels than noruubscribers." Increased choice can lead to more television viewing. Basic cable subscribers watch more television than nonsubscribers; pay<ab]e subcribers watch the most television.'* Cable subscribers also become aware of and value the specialized programming offered by cable.'^ Most valued cable charmels are those diat provide content not duplicated by broadcast television: CNN, ESPN, FNN, MTV, TNN, Nickelodeon, and The Weather Channel." Cable should increase the re-

844

wards of viewing television and satisfaction widi television viewing because viewers wiU be more likely to find programs to fill their particular needs. VCR. Videocassette recorders increase viewers' control over television. Use of VCR allows people to select not only what they will watch, but when ihey will watch it. An important reason people use VCRs, for example, is so they don't miss their favorite jwograms.'' Control means that viewers can make better use of their leisure time." Viewers have found new uses for VCRs that surpass the uses of tdevision" and new types of media behaviors, such as time-shifting, tape rental, and library building.^ VCRs lead people to be more active in the use of television content. VCR users plan their viewing more and make greater use of program guides^' and replay material so they can leam from it.^ Control and opportimity for greater activity should increase the benefits derived from viewing and satisfaction witb television. Remote control devices. Two major uses of RCD are grazing (changingchannels frequently to sample television's offerings) and zapping (changing channels to avoid commercials). Grazing itself provides its own gratifications.^ The constant shifting images and highlights of program bits may provide perceptual stimulation. Remote control devices should be linked to greater television satisfaction because RCDs increase the ease with which viewers can select and reevaluate television programs.^* When viewers find themselves watching something dissatisfybig, they can instantly change the channel. James Webster has said, "Grazing by definition is a sign of dissatisfaction."^ The most salient reasoru for changing channels are to avoid people, commercials, and to reject unwanted information.^ Viewers also use RCDs to get "more out of television.' They access music videos, news, weather, and shopping during commercial breaks. In general, RCDs make television more interesting." The goal of this study was to explore the impact of newer television technologies on television satisfaction. We focused on two infiuences on satisfaction: new technology use and perceived benefits of television viewing. Because cable, VCR, and RCD increase programming options and viewer control, we expected that greater use of new technologies would be associated with more perceived benefits from television viewing. Thus, the first hypothesis was: HI: Benefits perceived to be obtained from television viewing will be predicted by use of cable, VCR, and RCD. 1, because we anticipated that benefits and use would infiuence television satisfaction, we predicted that: H2: Television viewing satisfaction will be predicted by (a) increased use of cable, VCR, and RCD, and (b) more perceived benefits obtained from television viewing. Procedure and Sample. A random-digit-dialing telephone survey was conducted in spring 1991 among adults living off-campus in a university town in the Midwest.^ CXit of the 813 valid attempts (excluding business Method HvPOtheses

845

numbers and no answers), there were 615 completions and 198 refusals, for a 75 6% completion rate. The sample was 45.1% male and ranged in age from 17 - 93 (M = 36.27, SD = 17.01). The average respondent had completed 14.45 yearsofeducation(rangingfrom8-20years,SD = 2.45). HoUingshead'stwofactor social position index measured occupational level and r<mged from 11 - 73 (M = 46.50, SD = 18.52).^ Media Use. Because the focus of the study was on the impact of new television technology use on benefits derived from television viewing and satisfaction with television, we considered four media use variables in this study: cable subscription, VCR ownership, VCR use, RCD channel changing. In addition we considered the impact of overall television exposure. Cable subscription. Of the sample, 68.7% subscribed to cable television. This is above the national average of 59% at the time of the survey.^ VCR ownership. Of the sample, 76.9% had access to a VCR where they lived. Thiscomparestothenationalaverageof73%atthetimeofthesurvey." VCR use. Respondents indicated how much time they spent using their VCR by emswering the question, "What percentage of the time you spend watching TV is spent watching a videotape? " The responses ranged from 0 to 95% (M = 18.76, SD = 17.85)." Channel changing. Ferguson reported on the unreliability of asking respondents to indicate how many times per hour they change channels.'' Such mundane behavior is difficult to recall precisely. Instead, respondents with RCDs described their frequency (1 = never, 2 = seldom, 3 = often, 4 = very often) to the question "How often do you flip channels?" The mean score was 2.37 (SD = 0.81). Television exposure Respondents indicated how memy hours they viewed "yesterday" and "on a typical day." Averaged numbers of hours ranged from 0 to 17 (M = 2.98, SD = 2.24). Perceived Benefits of Television Viewing. Respondents expressed their agreement (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = strongly agree) with seven statements that concem benefits obtained from viewing television, including relaxation benefits, a dominant use cif television.-** The seven benefits statements were: "TV viewing helps me leam things that can help me" (M = 2.70, SD = 0.53), "Watching TV helps me pass the time" (M = 2.69, SD = 0.57), "TV keeps me company" (M = 2.47, SD = 0.59), "Watching TV helps me forget about my work and worries" (M = 2.46, SD = 0.62), "Watching TV helps me relax" (M = 2.88, SD = 0.41), "Watching TV entertains me" (M = 2.94, SD = 0.38), and "Watching TV peps me up" (M = 2.24, SD = 0.53). Satisfaction. Satisfaction was measured with the following question: "On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 means not at all satisfied and 10 means completely satisfied, how satisfied are you with the overall job that television does in providing you with the things you are seeking?"^ Satisfaction ranged from 1 to 10 (M = 5.96, SD = 1 95), the median value was 6, and the distdbution was bimodal with 20.3% answering 5 cind 21.5% answering 7. Statistical Analysis Hierarchical multiple regression was used to test the hypotheses of the study. In all cases, demographics were entered on the first step to control for emy variance they might contribute to the equation. New technology use variables were entered on the second step. In the regression of satisfaction, the seven benefits were entered on the final step. Results Benefits. Hierarchical multiple regression tested the first hypothesis, that benefits derived from watching television would be positively related to the use of new television technologies. The regressions are summarized in

846

TABLE 1 Hierarchical Multiple Regression Summary: Regressing Benefits Derived from Television Viewing

Benefit

Step E' Final E^ Final E' Final E' Final E^ Final E^ Final E^ Final Entered Change R Change R Change R Change R Change R Change R Change R

Demographics 1 Age Sex Education Occupation Media Use 2

.01 .08 -.06 -.01 ,05 .00 .01 ,03 -.04 -.02 ,03 .01 0,53

.05** -.02 .02 -.06 .08 ,06*" .04 -,03 -.09 .14* .19** .10*" 4.36*"

.05*

.02 .18** .02 -.04 .05 -.11 -.00 -.08 -.11

.01 .04 -.01 .11 .08 .03 -.00 -.07 .03 .11 .08 .04 .06 -.00 .08 ,14* -,01

.00 -.00 .01 .02 ,03 .03 .03 -.00 .12* .11 .09 .03 1.43 1.25

.01 -.04 -.06 -.11 -.06 .02 -.06 -.11 -.05 .05 -.02 .03 1.15

.10***

.02

Cable Subscription VCR Ownership VCR Use TV Exposure Channel Changing Total S2 Final E Note. Benefit 1: Benefit 2: Benefit 3: Benefit 4:

-.06 -.05 -.10 .24*** .24*** .15*** 6.63*** .04

1 .59

Leam things that can help. Helps me pass the time. Keeps me company. Helps me forget about work and worries.

Benefit 5: Helps me relax. Benefit 6: Entertains me. Benefit 7: Peps me up.

***p<.001 **p<.01 ' p < . 0 5

Table 1. The analyses provide only limited support for the first hypothesis. Leam things that can happen to me. Demographics, entered on the first step, accounted for 0.9% of the variance (p = .50). There were no significant predictors. Media use variables, entered on the second step, added 0.4% to the incremental variance (p = .92). The final equation accounted for 1.4% of the variance in perceiving leaming benefits from television viewing. There were no significant predictors. Helps pass the time At the first step, demographics accounted for 4.8% of the variance (p < .01), Occupation was initially a significant, positive predictor. New technology variables, entered on the second step, added 5.6% to the variance (p < .001). Occupation no longer was part of the equation. In the final analysis, the equation accounted for 10.4% of the variance in receiving pass time benefits from television viewing. Television exposure (R= ,14, p < .05) and channel changing (R = .19, p < ,01) were significant.
THE /MmcT or THE SEWEH TEUVISION TECHNOUXIIS ON TEUVISKMSAVSFACTION 847

positive predictors. Keeps me company. The demographics, entered at the first step, accounted for 4.7% of the variance (p < .01). Age and occupation were significant, positive contributors. The media use variables, entered at the second step, increased the variance 10.3% (p< .001). Occupation was no longer significant. The final equation explained 15.1% of the variance in receiving companionship benefits from television viewing. Age (R = .18, p < .01), television exposure (R = .24, p < .001), and channel changing (R = -24, p < .001) were all significant contributors to the equation.
Helps me forget about loorkand ivorries. At the first step the demograph-

ics accounted for 2.0% of the variance (p = .14). Age was a significant, negative predictor. At the second step, the media use variables increased the varianct by2.1%(p = .21). Age was no longer part of the equation. The final equation accounted for 4.1% of the variance in receiving escapist benefits. None of the variables was a significant contributor to the equation. Helps me relax. At the first step, the demographics accounted for 1.0% of the variance (p = .50). At the second step, new technology variables increased the variance 2.7% (p = .10). The final equation accounted for 3.7% of the variance in perceiving relaxation from television viewing. Television exposure (R = .14, p < .05) was a significant, positive predictor. Entertains me. The demographics accounted for 0.4% of the variance at the first step (p = .83). At the second step, the new technology variables added 2.8% to the explained variance (p = .09). The final equation accounted for 3.2% of the variance in perceiving entertainment benefits from television viewing. Time spent watching the VCR (R = .12, p < .05) was a significant, positive predictor. Peps me up. The demographics entered on the first step accounted for 1.1% of the variance (p = .46). The use of new technologies increased the variance 1.9% at the second step (p = .25). In the final analysis, the equation explained 3.0% of the variance in perceiving excitement benefits from television viewing. None of the variables was a significant contributor to the equation. Television Satisfaction. Once again, hierarchical multiple regression tested the impact of use of newer television technologies on satisfaction with television viewing. The regression is summarized in Table 2. The demographics entered at the first step accounted for 1.2% of the varicince in satisfaction (p = .39). The media use variables, entered at the second step, accounted for another 5.6% of the variance (p < .01). Television exposure entered the equation as a significant, positive contributor. At the final step, the benefits derived from television viewing from television \ iewing added 7.7% to the explained variance. The final equation accounted for 14 5% of the variance in satisfaction with television viewing. Television exposure (R = .19, p < .01) and receiving leaming benefits from television viewing (R = .18, p < .001) were significant, positive contributors to the equation. Perceiving companionship benefits (R = .12, p = .07) was a near significant, positive predictor of satisfaction. The regression provided no support for the second hypothesis.

Discussion

There was only limited support for our expectation that use of cable, VCRs, emd RCDs would increase the benefits that people derive from television viewing. Media use variables, as a block, added significantly to only two of the seven regressions. Media use had its strongest positive

848

TABLE 2 Hierarchical Multiple Regression Summary: Regressing Satisfaction "How satisfied are you with the overall job that television does in providing you with the things you are seeking?"
Step Entered Demographics Age Sex Education Occupation Media Use Cable Subscription VCR Ownership VCR Use TV Exposure Channel Changing Benefits Leam things that help Pass the time Keeps me company Forget work & wordes Helps me relax Entertains me Peps me up 3 .15"* .08"* .18"' -.07 .12 -.02 .05 .06 .08 2 .QT" .06" .09 -.00 -.01 .19" .04 1 E^ .01 E^ Change .01 -.01 .04 .01 .02 Final f>

Note. Step 1: E(4, 333) = 1.03, p = .39 Step 2: E(9, 328) = 3.94, p < .01 Step 3: E(16, 321) = 4 14, p < .001 Final E = 3.42*" " p < .001 * p < .01 p < .05

impact on believing that television helps to pass the time and provide companionship. Of the new technology variables, channel changing had the most substantial impact. Our respondents reported more pass-the-time and companionship benefits when they changed channels more. Passing time and companionship are usually considered more passive uses of television that focus more on the benefits of watching than benefits of particular content.'* These findings reinforce the theoretical ambiguity of channel changing. Although some writers consider channel changing a sign of active program selection and reevaluation,'' others have found that channel changing reflects lack of attention to programs and less involvement with the content.-'* The results of our study suggest that the remote control's greatest
THE iMmcT OF THE Nmu TELCVISION TECHNOWQES ON TtumioN SAVSFACTKN 849

benefits may not be associated with selecting specific programs. Channel changing instead may enhance television exposure that is unplanned or when there is nothing specific to watch. These results also reinforce the importance of focusing on reasons for chtinging channels. Zapping is related to commercial avoidance, grazing is related to boredom, and flipping is related to specific gratifications." Researchers should be aware of the different types of channel changing and the different reasons that motivate it. VCR use had only a limited impact on receiving entertainment benefits from television. And, contrary to our hypothesis, more VCR use was linked to lower levels of reported entertainment benefits. Future research should explore whether VCR use grows out of dissatisfaction with television. Perhaps VCRs provide other benefits not measured in this study. Rubin and Bantz, for example, found that the greatest perceived utilities of VCRs are movie rentals, time shifting, library storage, and for socializing.* Perhaps benefits from these uses are not seen as related to television viewing. Israeli children, for example, consider VCRs more like cinema than like television.^' Future research should examine connections between perceptions of VCR and television with a U.S. sample. We found it surprising that cable television was unrelated to any benefits of television viewing. We expected that the greater variety offered by cable would allow viewers more opportunity to get what they were looking for out of television. Perhaps cable is not seen as distinct from television. Perhaps subscribers see the variety of programming as what television has to offer. Future research should examine whether newer technologies raise expectations about television so that increased benefits may not be so noticed or appreciated. Moreover, although cable television offers greater progrtim variety, other aspects of cable may be dissatisfying. Some subscribers may feel that cost does not offset the benefits. Other subscribers may be dissatisfied with management and customer service, and the repetition of program offerings, especially on more expensive pay channels.*' Future research should continue to explore the aspects of the cable experience related to satisfaction and disconnection. We found no support for our second hypothesis. Television satisfaction was not increased by cable subscription, VCR use, or RCD use. The most substantial predictors of satisfaction were higher levels of television exposure and believing that one derives useful knowledge from television. It is hard to accept that technologies that have been so widely accepted by the audience do not provide benefits or increase television viewing satisfaction.*' There are some possible explanations for our findings. First, new technologies may raise the expectations that people have of television, so that any increases in satisfaction received may simply be what is expected. So, it might be more fruitfui to study chcinges in television satisfaction over time. Television may seem more satisfying to new cable subscribers and new owners of VCRs and RCDs, because they are more aware of increased benefits associated with the new technologies. Or, research might focus on satisfaction with television viewing when cable is unavailable, the VCR is broken, or the RCD is lost. Any decreases in television satisfaction might help researchers estimate how these technologies contribute to satisfaction. Second, we used the model of satisfaction most widely supported by television research. Perhaps other models are more appropriate with the new media environment." Comparing expectations about television between

850

new technology users and nonusers, for example, would help uncover whether new technologies increase what people hope to get from television viewing. Equity approaches might answer whether costs associated with newer technologies are offset by benefits. And, attribution approaches might resolve questions about whether benefits are attributed to television, to its content, or to newer technologies. Lastly, although we used a measure of television satisfaction widely use in mass communication research, future research might consider other measures. Scholars may need to enlarge the concept of television satisfaction. Satisfaction with television may be multidimensional and reflect different elements of the television landscape: programs sought versus programs found while seeking others, offensive commercials versus entertaining commercials, friendly versus unfriendly counterprogramming, and programs available at different times. Elements of and influences on television satisfaction may change with the adoption and use of different media technologies.

NOTES 1. R.L. OUver, "Measurement and Evaluation of Satisfaction Processes in Retail Settings," Journal of Retailing 57 (1981): 25-48. 2. R.L. Oliver, "A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions," Journal of Marketing Research 17 (1980): 460-469; R.A. Westbrook and R.L. Oliver, "Developing Better Measures of Consumer Satisfaction: Some Preliminary Results" in Advances in Consumer Research, ed. K.B. Monroe (Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 1981), 8: 94-99. 3. Judee K. Burgoon and M. Burgoon, "Predictors of Newspaper Readership," Journalism Quarterly 57 (1980): 589-596; Robert LaRose and David Atkin, "Satisfaction, Dempgraphic, and Media Environment Predictors of
Cable Subscription," Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 32 (1988): 403413.

4. LaRose and Atkin, "Predictors of Cable Subscription." 5. Burgoon and Burgoon, Predictors of Newspaper Readership." 6. Richard L. Oliver and Wayne S. DeSarbo, "Response Determinants in Satisfaction Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research 14 (1988): 495-507. 7. Philip Palmgreen and J.D. Raybum, "Uses and Gratifications and Exposure to Public Television: A Discrepancy Approach," Communication Research 6 (1979): 155-180. 8. Jean Dobos, "Gratification Models of Satisfaction and Choice of Communication Channels in Organizations," Communication Research 19 (1992): 29-51. 9.-Allen Lichtenstein and Lawrence Rosenfeld, "Normative Expectations and Individual Decisions Conceming Media Gratification Choices,"
Communication Research 11 (1984): 393-413. 10. Lynn S. Gross, Telecommunications: An Introduction to the Electronic

Media, 4th ed. (Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown, 1992). 11. Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations. 3rd ed. (NY: Free Press, 1983). 12. Carrie Heeter and Bradley S. Greenberg, "Cable and Program Choice,' in Selective Exposure to Communication, eds. Dolf Zillmann and Jennings Bryant (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1985), 203-224. 13. Carrie Heeter, David D'Alession, Bradley S. Greenberg, and D. Stevens
THE /MWCTOF TH NEWEII TEUVISKW TECHNOUXIIS ON TLUVISION S/msFAcnON

851

McVoy, "Cableviewing Behaviors: An Electronic Assessment," in Cableviewing, eds. C. Heeter and B.S, Greenberg (Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1988), 51-63. 14. Ron Garay, Cable Television: A Reference Guide to Information (NY: Greenwood, 1988). 15. Vemone M. Sparkes and Namjun Kang, "Public Reactions to Cable Television: Time in the Diffusion Process," Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 30 (1986): 213-229. 16. Garay, Cable Television. 17. Milton J, Shatzer and Thomas R, Lindolf, "Subjective Differences in the Use and Evaluation of the VCR," in The VCR Age: Home Video and Mass Communiaition, ed, Mark R. Levy (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1989), 112-131, 18. Kimberly K. Massey and StanleyJ, Baran, "VCR and People's Control of Their Leisure Time," in Social & Cultural Aspects of VCR Use, ed. Julie R, Dobrow (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1990), 75-92, 19. Alan M. Rubin and Charles R, Bantz, "Utility of Videocassette Recorders," American Behavioral Scientist 30 (1987): 471-485. 20. Mark R. Levy, "The Time-shifting Use of Home Video Recorders," Journal of Broadcasting 27 (1983): 263-268. 21. Carolyn A. Lin, "Audience Activity and VCR Use," in Social & Cultural Aspects of VCR Use, ed. Julie R. Dobrow (HUlsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1990), 75-92. 22. Julie R. Dobrow, "The Rerun Ritual: Using VCRs to Review," In Social & Cultural Aspects of VCR Use, ed. Julie R, Dobrow (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1990), 181-193. 23. Peter Ainslie, "Confronting a Nation of Grazers,'' Channels: The Business of Communicators (September 1988), 54-62. 24. Carrie Heeter, "Prograim Selection and the Abundance of Choice: A Process Model," Human Communication Research 12 (1985): 126-152, 25. Janice Castro, "View from the Ivy Tower," in How Americans Watch TV: A Nation of Grazers (NY: C.C. Publishing, 1989), 23, 26. Ainslie, "Nation of Grazers;" James R. Walker and Robert V. Bellamy, Jr., "Gratifications of Grazing: An Exploratory Study of Remote Control Use," Journalism Quarterly 68 (Auhjmn 1991): 422-431. 27. Walker and Bellamy, "Gratifications of Grazing." 28. This study was a secondary analysis of data collected for other research regarding television remote controls. See Douglas A. Ferguson and Elizabeth M. Perse, "Media and Audience Influences on Channel Repertoire," journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 37 (1993): 31-47, 29. Lower scores indicate higher social position, D.C, Miller, "HoUingshead's Two Factor Index of Social Position," in Haruibook of Research Design and Social Measurement (NY: Longman, 1983), 300-308. 30. Cable subscribers differed from nonsubscribers. They were older (M = 37.79) than nonsubscribers (M = 33,12), t(588) = 3,07,p < ,001; subscribers had completed more years of schoolings (M = 14.58) than subscribers (M = 14,05), t(594) = 2.45, p < ,05; subscribers had higher SES (M = 44.88) than nonsubscribers (M = 51.03), t(577) = 3.74, p < ,001; subscribers watched more television (M = 6.32) than nonsubscribers (M = 5,15), t(597) = 3.47, p < ,001; subscribers were more likely to own VCRs (82.4%) than nonsubscribers (62.6%), chi-square (N = 571) = 26.07, p < .001; and subscribers were more likely to own RCDs (83.6%) than nonsubscribers (56,1%), chi-square (N = 603) = 52.24, p<,001, 31. VCR owners completed more years of schooling (M = 14.61) than

852

nonowners (M = 13.85), t(563) = 3.16, p < .01; owners were more likely to subscribe to cable (75.0%) than n o n o w n e r s (51.9%), chi-square (N = 571) = 26.07, p < .001; and owners were more likely to own RCDs (82.4%) than nonovwiers (54.5%), chi-square (N = 571) = 41.59, p < .001. 32. VCRusewascomparabletolevelsfoundinotherresearch. SeeDanny Miletic, "VCR Usage and Its Seasonality," Nielsen Newscast, Fail 1988,6-9. 33. Douglas A. Ferguson, "Channel Repertoire in the Presence of Remote Control Devices, VCRs, and Cable Television," Journal cf Broadcasting & Electronic Media 36 (1992): 83-91. 34. Robert Kubey and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Television and the Quality of L^: How Viewing Shapes Everyday Experiences (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1990). 35. The satisfaction measure was drawn from Philip Palmgreen and J. D. Raybum n, "A Comparison of Gratification Models of Media Satisfaction," Communication Monographs 52 (December 1985): 334-346. The same measure was also used by Dobos, "Gratifications Models," and by Elizabeth M. Perse and Alan M. Rubin, "Audience Activity and Satisfaction With Favorite Television Soap Opera," Jourmlism Quarterly 65 (Summer 1988): 368-375. 36. Alan M. Rubin, "Ritualized and Instrumental Television Viewing," Journal of Communication 34 (Summer 1984): 67-77. 37. Heeter, "Program Selection and Abundance of Choice." 38. Elizabeth M. Perse, "Audience Selectivity and Involvement in the Newer Media Environment,"Communication Research 17 (1990): 675-697. 39. Ainslie,"Nation of Grazers;" Ferguson, "Channel Repertoire;" Walker and Bellamy, "Gratifications of Grazing." 40. Rubin and Bantz, "Utility of VCRS." 41. Akiba A. Cohen, Mark R. Levy, and K. Golden, (1988), "Children's Uses and Gratifications of Home VCRs," Communication Research 15 (1988): 772-780. 42. LaRose and Atkin, "Predictors of Cable Subscription;" Garay, Cable Television. 43. According to research on adoption of innovations, if users do not derive benefits of some kind, use discontinues. See Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion cf Innovations, 3rd ed. (NY: Free Press, 1983). 44. Oliver and DeSarbo, "Response Determinants."

853