Parasocial Theory: Concepts and Measures

Page 1

Parasocial Theory: Concepts

and Measures

GAYLE S. STEVER

SUNY Empire State College, USA

Basic concepts

Parasocial interaction (PSI) is a term that originated with Horton and Wohl (1956) to

describe the nonreciprocated manner in which audience members interact with media

personae. These social interactions are, in many ways, like face-to-face interactions with

the caveat that the response normally expected from a social partner is either minimal

or completely missing. Parasocial theory has been developed to describe and attempt to

explain the imagined social relationships and interactions we have with people who are

distant from us and who do not reciprocate our individual communication or interest.

Anthropologist Caughey (1984) used the term imaginary social relationship to describe,

for the most part, the same phenomenon. The term secondary attachment in develop-

mental psychology also has an equivalent meaning, with the primary attachment figure

being the actual media persona while the secondary attachment is to the viewer’s inter-

nal mental representation of the media figure (Adams-Price & Greene, 1990). All three

terms refer to the idea that imagined social interaction with media figures who have

not been met in a face-to-face situation is carried on in a fashion that mimics real-

world interactions with friends and acquaintances. The different disciplines appear to

have parallel terms for this phenomenon.

Caughey (1984), approaching the topic from an anthropological perspective,

suggested a parallel between, on the one hand, Americans and their relationships

to media celebrities and, on the other, the Pacific Islanders of Faanakkar and their

relationships to their gods and spirits. He pointed out that shared knowledge of

media celebrities is a foundational part of American culture. In the “artificial world

of vicarious social experience” (p. 34), imaginary social relationships are a standard

part of social life. Not only do people know about celebrities but they also often have

very strong feelings about them. Caughey’s discussion included a study where people

had been interviewed with respect to their various feelings for a favorite celebrity.

In the case of romantic feelings, the parallel was very direct, with the audience

member talking about the celebrity in exactly the same way one might talk about

a real-life romantic partner. Most often a fan will try to describe a relationship to a

media figure by equating it to a real-world social relationship. In addition to talking

about the media figure as a romantic partner, the figure could be described as a

“father figure” or “friend,” or some other traditional connection. Caughey reported

The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects.

Patrick R�ssler (Editor-in-Chief), Cynthia A. Hoffner, and Liesbet van Zoonen (Associate Editors).

� 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2017 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

DOI: 10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0069

Page 2

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

pseudo-communication with favorite celebrities during which the fan would “talk out

loud” to a picture or other representation of the star. These same aspects of mediated

relationships parallel those in the literature on PSI and parasocial relationships

(PSRs). Caughey’s pioneering work in this area dates from his first publication on

the topic in 1978 and is acknowledged by many of the researchers in PSI and PSRs

who came after him (Giles, 2002; Klimmt, Hartmann, & Schramm, 2006; Perse &

Rubin, 1989).

Early literature in parasocial theory tended to use the terms PSI and PSR inter-

changeably. Rebecca Rubin and Alan Rubin (2001) were among the most frequently

cited scholars in the 1980s, and they and their colleagues pioneered the early instru-

ments used to measure PSI and PSRs. They also applied mass communication theory

to parasocial theory in a way that moved the work forward after more than 15 years

wherein very little had been done beyond Horton and Wohl’s (1956) original descrip-

tion of the phenomenon. More recent work in this area has pointed out the need to

distinguish these concepts more clearly. For example, PSI has been distinguished from

PSRs as the viewer’s one-sided process of perception of the media person during actual

viewing, while PSRs are seen as ongoing processes including affective and cognitive

responses that continued outside the viewing time (Hartmann & Goldhoorn, 2011;

Klimmt, Hartmann, & Schramm, 2006).

That PSI and PSRs varied in intensity from audience member to audience mem-

ber, and that there were cognitive, affective, and behavioral components to paraso-

cial theory, were ideas that scholars continued to explore as the theory matured and

became more complex. It was also recognized that the media personae who elicited

these responses were as varied and diverse as were the audience members. The con-

structs were certainly not “one size fits all” from the point of view of the viewer or the

media performer (Klimmt, Hartmann, & Schramm, 2006).

Parasocial attachment (PSA) is a third construct within parasocial theory. It refers to

the evolution of a PSR to the point at which the media figure becomes a source of felt

security and safe haven. Attachment to parasocial figures and attachment in face-to-

face relationships have many of the same characteristics. Three characteristics of adult

attachment are proximity, secure base, and separation protest and these can be found in

both PSRs and face-to-face relationships. The idea that PSA is another form of attach-

ment consistent with the characteristics described in attachment theory is one that is

being explored in current studies (Stever, 2013).

Mary Ainsworth and other developmental psychologists have described three pat-

terns of attachment: secure attachment, preoccupied/anxious/ambivalent attachment,

and avoidant attachment. These were originally used to describe the relationship

between an infant and caregiver, and later between adult romantic partners. Various

studies have applied the attachment construct to whether or not these attachment

styles predict PSRs. Various studies have found that those with avoidant attachment

styles are the least likely to form PSRs while those with an anxious, preoccupied, or

ambivalent style are most likely to form PSRs. Secure people with low levels of trust for

others are more likely to form PSRs than those with high trust, and it is suggested that

this might be compensatory. Mediated and interpersonal relationships involve similar

Page 3

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

cognitive processes, leading to the finding that PSRs and face-to-face relationships

show many of the same characteristics (Cohen, 2001).

While early studies explored the idea that PSI and PSRs might be the result of social

dysfunction or loneliness, subsequent research did not support this hypothesis and, by

the late 1980s and early 1990s, researchers were recognizing PSI and PSRs as normal

functions of TV viewing. More recent research has found that PSRs do help people with

low self-esteem to feel better about themselves; this is in spite of the fact that chronic

loneliness, neuroticism, and low self-esteem have not been supported as predictors of

PSI. While large amounts of TV watching correlate with social deficiencies, PSI is not

predicted by such a model, nor does amount of media consumption reliably predict PSI.

The study of PSI and PSRs has expanded from an original emphasis on television to

include other forms of media including computer-mediated communication, romance

novels, films, and musical performances.

Linking other theories to parasocial theory

A number of prominent theories have been explored in the context of PSI. Uses

and gratifications theory was one of the first to be associated with PSI. It was these

researchers, in the 1970s, who revived the idea of PSI and began to apply it theoretically.

Uses and gratifications theory says that people seek out specific media in order to

meet their own personal needs. Various needs, including entertainment and social

interaction, are met through PSI and PSRs. Viewers use media to alleviate boredom

and to gather information about the world. If a person’s needs are not being met, he or

she seeks out alternative methods of meeting those needs. The imaginary relationship

serves to alleviate boredom, and varied media figures, particularly types of people we

do not encounter in our day-to-day lives, give new information about those types that

are not readily available to us. Often viewers report that the exotic or interesting nature

of people from other countries enhances their attractiveness, as with the American

fixation in the 1960s with the British invasion of music groups such as the Beatles and

the Rolling Stones, or the intense interest that Japanese fans had in Michael Jackson

in the 1980s.

Additionally, if face-to-face interaction is uncomfortable for a person, PSI offers an

alternative way to meet needs for social interaction. Active and engaged users are more

likely to form PSRs than are passive or uninvolved users, regardless of the length of

exposure to the media personality.

Albert Bandura postulated that cognitive rehearsal is an important component of his

social learning theory. If this is the case, then PSI where the audience member inter-

acts in his or her imagination with a media partner could be a path to better social

interaction skills that could then transfer to real-life partners. Social cognitive theory,

also proposed by Bandura, extended social learning theory to include schemas, con-

cept structures that influence what we choose to watch and how we react to what we

watch. He and others have observed that both attractiveness and gender are influential

in both viewing choices and the way those choices are processed. All of these factors

have implications for parasocial theory in that the way we interact with media personae

Page 4

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

and the choices we make in developing PSRs with those personae are heavily influenced

by things such as attraction, gender, and the way the viewer perceives characters and/or

actors. Similarity or homophily, empathy, and identification are also factors that are

discussed in this context. We are more likely to be interested in and listen to characters

with whom we perceive commonalities and similarities. Additionally, basic to identi-

fication and PSRs are empathy and the belief that one understands a media persona.

Many researchers have focused on attraction as a motivation of PSI with a focus on

task, social, and physical attraction.

An example of how PSI and PSRs are antecedents to behavior change is a series of

studies done in India with entertainment and education programs that were effective in

changing viewers’ attitudes in areas such as small family size, substance abuse preven-

tion, use of dowries, and attitudes toward women’s rights (Sood, 2002). It was found

that PSI has both affective and cognitive elements, and changes in thinking, feelings,

and behavior are all possible for those engaged in these relationships; additionally, PSI

leads to PSRs, meaning that both of these processes can lead to changes in attitude and

behavior.

Attribution is the process wherein an observer decides what motivated the behavior

of another person. The theory was developed to describe social interactions in a face-to-

face setting, but it is equally applicable to PSI. The media viewer observes the behavior

of an actor or character and decides whether that media persona is influenced by exter-

nal factors or internal ones. The fundamental attribution error is the tendency to ascribe

the behaviors of others to internal stable characteristics while attributing one’s own

behavior to external influences. Evidence suggests that the length of a PSR increases

attributional confidence in spite of the lack of evidence that length of exposure is a

predictor of the strength of a PSR (Perse & Rubin, 1989; Rubin & Rubin, 2001).

Uncertainty reduction theory, an outgrowth of attribution theory, suggests that

information received before interacting with a social partner causes increased comfort

around that person as uncertainty about how they might react in social situations

decreases. This concept has been applied in studies to PSI and PSRs and suggests that

media figures are liked more as uncertainty as to how they will react decreases, just as is

the case in real social relationships. Basically, it is desirable for others to be predictable,

and this is yet another way that PSRs mirror real social relationships with friends and

acquaintances.

Some studies recognize involvement as a metaconstruct for various ways in which

audience members become connected to media personae. The construct can be bro-

ken down into components that include identification, transportation, and PSI. Many

studies have focused on distinguishing these components from each other and on devel-

oping ways to measure them. While earlier studies showed a need for companionship

and personal identification as catalysts for PSI, a clearer distinction has since been made

in the literature between PSI and two types of identification. Personal identification,

also called similarity identification, is when the audience member recognizes that the

media figure has qualities that are shared with the audience member—things like per-

sonality traits, ethnicity, age, gender, and other qualities. Wishful identification is when

the audience member aspires to be like the media figure. In the first case the audience

member is already like the media figure while in the second case they want to be like the

Page 5

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

media figure. Transportation is defined as a media experience that engages the audience

member in deep involvement and absorption in the story or experience. Cohen (2001)

and others have made the case for identification being a separate construct from PSI.

Both PSI and identification are constructs that were developed to explain the extraor-

dinary influence of celebrities. In the case of PSI the viewer wants to interact with the

celebrity while in the case of identification the viewer actually wants to be the celebrity,

or sees him- or herself as already like the celebrity. A number of studies have found that

a single audience member can experience PSI, PSRs, and identification with the same

celebrity.

Important variables explored in PSI and PSR research

Gender has been included as a variable in a number of the studies on PSI and PSRs. In

general,malesweremorelikelytoidentifymalecelebritiesasobjectsofbothPSIandPSRs

while females were equally likely to identify males and females. Boys were more likely to

choose males while girls chose favorite celebrities from both sexes in studies on children.

Girls are slightly more likely to report PSI than are boys. For boys and girls who interacted

with male media characters, intelligence and attractiveness predicted PSI. However, for

girls only, attractiveness predicted PSI with female characters (Hoffner, 1996).

Studies on loneliness have found variability between men and women in terms of how

their personal loneliness affected their tendency to engage in PSI. Overall motivations

for media use differed between men and women. Early studies that failed to link loneli-

ness with PSI focused on degree of loneliness. A more recent study focused instead on

types of loneliness and found that family loneliness predicted PSI for women but not

for men, while chronic loneliness predicted PSI for men but not for women. Roman-

tic loneliness did not predict PSI for either gender in this study (Wang, Fink, & Cai,

2008). Some studies have found differences by gender in PSRs and some have not: type

of media situation seems to be a key variable; for example, women have stronger PSRs

with soap opera characters than with other types of characters.

It has been found that PSI and PSRs can be more important than the content of a

show, and motivation for viewing can come from PSI with characters rather than actual

interest in the story or other content. For example, studies have found that news viewing

increases with PSI with newscasters, thus increasing interest in the news, rather than

the primary viewing motivation being interest in the news itself.

An affective connection with a media celebrity will increase the influence of his or

her message on the viewer. Talk show hosts and other media persona actively work to

increase PSI in order to better influence (for example) the buying or viewing behavior

of the audience. Emphasis in research on the bodily addressing of the media persona in

orientation to the audience shows that facing the audience and addressing them directly

increases the strength of the perceived PSI by the viewer. Bodily addressing is more

influential than verbal addressing alone. The illusion of mutual gaze increases this effect

(Cummins & Cui, 2014).

It is clear from a number of studies that positive or sympathetic portrayal of marginal-

ized populations and resulting PSI can improve audience members’ perceptions of those

Page 6

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

populations. Work on the portrayal of homosexual characters and the parasocial contact

hypothesis involved findings along these lines (Schiappa, Allen, & Gregg, 2007), and

researchers have found the same phenomenon for the portrayal of mentally ill charac-

ters (Hoffner & Cohen, 2012).

Age is a variable often studied by parasocial theorists. Specific studies looking at fac-

tors influential to adolescents (such as those discussed below in the section on psychol-

ogy) have been common. The specific function of PSI in the life of elderly populations

might suggest that loneliness increases PSI and PSRs, but most studies along those lines

did not support that hypothesis. However, it is true that elderly viewers are more fre-

quent consumers of television, although time viewing alone was also not a variable that

consistently predicted either PSI or PSRs. Overall, studies linking age to PSRs have been

inconclusive. Tukachinsky (2010) has pointed out that this could be because different

types of PSRs are prominent at different ages, with adolescents and young adults more

frequently having romantic PSRs while older adults are more like to have the friendship

type of PSRs.

Parasocial relationships and parasocial attachment

as studied by psychologists

While the bulk of work in parasocial theory has been done within the discipline of

communication, there have been contributions made by developmental and social psy-

chologists to this area of research.

Giles (2002) was the principal scholar to begin the discussion about the necessity of

distinguishing PSI and PSRs. In his seminal article, he posed a number of key ques-

tions that created the agenda for work in parasocial theory for the decade to come. He

researched celebrity worship and worked to integrate the work from that area into main-

stream parasocial theory, pointing out the dangers of pathologizing normal PSI and

PSRs. He postulated a system of categories to differentiate types of parasocial objects,

creating distinctions between PSRs with real people, PSRs with real people playing

fictional characters, and PSRs with nonhuman personae such as cartoon figures. He

provided an exhaustive review of the literature in PSI and PSRs up to 2002 and asked the

question “when does PSI cross over into social interaction?” This is an important ques-

tion in the area of fan studies, where it is possible and even likely that one might meet

one’s favorite celebrity in real life. Giles also pointed out the importance of distinguish-

ing between PSRs and other types of mediated relationships, particularly other types of

computer-mediated communications. Not all computer-mediated communications are

parasocial; in fact, more often they are not. It is the lack of reciprocity that defines PSRs,

whereas many forms of computer-mediated communications are reciprocal between

users of equal status and thus not parasocial. Giles also proposed a continuum of social

to parasocial mediated communication with variables including the number of peo-

ple involved (dyads vs. groups), the physical distance between communicators, and the

power relations and potential real relations between users. He found that PSRs tend to

occur between a less powerful viewer and a more powerful celebrity, and the potential

for a real relationship is very limited due to this status differential.

Page 7

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

While couched in the terminology of psychoanalytic theory, the work of Adams-

Price and Greene (1990) supported many of the findings in studies of PSI, PSRs, and

PSA. The term secondary attachment (rather than parasocial attachment) is used to

describe a relationship that is presumed to be unilinear rather than reciprocal, a key

feature of parasocial theory. Psychoanalysts going back to Sigmund Freud and Erik

Erikson have held that crushes are an important part of adolescent development. In

a culture dominated by mass media, often the objects of such crushes are music and

film stars. Also discussed in psychoanalytic literature is an identificatory type of sec-

ondary attachment wherein a young person looks to a larger-than-life other in order

to enhance the development of self-identity. The term secondary attachment is used

because the audience member’s own internal representation of the other is the object of

the attachment rather than the primary object or actual media figure who is admired.

This concept comes from object relations theory, a psychoanalytic theory that states that

the attachment object is an internalized representation of the other.

Homophily, or perceived similarity, has been supported by numerous studies as a

motivation for PSI and PSRs, and this same factor was found to be at work by Adams-

Price and Greene (1990). The viewer perceived that the object’s personality and other

characteristics were similar to his or her own, often as the result of projection of personal

characteristics onto the media figure or other. Just as other studies in PSRs have found,

this work supported the idea that romantic and identificatory attachment are principal

motivators in forming attachments to media figures. During adolescence it is clear that

audience members idealize their favorite celebrities, but it is not clear whether or not

this process continues into adulthood.

Stever (2013) has done a number of studies that support findings in the commu-

nication literature on PSRs and PSA. Her Celebrity Appeal Questionnaire, discussed

below, measured task, romantic, and hero or role model attraction—key themes in

other studies on PSRs. Looking for motivations for PSA, she found many of the

same categories emerged, including identification, wishful identification, romantic

attraction, task attraction, parasocial friendship, and hero worship, as well as other less

frequent categories such as the desire to be the favorite celebrity’s coworker. In the area

of homophily, or perceived similarity, participants were given a personality measure

to fill out themselves and then asked to complete it again as they thought the celebrity

would answer. There was a high degree of congruence between the self-profiles and the

perceived celebrity personality profile for a favorite celebrity.

Overall, psychologists have concluded that secondary attachments play a critical

transitional role in adolescence, particularly where romantic attachments are involved,

as these play a critical role in rehearsing for future relationships. While they are

imaginary, these attachments are experienced as real and share many similarities with

real social relationships, a finding that is also common in the communication literature

on PSRs. In adolescence, high attachment to peers and low attachment to parents is

a good predictor of secondary attachment to celebrities. For adults there is a wide

variety of motivations for PSRs, and further exploration in this area is needed as adult

secondary attachment (or PSA) is something that is just beginning to be explored.

Page 8

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

Development of measurements for parasocial interaction

and parasocial relationships

The original conceptualization of PSI by Horton and Wohl (1956) specified that PSI

was the illusion of a conversation created by behaviors by the media performer that

were meant to suggest interaction. In contrast, the PSR was a second concept defining

the perception of an ongoing relationship between a media performer and an audi-

ence member that did not necessarily include the breaking of the fourth wall, a concept

that refers to the performer talking directly into the camera as if directly addressing

the audience. The measurement of these concepts has involved a path that started out

by combining the two concepts into measures that involved both concepts at once,

although most of the measures had items that focused more on the ongoing relation-

ship than they did on the illusion of conversation. Items asked participants to identify

their liking of and perception of a relationship to the media performer—both aspects

of PSRs more than PSI.

There seemed to be a critical juncture in the 1970s wherein two schools of thought

were influential. The first focused on the view of PSI as taking place specifically during

media viewing and was put forth by Rosengren et al. (1976). The second view, elab-

orated by Nordlund (1978), reconceptualized media interaction as taking place within

the viewer in an ongoing PSR but also included concepts such as identification. As mea-

surements were developed, Nordlund’s view seemed to be the more influential, as the

emphasis in measures for the next decades was on PSRs and not on PSI as originally

defined by Horton and Wohl (1956).

Early instruments that were prominent included the Parasocial Interaction Scale

(Rubin, Perse, & Powell, 1985) or PSI Scale, with two versions, one having 20 items

and the abbreviated version having 10 items. This questionnaire integrated items from

Levy’s (1979) scale, which he developed to measure attraction to and interaction with

newscasters. Using the PSI Scale, studies showed that duration or history of viewing

and amount of viewing were not significant factors leading to PSI. This instrument

incorporated identification as part of the scale, while later measures and studies

considered identification to be a separate construct. While this instrument was called

the PSI Scale, the measure better related to PSRs, because items asked about the

viewer’s liking of a character and other items that imply a longer term relationship with

a media figure. The PSI Scale had good internal reliability and supported a single-factor

model of PSI and PSRs.

Auter and Palmgreen’s (2000) Audience-Persona Interaction Scale (API) measured

PSI, PSRs, and other concepts, including identification. This instrument challenged the

idea that PSI was a unitary construct as it supported four factors rather than just one:

identification, interest, interaction with characters, and a fourth factor concerning a

favorite character’s problem-solving abilities.

A number of instruments have been developed to measure aspects of PSRs. An early

one, developed in 1991, was the Celebrity Appeal Questionnaire, which asked par-

ticipants to indicate how big a fan they were of a specific media performer and then

used Likert scales to rate the performer on specific items designed to measure task

attraction, romantic attraction, and hero or role model attraction, with a factor analysis

Page 9

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

supporting these scales (Stever, 2013). Purposive sampling of participants who were

behaviorally identified as fans of the target media performer constituted the primary

use of this instrument. The Celebrity Attitude Scale was designed to measure a concept

called celebrity worship. While the borderline pathological scale specifically focused

on abnormal fan obsession, the intense-personal scale and the entertainment-social

scale identified characteristics that are related to PSRs and PSA (McCutcheon, Lange,

& Houran, 2002). The scales have been interpreted by some in a way that pathologized

normal fandom. More work is needed to discover the implications of the various levels

of celebrity worship, as it is not clear whether celebrity worship is a construct separate

from PSRs and PSA or whether it is a subcategory of them.

Tukachinsky (2010) developed a scale to differentiate parasocial friendship from

parasocial love. This instrument successfully identified items that discriminate between

the two concepts, supported by factor analysis. The scales showed internal reliability

and construct validity, supporting the idea that not all PSRs can be evaluated in the

same way. Also in 2008, Schramm and Hartmann developed a measure called the PSI

Process Scale, which returned to an emphasis on measuring PSI rather than other

aspects of parasocial theory.

Since then there has been a return in measurement in parasocial theory to an empha-

sis on PSI. Hartmann & Goldhoorn (2011) developed the Experience of Parasocial

Interaction Scale. This instrument was designed to specifically look at PSI as distinct

from PSRs and measures the impact of a media performer who directly addresses the

camera and audience as compared to one who does not. The instrument successfully

differentiated these concepts, affording researchers a distinct measure for those who

wish to study PSI rather than PSRs. Both Cummins and Cui (2014) and Dibble, Hart-

mann, and Rosaen (2016) conducted studies that supported the reliability and validity

of the EPSI. Its greatest strength is that it is a very specific measure that separates the

construct of PSI from PSRs and focuses on the direct verbal and bodily addressing

of the performer to the audience in such a way that he or she breaks the fourth wall

and addresses the audience as if they were present. These works on PSI recognize that

the viewer understands that the interaction is an illusion, so there is no emphasis on

pathology in recognizing the viewer’s reaction to the performer. This instrument and

studies using it specifically focus on performers who intentionally address the audience

as opposed to performances where the audience is not addressed directly and yet the

viewers still react as if they are part of the conversation.

Current emphases and future directions

There are a number of avenues of research being pursued in parasocial theory at this

time. First, some of the most recent work in parasocial theory explores the potential

ways that social media might be changing the nature of PSRs. Studies have suggested

that, when sports fans are active on celebrity websites, the relationships move into a

domain that is more quasi-parasocial, meaning that actual feedback from celebrity

participants introduces an element of possible reciprocation as was alluded to in

Giles’s (2002) work. More research is needed to better describe the moment in social

Page 10

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

media (e.g., Twitter) when the parasocial crosses over into the social realm. In Korea

(a collectivist culture), Baek, Bae, and Jang (2013) found that high dependency on PSRs

was related to both feelings of isolation and addictive social media use. However, in this

study, heavy social media users were active in both social and parasocial relationships.

Second, as Western society continues on a trajectory toward people becoming more

and more transient, the way that people use PSRs to gratify needs for social interaction

will become even more important than it has been in the past. New theoretical direc-

tions linking parasocial theory to theories such as sense of place and presence theory will

explore whether or not it is possible to replace a local sense of place with a virtual one

within a virtual community, where the focus of that virtual community is a relationship

with a celebrity, celebrities, or a media-based community.

Third, in research on home shopping networks and other situations where PSRs are

exploited for marketing purposes, celebrity awareness of PSRs is often a factor in trying

to attract fans to increase sales, ratings, and popularity.

Fourth, Goode & Robinson (2013) conducted a unique study in that they used

actual parasocial behavior and not just self-report measures by looking at the linguistic

patterns in interaction online with a parasocial target (someone acting as a fictional

character). They found that audience members adapted their linguistic style to that

of the other in order to be perceived more favorably. They observed that there is a

tendency to communicate with fictional characters about fictional themes in much the

same way that we communicate with friends. Studies that find a way to incorporate

parasocial behaviors will doubtless be an important part of future research in this area.

Fifth, it will be important to continue to explore the implications of PSI and PSRs

for the portrayal of marginalized populations in media. If these groups are perceived

in a more fair and equitable manner as a result of being portrayed in a fair and more

positive light, it will be important to explore the implications for such programming.

The findings of Sood (2002) apply here as the research in India has shown that PSI and

PSRs are successful in changing behaviors and attitudes.

Sixth, the emphasis in the current literature on parasocial relationships and breakup

is extensive enough that it is considered in a separate topic in this work. Overall, the

intensity of the PSR is the best predictor of breakup stress in the loss of a PSR (Eyal &

Cohen, 2006).

Seventh, research on instruments that measure PSI and PSRs continues with an eye

to refining these concepts such that they discriminate more thoroughly both between

the concepts and within the constructs, and work to identify differing types of PSR

is continuing. Finding ways to measure PSA continues, and the need to identify links

between the categories of attachment and how they predict PSI, PSRs, and PSA is just

beginning.

There is evidence to suggest that parallel tracks of inquiry in different disciplines have

been carried out with limited awareness of one another. An example of this is Tukachin-

sky’s (2010) work on parasocial love versus parasocial friendship and Stever’s (2009)

motivational categories for PSRs (i.e., “wanting to be the celebrity’s friend,” romantic

attraction, and “wanting to be the celebrity’s coworker”). These studies offer compa-

rable versions of similar concepts. Further, Stever’s work was a qualitative analysis of

documents written by 150 fans to describe why they were a big fan of a target celebrity,

Page 11

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

while Tukachinsky’s work used a quantitative instrument measuring parasocial love

and parasocial friendship with fictional characters. This is also just one example of

how qualitative and quantitative methods can have convergent findings. Future work in

parasocial theory needs to draw from all of the various disciplines that work in this area.

SEE ALSO: Entertainment Effects: Enjoyment; Fandom and Fan Fiction; Identification;

Involvement With Media Content; Media Effects: Accounts, Nature, and History of;

Narrative Persuasion Theories; Parasocial Interaction and Beyond: Media Personae

and Affective Bonding; Uses and Gratifications: Basic Concept

References

Adams-Price, C., & Greene, A. L. (1990). Secondary attachments and adolescent self-concept.

Sex Roles, 22(3/4), 187–198. doi: 10.1007/bf00288191

Auter, P. J., & Palmgreen, P. (2000). Development and validation of a parasocial interaction mea-

sure: The audience-persona interaction scale. Communication Research Reports, 17, 79–89.

doi: 10.1080/08824090009388753

Baek, Y. M., Bae, Y., & Jang, H. (2013). Social and parasocial relationships on social network

sites and their differential relationships with users’ psychological well being. Cyberpsychology,

Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(7), 512–517. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2012.0510

Caughey, J. L. (1984). Imaginary social worlds. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at identification of audi-

ences with media characters. Mass Communication and Society, 40(3), 245–264. doi:

10.1207/s15327825mcs0403_01

Cummins, R. G., & Cui, B. (2014). Reconceptualizing address in television programming: The

effect of address and affective empathy on viewer experience of parasocial interaction. Journal

of Communication, 64, 723–742. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12076

Dibble, J. L., Hartmann, T., & Rosaen, S. F. (2016). Parasocial interaction and parasocial relation-

ship: Conceptual clarification and a critical assessment of measures. Human Communication

Research, 42(1), 21–44. doi: 10.1111/hcre.12063

Eyal, K., & Cohen, J. (2006). When good friends say goodbye: A parasocial breakup study.Journal

of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(3), 502–523. doi: 10.1207/s15506878jobem5003_9

Giles, D. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research.

Media Psychology, 4, 279–305. doi: 10.1207/s1532785xmep0403_04

Goode, J., & Robinson, J. D. (2013). Linguistic synchrony in parasocial interaction. Communica-

tion Studies, 64(4), 453–466. doi: 10.1080/10510974.2013.773923

Hartmann, T., & Goldhoorn, C. (2011). Horton and Wohl revisited: Exploring viewers’ experi-

ence of parasocial interaction. Journal of Communication, 61, 1104–1121. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-

2466.2011.01595.x

Hoffner, C. (1996). Children’s wishful identification and parasocial interaction with favorite

television characters. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40(3), 389–403. doi:

10.1080/08838159609364360

Hoffner, C. A., & Cohen, E. L. (2012). Responses to obsessive compulsive disorder on Monk

among series fans: Parasocial relations, presumed media influence, and behavioral out-

comes. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 650–668. doi: 10.1080/08838151

.2012.732136

Page 12

PARASOCIAL THEORY: CONCEPTS AND MEASURES

Horton, D., & Wohl, R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations

on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19, 215–229.

Klimmt, C., Hartmann, T., & Schramm, H. (2006). Parasocial interactions and relationships.

In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment (pp. 291–315). New York, NY:

Routledge.

Levy, M. R. (1979). Watching TV news as para-social interaction. Journal of Broadcasting, 23,

69–80. doi: 10.1080/08838157909363919

McCutcheon, L. E., Lange, R., & Houran, J. (2002). Conceptualization and measurement of

celebrity worship. British Journal of Psychology, 93, 67–87. doi: 10.1348/000712602162454

Nordlund, J. E. (1978). Media interaction. Communication Research, 5, 150–175. doi:

10.1177/009365027800500202

Perse, E. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1989). Attribution in social and parasocial relationships. Commu-

nication Research, 16(1), 59–77. doi: 10.1177/009365089016001003

Rosengren, K. E., Windahl, S., Hakansson, P. A., & Johnsson-Smaragdi, U. (1976).

Adolescents’ TV relations: Three scales. Communication Research, 3, 347–366. doi:

10.1177/009365027600300401

Rubin, A. M., Perse, E. M., & Powell, R. A. (1985). Loneliness, parasocial interaction, and local

television news viewing. Human Communication Research, 12, 155–180. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-

2958.1985.tb00071.x

Rubin, R. R., & Rubin, A. M. (2001). Attribution in social and parasocial relationships. In V.

Mansusov & J. H. Harvey (Eds.), Attribution, communication, behavior & close relationships

(pp. 320–337). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Schiappa, E., Allen, M., & Gregg, P. B. (2007). Parasocial relationships and television: A meta-

analysis of the effects. In R. Preiss, B. Gayle, N. Burrell, M. Allen, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Mass

media effects: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 301–314). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.

Schramm, H., & Hartmann, T. (2008). The PSI-Process Scales: A new measure to assess

the intensity and breadth of parasocial processes. Communications, 33(4), 385–401. doi:

10.1515/comm.2008.025

Sood, S. (2002). Audience involvement and entertainment education. Communication Theory,

12(2), 153–172. doi: 10.1093/ct/12.2.153

Stever, G. S. (2009). Parasocial and social interaction with celebrities: Classification of media

fans. Journal of Media Psychology, 14(3), 1–39.

Stever, G. S. (2013). Mediated vs. parasocial relationships: An attachment perspective. Journal of

Media Psychology, 13(3), 1–31.

Tukachinsky, R. (2010). Para-romantic love and para-friendships: Development and assessment

of a multiple parasocial relationships scale. American Journal of Media Psychology, 3, 73–94.

Wang, Q., Fink, E. L., & Cai, D. A. (2008). Loneliness, gender and parasocial interac-

tion: A uses and gratifications approach. Communication Quarterly, 56(1), 87–109. doi:

10.1080/01463370701839057

Gayle S. Stever is an associate professor at Empire State College at the State University

of New York, USA. She has published a number of articles on parasocial attachment,

celebrity appeal, parasocial theory as it affects adult development, fan culture, and the

impact of Twitter on parasocial relationships. Dr. Stever is the author of the Celebrity

Appeal Questionnaire.

View publication stats