Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Effects of racial exclusion from media
(USC Thesis Other)
Effects of racial exclusion from media
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
EFFECTS OF RACIAL EXCLUSION FROM MEDIA
by
Charisse Corsbie-Massay
A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF ARTS
(PSYCHOLOGY)
May 2009
Copyright 2008 Charisse Corsbie-Massay
ii
ACKNOWELDGEMENTS
Charisse Corsbie-Massay would like to acknowledge the people that made this
research possible including Ellen Seiter and Tara McPherson from the USC School of
Cinematic Arts, Stephen J. Read from the Psychology Department at USC, Lynn C.
Miller from Annenberg School for Communication at USC, and Henry Jenkins III from
the Comparative Media Studies Department at MIT. Many thanks also to Greg Townsend
and Jesse Eisenhardt who constructed the promotional videos used in this research.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments ii
List of Tables iv
List of Figures v
Abstract vi
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Social Exclusion Theory 3
Symbolic Annihilation 13
Current Research 15
Chapter 2: Methods 19
Chapter 3: Results 26
Manipulation Check 26
Missing Variables 26
H1: Effect of condition 27
H2: Effect of prior media representation 28
H3: Effect of baseline group identification 32
H4: Effect of baseline ethnic identification 36
H5: Effect of gender 38
Chapter 4: Discussion 41
Chapter 5: Future Research 47
References 51
Appendix A: Measurement Scales 56
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Racial composition of test videos 22
Table 2: Means Table 28
Table 3: Correlation between word fragment subscales 28
Table 4: Correlation with private judgments of subject's ethnic group 36
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Follow-up Community Belongingness (by Race) 30
Figure 2: Follow-up Membership CSE (by Race) 30
Figure 3: Follow-up Importance of USC to Personal Identity (by USC Groups) 34
Figure 4: Follow-up Membership CSE (by USC Groups) 34
Figure 5: Follow-up Identity CSE (Whites) 35
Figure 6: Follow-up Private CSE (API/Latinos) 35
Figure 7: Condition X Gender Interaction on Follow-up Importance of USC 38
to Identity (Controlling for Baseline Identity CSE)
Figure 8: Condition X Gender Interaction on Follow-up Private Assessments 38
of USC (Controlling for Baseline Identity CSE)
Figure 9: Condition X #USC-Affiliated Groups Interaction on Positive Affect 38
vi
ABSTRACT
The effects of media exclusion are discussed in communications and critical studies, but
the topic has received limited attention from social psychologists. This experiment
investigates the effects of viewing a university promotional video that excludes
individuals of a subject’s race, integrating Social Exclusion Theory (exclusion from a
social group causes deficits in self-esteem, belonging, and control) and Symbolic
Annihilation (individuals not represented in media may suffer from low self-esteem and
reduced feelings of belongingness). Racially excluded Caucasians reported greater
belongingness to the university, while Asians and Latinos reported lower belongingness
when excluded. Furthermore, replicating prior social exclusion research, racially
excluded women experienced reported greater importance of the group to personal
identity, while racially excluded men experienced a decrease. This research provides
evidence that exclusion from media may induce similar processes to that of social
exclusion and highlights the different reactions of racial groups to exclusion from a visual
medium.
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The effects of media exclusion, or the absence of a viewer’s social group (e.g.,
gender, race) in media, are discussed extensively among communications and critical
studies scholars, but the topic has received limited attention from social psychologists.
According to the theory of Symbolic Annihilation, if an individual is not represented in
the media, then he or she may suffer from low self-esteem (Graves, 1999), reduced
feelings of belongingness, and a poor self-image relative to the larger group (Tuchman,
1978). These effects of media exclusion parallel the effects of interpersonal exclusion, a
phenomenon studied extensively by psychologists; social exclusion (or ostracism) can
cause distinct psychological pain (Lieberman & Eisenberger, 2005) and lead to a
decrease in self-esteem, belonging, control, and meaningful existence (Williams &
Sommer, 1997). The similarity between these two theories emphasizes the importance of
analyzing media exclusion as a special case of social exclusion.
Television has permanently altered American society; since its inception and
public distribution in the late 1940s, television has affected the way we construct and
interpret our environment, our community and our selves. The statistics are impressive:
over 98% of American homes have a television (Center for Strategic and International
Studies, 2002), half of American homes have three or more units, and the average
American watches an average of 4.5 hours of television per day (Associated Press, 2006).
The content of television programming, although often claimed to be a reflection of
society itself, presents a skewed reality wherein there are few elderly, overweight, or
2
generally social undesirable individuals (Gerbner et al., 2002). These statistically skewed
images cultivate an idealistic impression of America, one that is often very different from
reality, and these televisual norms can be employed by viewers to understand how the
world works.
We turn to television for much of our social information including cues regarding
what we should look like and how we should behave. Television has been referred to as a
frame, a window and a mirror (Spigel). As a frame, the television serves to highlight what
is important (i.e., television content is important); as a window, it gives us insight it what
is occurring outside of the home (i.e., television content is normal); and as a mirror, it
informs us of how we should look and behave. Media cultivates a definition of American
culture and Americans; therefore, television’s effect on the viewer’s norms demands
attention as the ethnic composition of America changes. The most recent census states
that Hispanics are the largest “minority” as well as the fastest growing (U. S. Census
Bureau News, 2007) and it is believed that the face of America will change drastically
from white to “other” within the next few decades. In the new, hyper-mediated
millennium, the representation of a group is essential to the goal of a diverse community.
The current research focuses on the effect of racial exclusion in media, i.e., how does not
seeing a member of one’s racial group on television affect the viewer’s self-esteem and
relationship with the larger community?
3
Social Exclusion Theory
The research pertaining to social exclusion extends back to the mid-twentieth
century; studies conducted by Dittes and Snoek in the late fifties and early sixties
successfully invoked exclusion and tested the subsequent behavior (Leary, 2001). Social
exclusion induces psychological pain by activating the dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex
(dACC), the same area of the brain associated with physical pain (Eisenberger,
Lieberman & Williams, 2003). This correlation highlights the evolutionary role of social
exclusion as a factor in the interpretations of, and subsequent interactions with, our
environment. Humans are social animals that require companionship for survival, and the
punishment for not being involved in survival activities can lead to very real pain, thus
encouraging the target to return to the fold (Lieberman & Eisenberger, 2005). Social
exclusion is present throughout many cultures, and may be the most pervasive form of
social punishment in humans (Williams & Sommer, 1997).
Many researchers have associated social exclusion or rejection with negative
effects on the subjects’ self-esteem (Leary et al., 1995; Leary, 1990), as well as feelings
of belongingness (Baumeister & Leary et al., 1995), control (Bruneau, 1973; Williams &
Sommer, 1997), self-worth, and a meaningful existence (Williams & Sommer, 1997;
Twenge & Baumesiter, 2002). These studies led Williams and Sommer to establish the
Model of Ostracism: social ostracism prevents individuals from satisfying fundamental
psychological needs, and may result in worsened mood, hurt feelings, and anger,
behavior designed to repair and maintain the self in the short term (e.g., taking control,
self affirmations, potential pro social behavior), or long-term distancing from the group
4
(e.g., self-imposed isolation, learned helplessness, low self-esteem) (Williams &
Sommer, 1997).
Self-esteem is a complex psychological process; it is largely based on the degree to
which one feels included or accepted by others (Sommer, 2001) and is often defined as an
individual’s overall evaluation of the self (Rosenberg et al., 1995). Self-esteem is divided
into trait and state conditions; trait self-esteem is considered a dimension of personality
and refers to the individual’s long-standing impression of the self (i.e., high or low self-
esteem), while state self-esteem refers to an individual’s current self-esteem, which is
affected by daily events. However, it has been shown that constant levels of state self-
esteem may affect trait self-esteem (Zadro, Boland, & Richardson, 2006). For example,
the smallest child may get picked last for a game thus creating low state self-esteem; if
this occurs regularly, it may lead to low trait self-esteem, especially as the anticipation of
anxiety and unpleasant feelings are transferred to other activities and affect the child’s
future behavior (Leary et al., 1995; Zadro, Boland, & Richardson, 2006). Furthermore,
individuals subjected to long-term ostracism can suffer from mental and physical illness
including depression, self-destructive behavior, and stress-related ailments (Williams &
Zadro, 2001).
Exclusion is frequently associated with low self-esteem, either directly or
moderated through other psychological traits. Exclusion targets (i.e., victims of
exclusion) report higher negative concepts of self, including lower self-actualization,
competence, intrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy or control (Aron & Aron, 1991). Self-
esteem has been shown to increase with social acceptance and decrease with rejection
5
(Leary et al., 1995) thereby functioning as a “sociometer”; “The self-esteem system
monitors others’ reactions and alerts the individual to the possibility of social exclusion”
(Leary et al., 1995, p. 518). This situates self-esteem as both an outcome of the social
environment and a motivator to interact with the environment, resulting in a circular
process that highlights the ability of state self-esteem to affect trait self-esteem over time
as the individual begins to anticipate rejection (Leary et al., 1995). Self-esteem can also
act as a moderator for the interpretation of and reaction towards exclusion: high self-
esteem subjects may avoid the negative implications of rejection by enhancing self
concepts both internally (i.e., self-esteem) and externally (e.g., lashing out with hostility
or violence), while low self-esteem subjects view the rejection as a confirmation of
previously held beliefs (Sommer, 2001).
Belongingness is a fundamental motivation; humans possess a need to belong,
which drives much of our behavior. Baumeister and Leary (1995) provide a review of
empirical findings in support of this theory including the ease with which we form social
bonds, our difficulty in breaking those bonds, and the effect of belongingness on emotion.
Exclusion can also motivate individuals to actively seek belonging through behaviors like
working harder in groups and conforming to the majority. In addition, they explore the
physical consequences of exclusion (i.e., depriving an individual of belonging) including
increased stress, a poor immune system compared to married couples, eating disorders,
criminal behavior, and suicide (Baumeister & Leary et al., 1995).
A sense of control over one’s environment is an essential component of mental
well-being. Deci and Ryan’s self-determination theory claims that “people want to feel
6
effective in their activities (competence), to feel that their activities are self-chosen and
self-endorsed (autonomy), and to feel a sense of closeness with some others
(relatedness)” (Sheldon, 2001). When asked to isolate the most recent satisfying event
and describe their emotions surrounding it, subjects consistently rated competence,
autonomy and relatedness as important when defining events as “satisfying” (Sheldon,
2001). Humans are motivated to control their environment and experience themselves as
capable and effective, and exclusion can rob an individual of this need (Bruneau, 1973)
leading to disastrous results; in an interview, a woman claimed to have developed an
eating disorder, after being ostracized by her mother for years, in order to “maintain some
control over my life” (Williams & Sommer, 1997, p. 159).
Social inclusion is essential to ensuring a meaningful existence as perceived by
the individual. “Social death refers to the point at which other people cease to socially
interact with the dying person” (Williams & Zadro, 2001, p. 23) by refusing to
acknowledge the individual’s presence and behaving as if the individual was deceased.
Being ignored by others stimulates feelings of invisibility and can cause individuals to
question their purpose in life. Social exclusion is correlated with a statistically significant
increase in agreement with the phrase “Life is meaningless,” engagement in self-
defeating behavior (Twenge & Baumesiter, 2002), and increased rates of suicide
(Sommer, 2001). Exclusion has also been associated with homicidal tendencies as
evidenced in the recent school shootings in order to establish their importance and
meaning in the world, thereby emphasizing the potential of the individual’s self-worth to
affect emotion and behavior.
7
Identity theory states that self-esteem is inherently tied into one’s sense of self
and the groups that the individual is a part of. Exclusion from groups can lead not only to
troubled self-esteem and self-worth, but also a troubled identity, wherein the individual
cannot feel an association with a particular group. According to Lickel (2000), identity
needs are served by affiliation with social groups and this is essential to healthy
development. If an individual cannot experience an affiliation with a desired social group,
e.g. national identity, this may potentially lead to feelings of ostracism and reduced self
worth. Furthermore, Cast and Burke (2002) claim that self-esteem plays a role in the self-
verification process and the creation of identity. Self-verification occurs when the
situational context matches or confirms an individual’s expected identity. Media
Exclusion offers another example for Cast and Burke’s argument: “a lack of verification
in within groups is likely to leave the individual feeling inefficacious and unaccepted by
the group” (Cast & Burke, 2002, p. 1043). Non-representation in media can lead minority
viewers to develop impressions of the self that are detached from mainstream society.
Individual reactions to exclusion differ drastically based on a variety of
moderators including personality traits, a desire to maintain relations with the group, and
gender. Levels of narcissism and self-esteem moderate subsequent behavior; high
narcissistic subjects will respond with greater anger and aggression towards the exclusion
sources (Leary, Twenge, & Quinlivan, 2006). Furthermore, Zadro, Boland, and
Richardson (2006) found that high socially anxious subjects returned to baseline
measures of belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence slower than low
socially anxious subjects after being excluded, thus demonstrating that resolving the
8
detrimental effects of ostracism depends on personality characteristics and interpretation
of the events.
In addition, post-exclusion behavior often depends on whether or not anti-social
behavior will breed further exclusion (Williams & Zadro, 2001). Subjects ostracized by
faceless sources with whom they may have little future interaction (e.g., an online chat
room) were openly negative in their reactions to the exclusion (Williams, Cheung, &
Choi, 2000), while subjects ostracized by a desired group or a group with whom future
interaction is desired (e.g., work group, long term-companions) tempered their negative
reactions, often choosing to disassociate from the conversation (Williams & Sommer,
1997). However, the role of prior group identity has yet to be fully explored on the effects
of post exclusion behavior.
Gender also emerges as a moderator of exclusion effects across several studies.
Leary discovered that women rated themselves as less positive than men when ostracized,
regardless of the reasons for exclusion (i.e., random or because of rejector preferences),
suggesting that women may be more sensitive to rejection cues (1995). Furthermore,
when ostracized from a work group prior to interaction, women exhibited social
facilitation whereas men socially loafed. This difference was attributed to the desires of
each gender; women worked harder in order to increase their group status, while men
separated from the conversation and played with objects in the environment in order to
maintain control (Williams & Sommer, 1997). The differences between men and women
are often attributed to gender socialization and relates to several of the abovementioned
moderators. Kelly suggests that men are more likely to attribute their rejection to external
9
factors (2001), thus taking actions to save their self-esteem that include withdrawing or
disengaging from prior rejecting group members (Williams & Sommer, 1997).
Multiple experimental paradigms are used to induce varying degrees of exclusion;
the most popular methods include the conversation scenario, the ball-tossing scenario,
and the selection scenario, all of which have been implemented in real space to great
effect. Furthermore, new technology allows many of these experimental tactics to be
conducted in virtual space, thus taking social exclusion into the new media frontier and
demonstrating its effects independent of physical interpersonal interactions. In a
comparative study by Williams et al., it was demonstrated that both modes of ostracism
were aversive (2002).
In the conversation scenario, targets are actively ignored during a conversation;
this paradigm usually involves three individuals: two exclusion sources and one
exclusion target. In real space, the exclusion sources conduct a conversation and ignore
the target’s attempts to participate; confederates are commonly serve as the exclusion
sources in order to standardize the exclusion experience. Gardner, Pickett, and Brewer
(2000) and Williams et al. (2002) successfully employed this paradigm in virtual space
using “online” chat rooms; subjects were instructed to converse with other “subjects”
elsewhere in the building via computer, but the conversation was generated by a
computer program. After a brief period wherein all chat room participants were prompted
for introductory information, the subject was either included in the conversation or
excluded. The exclusion manipulation successfully elicited lower reports of control,
belongingness, and self-esteem (Williams et al., 2002), and the research by Gardner,
10
Pickett, and Brewer (2000) demonstrated that ostracized individuals exhibited a selective
memory recall for social events. This paradigm also includes a study of cell phone text
messages; subjects were informed that they would be communicating with other
participants in the building, however after a brief introductory period, they received no
further text messages. Exclusion targets reported lower measures of control,
belongingness, and self worth, and a content analysis of their text messages revealed that
ostracized participants attempted to provoke responses more than included participants
(Smith & Williams, 2004). According to Williams et al. (2002), online environments
allow for “virtual bravado” wherein the subject actively responds to the exclusion; this is
most likely related to issues of anonymity and a lack of potential future interaction.
In the ball-tossing scenario, subjects play ball with two confederates. One of the
earliest experimental paradigms to induce exclusion, the real space version of this game
was first employed by Williams & Sommer (1997); a subject was placed in a room with
two confederates and all were asked to remain silent for five minutes while the
experimenter stepped away. One confederate would rummage through a box, “discover”
a ball, and begin tossing it to the other confederate and the subject. After a few tosses, the
confederates either continued to involve the subject (inclusion), or refused to throw the
ball to the subject (exclusion). This manipulation successfully induced feelings of
rejection and lower reports of control (Williams & Sommer, 1997). The online ball-
tossing scenario replicates this paradigm by utilizing a simple interface wherein the
subject controls an onscreen hand and can choose to throw the ball to player A or B,
whom the subject believes to be real people elsewhere in the building. After a few tosses,
11
the subject is either included or excluded in the virtual game. This adaptation successfully
elicited increased negative emotions, lower feelings of control, and a lower sense of
belonging (Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000). Furthermore, subjects still reported
feelings of ostracism and exhibited post-exclusion behavior even when they were
informed that the ball would not be thrown to them due to a computer error (Zadro,
Williams, & Richardson, 2004).
In the selection scenario, excluded subjects are informed that a desirable group
has rejected them; this often takes the form of a vote by a task group claiming that no one
wants to work with the subject (Leary et al., 1995; Twenge, Cantanese, & Baumeister,
2003), or as a result of a bogus survey determining that the subject is destined for a future
alone (Baumeister, Twenge, & Nuss, 2002; Baumeister, DeWall, Ciacorro, & Twenge,
2005). Other researchers have also effectively employed, within a controlled setting, the
classic and familiar exclusion tactic of being chosen last for a team (Bourgeois & Leary,
2001). The online evolution of the selection paradigm utilizes virtual “online” chat rooms
where a subject is rejected by a computer generated, opposite sex participant that he or
she is conversing with; the subject is informed that their virtual partner either does or
does not want to meet (Buckley, Winkle, & Leary, 2004). This finding takes social
exclusion research into the world of online dating, a popular trend in recent years; despite
the safeguards against actual interpersonal rejection, subjects still exhibit post exclusion
behavior (e.g., reduced belongingness, reduced control, reduced meaningful existence)
even when rejected by a faceless source.
12
These scenarios and measurements focus on the immediate threat to the self as
well as the short-term repercussions of exclusion, and the experimental deficits of these
experiments are well documented. It is almost impossible (and unethical) to replicate
laboratory studies for long-term exclusion and the preexisting data on this subject is
difficult to quantify and often depends on diaries and self-report measures. Structured
interviews have been conducted with victims of ostracism and exclusion, but these self-
report measures are not reliable and subjects often demonstrate emotional breakdowns at
the mere recollection of the incidents. Studies regarding the cognitive state of prisoners
and social outcasts offer a glimpse into the psychological repercussions of long-term
exclusion (Williams & Sommer, 1997), but these individuals are inherently multifaceted
and exclusion cannot be assessed independently.
The question remains whether or not the effects of interpersonal exclusion are
replicated when a representation of an individual is eliminated from the media. Simply
put, does exclusion from media have the same real life consequences as interpersonal,
social exclusion? Mass media is the main outlet of our mainstream culture and norms; it
is often accepted as the popular definition of what is acceptable and expected in
American society. If a viewer does not see a representation of his or her subgroup on
television, do they feel like they have been excluded from the larger group? The theory of
Symbolic Annihilation begins to tackle this complex argument and address how media
exclusion can affect an individual over time.
13
Symbolic Annihilation
Media theorists have speculated about the psychological effects of absence in
media. The term “symbolic annihilation” was coined by Gerbner and Gross in 1976 to
identify the phenomenon of a group’s absence in mainstream media; “Representation in
the fictional world signifies social existence; absence means symbolic annihilation”
(1976, p. 182).
The origins of this theory lie in the reflection and cultivation hypotheses; the
former states that mass media is designed to reflect dominant social values (Tuchman,
1978) and, in turn, cultivates norms that are internalized by its viewers (Gerbner et al.,
2002). Symbolic annihilation describes the phenomenon wherein a group is not
represented, or drastically misrepresented, in mass media. Gaye Tuchman provides an
excellent example of this theory in the introduction to the 1978 compilation, Hearth and
Home: Images of Women in Mass Media, that addresses the representation of women on
television and its effect on young women and men who view television as reflecting the
standard norms of American society. Content analyses from 1954 to 1975 revealed that
male characters dominated the American television landscape, ranging between 68-80%
of characters, a drastic difference from the 1:1 ratio of the nation. Furthermore, despite
the fact that woman comprised nearly 40% of the workforce in 1970, most female
characters were restricted to housewives, while workingwomen were either derogated as
incompetent and inferior to male coworkers, or socially punished for their career choice
(i.e., childless spinsters) (Tuchman). According to Tuchman, these messages teach
viewers that “women are not important in American society, except perhaps within the
14
home. And even within the home, men know best… to be a woman is to have a limited
life divorced from the economic productivity of the labor force” (Tuchman, 1978, p. 17).
In addition, this exclusion can cause workingwomen to question their social purpose and
the worth of their life choices, and this lack of two fundamental needs may lead to low
self-esteem and other psychological deficits.
Tuchman divides Symbolic Annihilation into three aspects: omission,
trivialization, and condemnation. This research will focus primarily on the first aspect,
omission, specifically, the omission of racial groups. The presentation of racial groups in
mass media is critical, especially when discussing the American national broadcast
model. During the Network Era of television (1957-1975), the three major networks
(CBS, NBC, ABC) purchased several local television stations around the country and
distributed the majority of programming content, which was designed for a “national
audience,” regardless of local demographics; television shows featured White
protagonists, and characters of color were often stereotyped. This trend continued into the
early seventies, when a paradigm shifts in civil rights and Nielsen distributions created a
sudden explosion of urban programming.
The question remains, what is the effect of viewing nationally broadcast television
designed for a predominantly English-speaking White audience among communities of
color? 47% of Los Angeles County identified as Hispanic or Latino in the 2000 Census,
and 13% identified as Asian (U. S. Census Bureau, 2000); these statistics are quickly
becoming the norm instead of the exception. According to Graves, “In the case of same
15
race viewers whose group is rarely shown, it is hypothesized that invisibility might create
feelings of low self-esteem” (Graves, 1999, p. 712).
It is important here to note the difference between race and ethnicity; while
ethnicity refers to the ethnic and cultural heritage of an individual (e.g., Chinese,
Japanese, Vietnamese), race combines these subcategories into large groupings based on
similar phenotypic features often attributed to a specific global region (e.g., Asian).
Historically, “race” was originally referred to as clines, or the prevalence and correlation
of phenotypic features indicative to a give geographic region. Much of the research
surrounding media representation refers to race, or the visualization of ethnicity or ethnic
groups, despite using the terms interchangeably. Subjects are identified by racial group
(e.g., White, Black, Asian, Latino); is there a difference between the way American-born
Whites identify with their nationality as compared to American-born Asians or Latinos,
and is this difference related to their presentation in the media? This research will focus
on the viewer psychology when racially excluded from the media, i.e., when individuals
with similar phenotypic features are excluded from a visual representation of culture.
Current Research
Symbolic Annihilation affects the individual by eliminating them from the
representation of an essential social identity, nationality, in a manner similar to the
selection scenario. If television reflects the dominant values and norms of a society (both
described and prescribed), then individuals who do not fit into the representation are, by
default, abnormal and subsequently may feel unwelcome or worthless in society. This is
16
particularly relevant for underrepresented minority viewers. Americans of all races view
programming designed for a White majority audience despite the fact that their race-
congruent characters may be minimized or misrepresented. Thus, they are symbolically
excluded and symbolic annihilation theorizes that this will yield similar effect to that of
social exclusion.
The overall aim of this experiment is to offer quantitative evidence for the theory of
Symbolic Annihilation by employing the methods of prior social exclusion studies to test
the effect of media exclusion. For this study, I will be investigating the effects of racial
exclusion from a USC promotional video on USC undergraduate students. I hope to
provide evidence for five major hypotheses:
1. Effect of condition: Subjects whose race is excluded from a video
representing their social group (i.e., college promotional video) will
experience the effects of exclusion including lower self-esteem, reduced sense
of belonging and increase in anger.
2. Effect of prior media representation: Subjects whose race is typically under
represented onscreen in mainstream media will exhibit reduced effects of
exclusion due to environmental habituation.
3. Effect of baseline group identification: Subjects who are highly identified with
the social group being portrayed will experience stronger effects (i.e., lower
self-esteem, lower belongingness to university) than those that are not highly
identified.
17
4. Effect of baseline ethnic identification: Subjects who are highly identified
with their ethnic group will experience stronger effects of exclusion than those
that are not highly identified with their ethnic group.
5. Effect of gender: Men and women will react differently to media exclusion in
a pattern similar to the one found in social exclusion research.
a. Men will exhibit reduced identification with the group.
b. Women will exhibit increased identification with the group.
Hypothesis 2 addresses the issue of prolonged media exclusion; subjects who are
racially underrepresented in mainstream American media will be habituated to the
exclusion such that one video, or a single televisual instance of exclusion, will not create
significant change. A report released by the Asian Pacific Media Coalition in 2006 noted
that, although primetime television characters were becoming more ethnically diverse,
the percentage of Asians and Latinos were disturbingly below the national average;
Asian/Pacific Islanders composed 2.6% of characters (vs. 4.4% of the national
population) and Latino characters composed 6.5% (vs. 14.8% of the national population)
(U. S. Newswire, 2006). The discrepancy becomes even more pronounced in urban
communities with large populations of Asians and Hispanics like New York, San
Francisco, and Los Angeles. These individuals may be habituated to a reduced television
presence, thus decreasing the effects of the manipulation.
Hypotheses 3 and 4 address the interaction between the viewer’s identity and
media exclusion. Subjects that are highly identified with the larger social group are more
18
likely to associate characteristics of the self to expected exemplars of the group (Coats et
al., 2000) thus causing the viewer to expect some racial representation. The discrepancy
between the expected presentation of the group, which includes members of the viewer’s
racial group, and the actual presentation, which excludes members of the viewer’s racial
group, should increase the effect of the exclusion. Furthermore, this should be most
evident in White subjects, the majority of the student body. Similarly, individuals who
are highly identified with their ethnic group may be hyper sensitive to the manipulation,
thereby also increasing the manipulation’s effect.
Hypothesis 5 focuses on the similarities between media exclusion and social
exclusion. Prior literature has repeatedly addressed how the effects of social exclusion
differ between genders; it is hypothesized that men may derogate the exclusion source
(i.e., the university) thus maintaining their self-esteem, while women will elevate their
ratings of the university, specifically regarding the importance of USC to their identity,
thus replicating the social facilitation phenomenon present in the prior research.
19
CHAPTER 2: METHODS
Participants: Subjects were recruited from the university psychology subject pool
and received extra credit for their participation. Data was collected over two semesters
during the academic year 2007-2008 and was pooled. At the beginning of each semester,
approximately 300 students completed a premeasure packet, resulting in an original pool
of 600; eligibility items included ethnicity (both categorical and self-reported), primary
language, and country of birth. Subjects who identified as primary English speakers,
American born, and ethnically appropriate for the study (i.e., White, Asian/Pacific
Islander (API), Latino) were selected. Racial identification was determined by the
participant’s categorical selection (e.g., Caucasian/White, Hispanic/Latino) in
combination with their open-ended self-identification (e.g., Irish, Mexican-American).
The combination of these identification methods ensured that subjects exhibited the same
phenotypic features as the actors in the promotional videos (e.g., subjects that identified
as “Indian” were not considered eligible for API). Invitations to participate in the study
were sent via email to 331 participants, of these, 110 visited the website and 23 dropped
out before completing the study, resulting in a final N = 87 (83.9% female; 59.8% White,
20.7% API, 19.5% Latino). Participant’s age ranged from 16 to 26 (M = 20.06, SD =
1.38).
Design: The experiment employed a 3 (race: White, API, Latino) x 2 (condition:
included, excluded) factorial design and subjects were randomly assigned to one of two
videos where their racial group is either included or excluded.
20
Procedure: The study was conducted using the website www.surveygizmo.com.
Data was collected over seven months during the 2007-2008 school year. Survey Gizmo
was used for construction and implementation of the survey, along with data collection.
Students were approached in undergraduate psychology classes and asked to
participate in the psychology subject pool. Interested students then visited the subject
pool website, completed the premeasure survey and were contacted via email based on
their eligibility. Participants then voluntarily visited the survey website, where they were
greeted with a welcome page that informed them of the study, explained that it was
approved by the university, emphasized that all data was confidential, and that they could
leave the study at any time. The experiment led subjects to believe that the video would
be broadcast on the USC website and that university administrators believed that this was
an excellent representation of USC culture.
Subjects were asked to complete a variety of demographic measures that included
their place of residence (dormitory, fraternity/sorority, and off-campus, with or without
parents), major, any USC- affiliated groups they were a member of, as well as media
consumption habits relating to television, DVDs, video games, and internet usage.
Subjects then viewed a USC promotional video wherein members of their race
were either included or excluded; they had no control over the video, but were asked to
click forward when the video was completed
1
. Subjects then completed a series of post-
manipulation measures, and were prompted for their personal reaction to the video.
Subjects were then debriefed in a funneled fashion to determine if and when they noticed
1
No measure of time spent on the video page was recorded.
21
the exclusion. Finally, subjects were informed of the actual purposes of the study and
thanked for their participation.
Independent Variables: USC Promotional Video: The USC promotional video
was created with the assistance of two graduates from the School of Cinematic Arts at
USC and lasted approximately three minutes. It included three major manipulation
sections wherein the subject’s race was either featured or excluded: an opening montage,
student testimonials, and a closing montage. The video began with various shots of
campus (i.e., B-roll) that lacked any racially identifiable students and featured a male
voiceover describing the campus and music from the Trojan marching band (length = 30
sec). The script was adapted from USC admissions brochures and is available in the
appendix. The opening montage featured “students” introducing themselves with their
names and “I go to the University of Southern California” (approximate length = 15 sec).
The video then alternated between the voiceover describing the university with B-roll and
clips from interviews with three students. These student testimonials represented the
second major manipulation. This section also featured shots of “students” on campus
(e.g., talking, studying, walking), which were racially manipulated (total approximate
length = 85 sec). Finally, the video ended with a closing montage wherein “students”
repeated the phrases, “I am a Trojan!” and “Fight On!” and featured music from the
Trojan marching band (approximate length = 50 sec). Once again, the subject’s race was
either included or excluded in the closing montage.
A call for actors was placed on Craigslist Los Angeles and NowCasting.com;
actors were selected based on their likeness to college students (i.e., approximate age,
22
youthful appearance) and their phenotypic representation of their racial group. A total of
thirteen actors were selected: four were Black (two females, two males), four White (two
females, two males), three API (two females, one male), and two Latino (two females).
Each actor performed all three testimonials and was paid $50 for their time.
Four videos were created, each with a different racial composition. The control
video featured all four racial groups in the montages and testimonials by an API male, a
White female, and a Latino female. In the experimental videos, the isolated racial group
was replaced with a testimonial delivered by a Black actor (See Table 1 for racial
composition of all four videos).
Table 1: Racial composition of test videos
Video Testimonial 1 Testimonial 2 Testimonial 3
Control API male White female Latino female
White Excluded API Male Black female Latino female
API Excluded White male Black female Latino female
Latino Excluded API male Black female White male
Baseline identification with university and ethnic group: The subject’s
relationship with these groups was determined using adaptations of the 16-item
Collective Self-Esteem Scale (CSE; Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992). The CSE was designed
to assess individual differences in collective rather than personal self-esteem, or how
much of an individual’s self-esteem is based on external entities, and consists of four
subscales: (1) an individual’s worth as a member of the group, or Membership CSE (e.g.,
23
“I am a worthy member of USC”), (2) an individual’s reporting of other’s impressions
regarding the group, or Public CSE (e.g., “Overall, USC is considered good by others”),
(3) an individual’s private assessment of the group, or Private CSE (e.g., “I feel good
about USC”), and (4) the group’s importance to an individual’s identity, or Identity CSE
(e.g., “USC is an important reflection of who I am”). Subjects were asked to respond to
each of these statements using a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7
(strongly agree) with 4 as “neutral”.
Two dimensions of the CSE Scale were selected to test levels of identification
with the university at baseline: Private CSE and Identity CSE. Only the Private
dimension was used to assess the subject’s relationship to their ethnic group (e.g., “I feel
good about my ethnic group”). These measures were gathered before the individuals were
contacted for the study.
Dependent Variables: The post experimental questionnaire assessed all of the
dependent variables. It was presented via web pages as designed by SurveyGizmo.com.
Responses varied according to the measure and were assessed using Likert-type scales
with radio buttons and open-ended text. Subjects were not forced to respond.
Word fragment completion task: Implicit action, arousal, and affect were assessed
using a word-fragment completion task (Pedersen et al., in press). Words could either be
completed with an action word (e.g., SL_P could be completed as SLAP or SLIP), an
arousal world (e.g., AL_ _ _ as ALERT), or an affect word (e.g., HA_E as HATE).
Subjects were asked to complete this task as quickly as possible, but no time was
recorded. Data was based on a percentage of completed words.
24
Mood: Mood was assessed using the 20-item Positive And Negative Affectivity
Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988). Participants were asked to rate the
extent to which they currently felt a number of emotions. Ratings were made on a 5-point
scale ranging from 1 (Very Slightly/Not At All) to 5 (Extremely). Positive affect items
included interested, excited, strong, enthusiastic, proud, alert, inspired, determined,
attentive, and active; negative affect items included distressed, upset, guilty, scared,
hostile, irritable, ashamed, nervous, jittery, and afraid.
Follow-up identification with the university: The subject’s relationship with USC
was determined using adaptations of the 16-item Collective Self-Esteem Scale (CSE;
Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992). The CSE was designed to assess individual differences in
collective rather than personal self-esteem, or how much of an individual’s self-esteem is
based on external entities, and consists of four subscales: (1) an individual’s worth as a
member of the group, or Membership CSE (e.g., “I am a worthy member of USC”), (2)
an individual’s reporting of other’s impressions regarding the group, or Public CSE (e.g.,
“Overall, USC is considered good by others”), (3) an individual’s private assessment of
the group, or Private CSE (e.g., “I feel good about USC”), and (4) the group’s importance
to an individual’s identity, or Identity CSE (e.g., “USC is an important reflection of who I
am”). Subjects were asked to respond to each of these statements using a 7-point scale
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) with 4 as “neutral”.
Community Belongingness: The Community Belongingness Scale (Fattore,
Turnbull & Wilson, 2003) was designed to measure personal trust in neighbors in order
to assess the extent of neighborhood attachment. Items were adjusted to be specific to the
25
university community (e.g., “I am good friends with many people at USC,” “People at
USC make it a difficult place to live in”). Subjects were asked to respond to each of these
statements using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)
with 3 as “neither agree nor disagree.”
Self-Esteem: Trait self-esteem was measured using the 10-item Rosenberg Self-
Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965). Subjects were asked to rate their agreement with
statements on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (disagree strongly) to 4 (agree strongly);
there was no neutral midpoint. Items included “I feel I have a number of good qualities”
and “I feel I do not have much to be proud of.”
Video Reactions: Finally, subjects rated their agreement with statements about the
video on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)
with 3 as “neutral”; these included two statements regarding the quality of the overall
video (e.g., “I liked the video.”), and two statements regarding the student testimonials
(e.g., “I thought the student testimonials were a good representation of USC.”). An open-
ended essay question asked them to reflect on the video and report anything that may
have seemed unusual or strange as well as anything they particularly liked. Responses
will be qualitatively coded in a following paper.
26
CHAPTER 3: RESULTS
Manipulation Check
All subjects were asked if they remembered the context of the student testimonials
and the race of the featured students. Subjects that were excluded were then asked, “Did
you notice that there were no (Caucasians/Asians/Hispanics) featured in the
testimonials?” and “At what point did you notice the exclusion?” Due to a programming
error, only White and API experimental subjects were asked these follow-up questions.
Overall, 60 subjects (69%) remembered the context in which the student
testimonials were featured, and 77 (88.5%) reported that they remembered the race or
ethnicity of the featured students; two subjects did not complete the manipulation check.
Of the 28 excluded White subjects, 21 responded to the specific exclusion questions, and
the vast majority (20) reported that they noticed that there were no Caucasians in the
video; they became aware of the exclusion while watching the video. Of the 9 excluded
API subjects, 7 responded to the specific exclusion questions and all noticed the
exclusion: 6 recognized it during the video and one while responding to the questions.
These numbers demonstrate that subjects were very aware that their race was not
represented, often while watching the video.
Missing Variables
There were very few missing variables throughout the dataset; they were not
correlated with any of the variables of interest and therefore assumed to be Missing At
27
Random. The missing values were replaced with the ethnic-, gender-, and (when
appropriate) condition-specific mean. One subject did not report his age but was
confirmed as an undergraduate. One subject did not complete the Community
Belongingness Scale, but was retained in the analyses that did not address community
belongingness.
H1: Effect of condition
A one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) did not reveal any
significant differences between the two conditions (See Table 2). A review of the
univariate analyses of variance (ANOVAs) revealed a difference between groups in the
completion of arousal words, as a percentage of words completed during the word
completion task (See Table 3) and the main effect of condition approached significance
(p = .070). Subjects who watched a video where their racial group was included reported
greater arousal than racially excluded subjects (M
included
= .181; M
excluded
=.130, F(1,85) =
3.358). Furthermore, although not significant, racially excluded subjects reported greater
levels of negative affect as determined by the word completion task, and this measure
was highly negatively correlated with arousal (r = -.444, p = .000) such that individuals
reporting high arousal also reported low negative affect; however, these results were not
replicated using negative affect as measured by the PANAS. The word completion task
focused on negative affect words including anger, hate, upset, irate, and bitter;
conversely, arousal words were less biased and included words like aroused, alert, active,
tense, and lively. Furthermore, affect words were also negatively correlated with action
28
words (r = -.483, p = .000) which included shoot, shout, provoke, kick, attack, fight, and
injure.
Table 2: Means Table
Pooled Races Whites API/Latinos
Included Excluded Included Excluded Included Excluded
% Action
Words
.279 .283 .295 .321 .259 .224
% Affect
Words
.400 .468 .387 .473 .419 .461
% Arousal
Words
.181 .130 .178 .128 .187 .134
Negative
Affect
15.512 15.413 15.875 15.750 15.000 14.889
Positive
Affect
27.829 27.196 27.750 27.536 27.941 26.667
Self-Esteem 32.146 32.478 31.792 33.357 32.647 31.111
Community
Belongingness
26.125 26.500 25.272 27.357 27.375 25.167
Identity CSE 19.049 20.196 18.917 19.786 19.235 20.833
Membership
CSE
23.756 23.348 22.792 23.571 25.118 23.000
Private CSE 25.073 24.174 24.250 23.393 26.235 25.389
Public CSE 24.317 23..348 23.708 23.750 25.177 22.722
Table 3: Correlation between word fragment subscales
Action words Affect words Arousal words
Action words - -.483 -.125
Affect words - -.444
Arousal words -
H2: Effect of prior media representation
It was hypothesized that the baseline representation of racial groups in
mainstream American media would cause underrepresented subjects to become
29
habituated to a reduced onscreen presence; thus API and Latino subjects would react
differently to media exclusion than white subjects. Prior to pooling API and Latino
subjects, a series of one-way ANOVAs revealed only a significant difference between
these groups in their follow-up measures of Public CSE, or their reporting of public
perceptions regarding USC. Latinos have a significantly higher perception of public
sentiment towards USC than APIs (M
HL
= 25.823, M
API
= 21.111; F(1,33) = 8.456, p =
.006)
2
. All other baseline and follow-up measures were shown not to be significantly
different, thus allowing these two ethnic groups to be pooled for subsequent analyses
pertaining to prior media representation.
A 2 (prior media representation: White vs. API/Latino) x 2 (Condition: racial
inclusion vs. exclusion) MANOVA on the affect-based dependent variables (i.e., positive
and negative affect, self-esteem, and implicit measures of arousal, negative affect, and
action) did not reveal any main effects. However, the same MANOVA performed on the
affiliation-based dependent variables (i.e., collective self-esteem and community
belongningness) revealed a significant interaction between prior media representation and
condition (F(7,76) = 2.095; p = .054). Further inspection of the ANOVAs revealed that
the interaction was a significant for follow-up community belongingness (F(1,82) =
4.336; p = .040 (See Figure 1) and approached significance for follow-up Membership
CSE (F(1,82) = 3.056; p = .084 (See Figure 2); White subjects who were racially
excluded from the video expressed greater community belongingness and claimed to be
2
Latinos (M=25.824) were significantly different than APIs (M=21.111) and Caucasians
(M=23.731) on public CSE (their report of how others evaluate USC) according to LSD
Post-Hoc analyses (p
HL/API
=.003; p
HL/C
=.043).
30
better members of the USC community, while subjects of color reported lower values on
both measures when racially excluded from the video. This data offers evidence that is
counter to the original hypothesis; it was expected that subjects who were racially
excluded from the video would report lower belongingness and identification with the
university. Instead, it appears that subjects who are typically excluded (API and Latinos)
demonstrate a tendency in line with the original hypothesis, whereas subjects who are not
typically excluded (Whites) showed an opposite effect.
This trend in the means is replicated for self-esteem, although the difference is not
significant; this is not surprising given that self-esteem and Membership CSE are highly
correlated (r = .620, p = .000), a relationship that Luhtanen & Crocker found in their
original scale construction (1992). It is also important to note that the interaction is
different for Identity CSE and Public CSE: both racial groups report that USC is more
important to their personal identity when racially excluded, although this is not
significant. However, when subjects of color are excluded, they report that the public has
a lower opinion of USC (M
included
= 25.177, M
excluded
= 22.722, F(1,33) = 3.230, p = .081),
but there is no difference between conditions for Whites.
31
It is evident that White subjects react to racial exclusion from the media very
differently than the subjects of color; they exhibit increased self-esteem and identification
with the university. There are two potential reasons for this drastic difference: (1) White
subjects may experience joy, or a reprieve of negative emotions, when viewing a diverse
video wherein no Whites are featured. The term White guilt refers to the individual or
collective guilt some Whites feel over the racist treatment of people of color by Whites
(Steele, 2006). If this were true, we would expect to see White subjects experience an
increase in positive affect (or decrease in negative affect) when viewing an racially
diverse video. Although positive affect and community belongingness were positively
correlated (r = .498, p = .000), and positive affect exhibited a significant main effect on
community belongingness (F(1,81) = 27.807, p = .000) that accounted for 23.9% of the
variance, the interaction between condition and prior media representation remained
significant, and became slightly stronger when controlling for positive affect (F(1,81) =
4.890, p = .030). These results demand a different theory.
(2) As the majority racial group, Whites are habituated to seeing other Whites
onscreen, and this confirms an ideological self-image as the exemplar (Coats et al.,
2000). Therefore, when the members of the majority racial group are racially excluded
from a media representation of an affiliated group, it is perceived as a threat to their
exemplary status and may lead them to employ emotionally reparative tactics (i.e.,
increased community belongingness, increased self-esteem). “Past research appears to
support the notion of interplay between the two types of self-esteem [personal and
collective]; for example, there is some evidence that in-group bias or inter-group
32
discrimination (presumably a behavior that has more direct implications for collective
self-esteem) enhances personal self-esteem” (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992, p. 304).
Furthermore, prior research has shown that in-group favoritism is increased when self-
esteem is threatened (Crocker, Major & Steele, 1998) as a self-enhancement defense
strategy (Sommer, 2001).
H3: Effect of baseline group identification
As mentioned above, there was three measures of baseline group affiliation: the
subject’s private judgments of the group (Private CSE), the importance of USC to a
subject’s personal identity (Identity CSE), and the number of USC-affiliated groups the
subjects belonged to. Only Identity CSE (M = 19.40, SD = 4.67; maximum 28)
demonstrated an approximately normal distribution; the other variables were either
positively (Private CSE median = 26, maximum 28), or negatively (USC-affiliated
groups median = 2, maximum 7) skewed. It may be noted that the invitation distributed to
participate in the study may have selected for individuals with high personal judgments
of the university. Identity CSE and number of USC-affiliated groups were dichotomized
at 19 and 2 respectively, and the following analyses were conducting using these two
dichotomized variables. With most subjects reporting almost at ceiling for Private CSE,
this measure was eliminated from further analyses due to lack of variance.
A paired-sample t-test revealed no significant differences between baseline and
follow-up scores for Identity CSE or Private CSE in either condition, indicating that the
33
video did not significantly change subject’s importance of USC to their personal identity
or their private judgments of USC.
Baseline Identity CSE: A two-way MANOVA utilizing dichotomized baseline
Identity CSE and condition revealed a main effect of baseline Identity CSE (F(6,77) =
25.711; p = .000) such that subjects who reported that USC was important to their
personal identity also reported greater identification with the university on all subscales.
A review of the ANOVAs revealed that the baseline importance to condition x identity
interaction approached significance for follow-up Public CSE, such that subjects who do
not rate USC as important to their personal identity report less positive public sentiment
for USC when they are racially excluded from the video (F(1,82) = 3.133; p = .080). The
interaction was non-significant for all other variables. These measures indicate that the
video did not have the expected effect for those who rated USC as important to personal
identity.
Considering that the interaction between condition and prior media representation
was found to be a significant predictor of follow-up community belongingness, a two-
way Univariate ANOVA replicating this analysis was conducted controlling for baseline
measures of USC’s importance to the subject’s identity. There was a main effect of
baseline Identity CSE (F(1,81) = 17.056; p = .000) that accounted for 15.5% of the
variance in community belongingness; subjects who reported that USC was important to
their personal identity reported greater community belongingness after the manipulation.
However, the interaction between condition and prior media representation remained
significant (F(1,81) = 4.444; p = .038). This main effect of identification was not
34
replicated using number of USC-affiliated groups, and the interaction between condition
and prior media representation still approached significance (F(1,81) = 3.660; p = .059).
These analyses indicate that although there is an effect of baseline identification on
follow-up community belongingness, it does not account for the interaction between
condition and prior media representation.
Number of USC-affiliated groups: Once again, number of USC-affiliated groups
was dichotomized at the median: subjects who belonged to 1 or no USC affiliated groups
were considered low identified, while subjects that belonged to 2 or more USC affiliated
groups were considered high identified. Subjects reported participating in an average of
2.38
3
USC-affiliated groups. A 2-way MANOVA revealed no main effects of condition,
membership in USC-affiliated groups, or the subsequent interaction. A review of the
ANOVAs revealed a significant interaction between condition and #USC-affiliated
groups for follow-up measures of Identity CSE (F(1,82) = 5.443, p = .022); subjects who
belonged to 1 or no USC-affiliated groups reported greater importance of USC to their
identity when racially excluded from the video (See Figure 3). However this interaction
was not significant and the interaction was no longer significant when controlling for
baseline Identity CSE.
3
One outlier reported 14 groups; it was winsorized to 7, the next highest data point.
35
When the data was dichotomized into prior representation-based racial groups, the
interaction between condition and #USC-affiliated groups was significant for White
subjects only according to a MANOVA (F(5,44) = 2.917, p = .023) and a review of the
ANOVAs revealed that Membership CSE accounted for most of the overall effect for this
group; White subjects who belonged to one or no USC-affiliated groups reported lower
worth as a member of USC when racially excluded, while subjects who belonged to two
or more groups reported no change (F(1,48) = 4.130, p = .048) (see Figure 4). However,
the effect of the interaction was reversed when predicting follow-up Identity CSE, such
that White subjects who belonged to one or no USC-affiliated groups reported higher
importance of USC to their personal identity when racially excluded, while subjects
belonging to two or more USC-affiliated groups reported lower importance to identity
when racially excluded; the interaction approached significance (F(1,48) = 3.433, p =
.070) (see Figure 5), thus replicating the trends of the pooled analyses.
36
For underrepresented subjects of color, the MANOVA revealed no significant
main effects of number of USC-affiliated groups, condition, nor was the subsequent
interaction significant. However, a review of the ANOVAs revealed that the interaction
between condition and #USC-affiliated groups was significant for follow-up Private CSE,
such that subjects of color who belonged to one or no USC-affiliated groups reported
better private assessments of USC when racially excluded, while subjects belonging to
two or more USC-affiliated groups reported lower private judgments (F(1,30) = 6.734, p
= .014) (see Figure 6).
H4: Effect of baseline ethnic identification
Ethnic identification was determined using the private dimension of the CSE
scale, which measured the subject’s private assessments of their ethnic group. Once
again, the sum variable was positively skewed (Median = 24, maximum 28), but the
measure was highly correlated with several other follow-up variables in the study (see
Table 4). It is important to note that baseline ethnic identity was not correlated with any
of the other baseline measures of USC identification.
37
Table 4: Correlation with private judgments of subject's ethnic group.
Measure Total Population Caucasian API/Latino
Follow-up Community
Belongingness
.339 (p=.002) .402 (p=.003) NS
Follow-up Identity CSE NS .312 (p=.026) NS
Follow-up Membership CSE .343 (p=.001) .302 (p=.033) .389 (p=.025)
Follow-up Private CSE .348 (p=.001) .458 (p=.001) NS
Follow-up Public CSE .385 (p=.000) .404 (p=.003) .370 (p=.34)
Follow-up Positive Affect .224 (p=.040) .389 (p=.005) NS
Follow-up Self-Esteem .345 (p=.001) NS .505 (p=.003)
Action words NS NS .381 (p=.031)
Arousal words NS NS -.371 (p=.034)
Total Enjoyment of Video NS NS .490 (p=.004)
Despite the correlations, a MANOVA revealed a main effect of private judgments
of one’s ethnic group (F(7,76) = 4.707; p =.000), but the main effect of condition and the
interaction were not significant. Private Ethnic CSE was a significant predictor of all
USC-based CSE measures such that subjects who held high private judgments of their
ethnic group also reported greater scores on Membership CSE, Private CSE, and Public
CSE, as well as community belongingness and self-esteem, regardless of condition.
Furthermore, a review of the ANOVAs revealed that the interaction between condition
and Private Ethnic CSE was significant for ∆Identity CSE (F(1,82) = 4.467; p = .038);
subjects that reported lower private judgments of their ethnic group also reported a
decrease in importance of USC to their identity when racially excluded, while subjects
who reported high private judgments about their ethnic group demonstrated an increase in
USC’s importance to their personal identity when racially excluded. However, a
38
regression revealed that the interaction did not predict any additional variance above and
beyond that predicted by condition and baseline ethnicity alone.
When the data was split by prior representation-based racial groups, the main
effect of ethnic identity as determined by the MANOVA was restricted to
underrepresented subjects of color (F(7,24) = 2.932, p = .023). However, a review of the
ANOVAs revealed a main effect of private judgments of one’s ethnic group on all CSE
measures and community belongingness for White subjects and Membership CSE,
Private CSE, and Public CSE for underrepresented subjects of color.
The validity of this 4-item scale as a functional measure of ethnic identity is
questionable. A simple ANOVA revealed no significant differences between racial
groups, despite prior research stating that, in the United States, people of color have a
greater ethnic identification than Whites. This bias was not evident in this sample.
H5: Effect of gender
A MANOVA investigating the effect of gender and condition on identification
measures (i.e., collective self-esteem and community belongingness) revealed a main
effect of gender (F(7,76) = 2.174, p = .046), a main effect of condition (F(7,76) = 2.471;
p = .024), and the subsequent interaction was also significant (F(7,76) = 2.391; p =.029).
It is interesting to note that condition appears as a significant predictor only when pooled
with gender. However, a review of baseline identification measures reveals a significant
difference between genders; females reported greater higher baseline private assessment
of USC (M
female
= 25.239, M
male
= 22.500, F(1,85) = 8.009, p = .006) and greater
39
importance of USC to individual identity (M
female
= 20.118, M
male
= 15.357, F(1,85) =
14.505, p = .000). When controlling for baseline importance of USC to personal identity,
the main effect of gender was no longer significant, although the effect of condition
(F(7,75) = 2.422, p = .027) and the interaction between condition and gender (F(7,75) =
2.375, p = .030) remained approximately the same.
A review of the ANOVAs demonstrate that, when controlling for baseline
importance of USC to personal identity, the main effect of the interaction was significant
for follow-up Identity CSE (F(1,81) = 5.707, p = .019 (See Figure 7), Private CSE
(F(1,81) = 5.894, p = .017, see Figure 8), and ∆Identity CSE (F(1,81) = 7.128, p = .009,
40
see Figure 9); female subjects consistently reported greater identification with the
university (i.e., greater importance of USC to their personal identification and greater
private assessments of USC). Men consistently report lower measures of USC’s
importance to their identity and lower private assessments of USC when they are racially
excluded, while women report greater importance of USC to their personal identity (both
follow-up and change scores) and exhibit no change regarding their private judgments.
When the data file was split according to prior media representation-based racial
groups, the aforementioned results were only significant for White subjects. This
cornerstone of exclusion literature will be addressed in the discussion.
41
CHAPTER 4: DISCUSSION
Much of the theory to date investigates media exclusion from the perspective of
underrepresented minority groups. However the results of this study demonstrate that the
effect on White subjects is very different, but just as important, especially as the move to
“diverse” programming seems to be the current norm.
The interpretation of media messages and their racial composition differs
drastically between individuals, which is commonly referred to as reception theory; the
viewer plays an active role in giving meaning to the message, thus changing the
experience of the media (Livingstone, 1990). This study sought to discover the effect of
racial representation in the media on the psychological effects of viewing a video
produced by the superordinate group (i.e., affiliated university). Results demonstrate that
there is a significant effect of prior media exposure. This is demonstrated by the
similarity between American-born APIs and Latinos on baseline and follow-up measures
despite differences in parental culture and the difference between racial groups when
aggregated according to prior media exposure.
Subjects whose racial group is not commonly represented in the media reported
differences in the direction postulated by the prior research; racially excluded API and
Latino subjects demonstrated a decrease in community belongingness and a decrease in
their reported worth as members of the community. Alternatively, subjects whose racial
group was commonly represented in media reported opposite reactions; racially excluded
White subjects demonstrated an increase in community belongingness and an increase in
42
reported worth as members of the community. Furthermore, despite the expectations of
prior literature, the subjects of color did not exhibit any significant decline in self-esteem,
identification with the university, or private assessment of the university; this is most
likely due to habituation over time that lowers their expectation of media representation.
This drastic difference in the reaction of White subjects raises the question: How
does the majority ethnic group interpret media exclusion? I proposed two theories as to
why Whites would increase their self-esteem: (1) White subjects were happy to see a
diverse video, thereby removing issues of White guilt and eliciting a positive affective
reaction among these viewers, or (2) White subjects viewed the exclusion as a threat to
their in-group and reacted in a manner designed to repair or maintain their self-esteem
and relationship with the university. The first hypothesis demands that racially excluded
White subjects express higher positive affect, however, all racially excluded subjects
reported lower positive affect compared to the racially included subjects, although not
significantly. These results point towards the latter hypothesis; racially excluded White
subjects experience the exclusion as a threat to their social group, thus decreasing
positive affect while increasing community belongingness and worth as a member in the
group.
Baseline importance of USC to a subject’s personal identity demonstrated a main
effect on the results, but did not interact with condition to predict follow-up measures.
However, a different measure of baseline identification, the number of USC-affiliated
groups, interacted with the condition to predict follow-up importance of USC to identity
such that subjects who were low identified reported higher follow-up measures on
43
Identity CSE. A review of the data on positive affect reveals that the subjects who
belonged to one or no USC-affiliated groups reported the highest positive affect (see
Figure 10) indicating that they may have been inspired by the video to increase their
identification with the university, while subjects who belonged to two or more USC-
affiliated groups were not as affected. Qualitative responses offer a glimpse into the
psychology of the viewer; responses ranged from “FIGHT ON!” to “fake and cheesy;”
this spectrum of responses demonstrates that there were a variety of reactions from
inspiration to disgust. It is not unreasonable to hypothesize that subjects who were low
identified with the university may have enjoyed the video more, however, this is not
replicated in the final quantitative measures regarding video enjoyment.
In addition, when analyzed separately, an interesting difference emerges: for
White subjects, number of USC-affiliated groups was a significant moderator between
condition and their worth as members of USC, while for subjects of color, number of
USC-affiliated groups was a significant moderator between condition and their private
assessments of USC. These split-file results demonstrate that media exclusion is
interpreted differently by White viewers as compared to viewers of color; for White
subjects, viewing their racial group on television is related to their worth as members of
the university while for subjects of color, viewing their racial group in television is
related to their personal perceptions of the community, but not their perceptions of worth
as a community member. This difference offers evidence for the threat theory regarding
Whites’ interpretation of media exclusion; when excluded, racial exclusion is related to
their worth as members of the community. The reaction depends on the subjects
44
identification with the university; White subjects do not belong to many USC-affiliated
groups behave in the expected direction, reducing their perceived worth as a member of
the community, while White subjects who belong to two or more USC-affiliated groups
employ self-enhancement strategies and boost their worth as members.
The replication of gender effects demonstrates that media exclusion functions
similarly (although not exactly) to interpersonal exclusion. Racially excluded women
reported an increase in the importance of USC to their personal identity and maintain a
high private assessment of USC while racially excluded men exhibit a decrease in
importance of USC to their personal identity and a sharp decline in their private
assessments of the university. These results are analogous to prior literature wherein
excluded women socially facilitate, or work harder, to become a member of the group; in
the current research, they increase the importance of USC to their personal identity,
exhibiting a similar desire to become part of the excluding group. For men, the data is
even more comparable; when racially excluded, men report significantly lower private
assessments of the university and decrease the importance of USC to their personal
identity, a tactic identified in the prior literature. Racially excluded males also exhibited
an increase in negative affect and a decrease in positive affect (although not significant),
emphasizing their emotional response to the exclusion.
Finally, the lack of gender effects in the subjects of color prompts two questions:
(1) Either subjects of color do not experience the same gender effects described in the
prior literature, or (2) they do not interpret the media exclusion as actual exclusion and do
not experience the subsequent psychological effects. Although much of the social
45
exclusion research that investigates gender is conducted on White college students, the
latter question is more pertinent with respect to the other results in the study. Subjects of
color repeatedly demonstrate minimal reactions to the exclusion, indicating that they may
be habituated to media exclusion and do not experience it as a threat. Alternatively, they
may be employing the same strategies ascribed to men in the social exclusion literature
wherein they attribute the exclusion of their racial group to external reasons (e.g., racism,
media trends) and derogate the source of the exclusion, as mentioned in the split file
analysis of baseline identification and condition.
These findings add to the study of media effects from a social psychological
perspective; however, there are several points that must be addressed including a small
sample size, potential inadequacy of certain measures, and its relation to changes in the
national population.
The N of 87 is lacking sufficient power for many of the abovementioned analyses.
Furthermore, in an attempt to gain as many subjects as possible, care was not taken to
ensure an even distribution across all racial groups and by gender, thus causing
imbalances in the cells. Furthermore, some of the analyses may be explained by this lack
of power, specifically with measures that lacked significant variance including Private
Ethnic CSE. Additional iterations of this study utilize measures that seek to increase the
reliability of ethnic identity and perceived typicality as an in-group member. The
Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM: Phinney 1992) is a more precise
measurement of ethnic identification and should achieve greater variance across subjects.
The self-typicality and group identification scale (Kashima, Kashima & Hardie, 2000)
46
seeks to discover the subject’s perceived typicality as an in-group member. Identification
with the larger social group only implies perceived similarity with the group, and
Kashima, Kashima & Hardie have noted that group identification and typicality, although
related, are two factors of self-categorization (2000). In addition, the differences between
racial groups may be explained by concepts of typicality; White subjects may consider
themselves a typical example of a USC student, thus resulting in the defensive, threat-
response behavior.
In addition, the purpose of this study was to create a microcosm seeking to
replicate the effects of racial exclusion in American television; however the racial
dynamics of the target campus may be different from that of the United States. The
national percentages are different from those at USC; the undergraduate population
contains approximately 47% White (vs. the national representation of 65%), 13.1%
Latino (vs. 15%), and 21.7% API (vs. 4.5%) (USC Factbook, 2008). Although these
numbers both demonstrate a White majority, the USC demographics are different from
the national representation. It may be necessary to measure the subject’s perception of
racial representation on campus (i.e., “What percentage of USC undergraduates are of
Asian descent?”) in order to further assess their interpretation of the video.
47
CHAPTER 5: FUTURE RESEARCH
The difference between White subjects and subjects of color in their reactions to
exclusion, media or interpersonal, is has not been addressed prior to this study.
Individuals who are not experienced in being racially excluded may interpret the
exclusion as a threat to their individual and in-group, thus employing reparative increases
in identification with the larger group. Once again, this is similar to the threat literature
wherein subjects that are high identified with an in-group will increase their in-group
favoritism (Crocker, Major & Steele, 1998) and increase their self-stereotyping, thus
ascribing more of the in-group’s characteristics to themselves (Kashima, Kashima &
Hardie, 2000).
It is important to note that African-American or Black subjects were not tested in
this study due to their current status in American media. Black characters comprise 16%
of all television characters, much higher than their 12.8% representation in the national
population (Children Now, 2004). This group suffers from misrepresentation as
compared to an underrepresentation, the purpose of this study. The majority of Black
characters on television are either musicians, athletes, or criminals, thus creating a hostile
media environment for Black viewers. Prior research has addressed the effects of this
misrepresentation; the most interesting of which is a study on the interpretation of
television news stories conducted by Gilliam & Iyengar (2000). Subjects were shown
television news stories about a recent crime; the story ether mentioned a White suspect, a
Black suspect, or the suspect’s race was not mentioned. In the “no race” condition, 44%
48
of subjects recalled the suspect as Black, more than the amount of subjects recalling the
suspect as White (19%) and the same amount unable to recall a suspect (37%), the correct
answer. These effects place Black Americans outside the scope of this study, but demand
additional studies to investigate the effect of media misrepresentation on viewer
psychology. In addition, the subject pool lacked sufficient numbers Black undergraduate
student in psychology classes to reach an appropriate N.
The lack of gender differences among subjects of color demands further analysis;
much of the exclusion research has been conducted on White college students thus
disregarding the potential cultural component of reactions to exclusion. The results of this
study demand a deeper investigation into the effect of cultural differences exclusion
behavior: the female reaction to social exclusion may be related to a conditioned manner
of behavior within the White community, or a repercussion of majority culture.
Alternatively, as a minority culture, excluded subjects of color may attribute the
exclusion to other external factors, or may demonstrate a habituation to non-
representation (or media exclusion), such that they do not interpret the exclusion as
exclusion.. Further research must be conducted wherein the majority community is not
White.
Furthermore, this study, along with most media-related laboratory research,
suffers from testing a one-time viewing. Media is much more pervasive than a single
exposure and the actual experience is often difficult to quantify in a controlled
experimental study. However, the results of laboratory research offer some context for
the immersive media we currently experience. Television has the power to reflect,
49
modify, and regurgitate social norms, and a long-term lack of representation in media can
be potentially damaging; excluded subjects may be led to believe that they are on the
fringes or outskirts of society. This is particularly important for children who utilize
television programming to construct schemas of the world. “While the influence of
television images may not be immediately apparent, effects from media use are ‘like the
steady drip, drip, drip of a faucet; measurable effects at any moment may be small, but
they accumulate over time’” (Jeffers in Children Now, 2004, p. 1). Over 40% of
American youth under 19 are of color, drastically higher than the 27% of primetime
characters (Children Now, 2004), but the effects of this exclusion may not yet be evident.
The 2005 riots in the suburbs of Paris may offer a glimpse into the correlation
between long-term media exclusion and the psyche. A regular criticism of French media
is its exclusion of brown faces, despite an influx of North African Muslims in the
seventies and eighties. The best estimates put France’s Muslim population at
approximately four million, half of which are French citizens (Caldwell, 2000). Many
have argued that there are more practicing Muslims in France than Catholics. However,
this “minority” population is not represented in the media. Consigned to the ghetto
suburbs outside Paris, this lack of representation aids in the ostracizing the group. In
November 2005, after two Muslim teens were accidentally electrocuted while running
from the police in Clichy-sous-Bois, second-generation Muslim youth rioted through the
suburbs of France, burning cars and buildings for two weeks. These youth had only
known a nation that excluded them financially, academically, and physically, and this
was mirrored in their exclusion from the media.
50
The power of the media is undeniable, and the research regarding its influence on
the viewer is extensive and far-reaching. This research adds to this research, but begins to
quantify the psychological effects of media exclusion. As media becomes more intimate
and pervasive, these effects may become even more exaggerated; alternatively, an
awareness of media effects and the advancement of media literacy may encourage
viewers to become more active and aware of simple “entertainment.” Furthermore, the
effect upon White Americans is rarely addressed in the theoretical discussion but is
clearly deserving of attention. As America becomes a more diverse community, so will
our media, highlighting the importance of its effect on concepts of self for all viewers.
51
REFERENCES
Aron, A., Aron, E. N., Tudor, M., & Nelson, G. (1991). Close relationships as including
other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 60, 241-253.
Associated Press (2006). Average home has more TVs than people. USA TODAY.
September 21, 2006. Retrieved September 15, 2008 from
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2006-09-21-homes-tv_x.htm.
Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciacorro, N. J. (2005). Social Exclusion Impairs Self-
Regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 88(4), 589-604.
Baumeister, R. F., Leary, M. R. (1995). The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal
Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation. Psychological Bulletin. 17(3),
497-529.
Baumeister, R. F., Twenge, J. M., Nuss, C. K. (2002). Effects of Social Exclusion on
Cognitive Processes: Anticipated Aloneness Reduces Intelligent Thought. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology. 83(4), 817-827.
Bourgeois, K. S., Leary, M. R. (2001). Coping with Rejection: Derogating those who
choose us last. Motivation and Emotion. 25(2), 101-111.
Bruneau, T.J. (1973). Communicative silences: Forms and functions. Journal of
Communication, 23, 17-46.
Buckley, K. E., Winkle, R. E., Leary M. R. (2004). Reactions to acceptance and
rejection: Effects of level and sequence of relational evaluation. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology. 40, 14-28.
Caldwell, C. (2000). The Crescent and the Tricolor. TheAtlantic, November 2000.
Retrieved September 15, 2008 from
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200011/france-muslims
Cast, A. D., Burke, P. J. (2002). A Theory of Self-Esteem. Social Forces. 80(3), 1041-
1068.
Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2002. Tech Policy Notes. June. Retrieved
September 15, 2008 from
http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/020601_broadbnd_govt_support.pdf.
52
Children Now (2004). 2003-2004 Fall Colors: Primetime Diversity Report. Retrieved
September 15, 2008 from
http://publications.childrennow.org/publications/media/fallcolors_2003.cfm
Children Now (2004). Fall Colors 2003-2004; Prime Time Diversity Report.
http://publications.childrennow.org/assets/pdf/cmp/fc03/fall-colors-03-v5.pdf
Coats, S. Smith, E. R., Claypool, H. M., Banner, M. J. (2000). Overlapping Mental
Representations of Self and In-Group: Reaction Time Evidence and Its
Relationship with Explicit Measures of Group Identification. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology. 36, 304-325.
Crocker, Major & Steele (1998). Social stigma. In D. gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey
(eds). Handbook of social psychology (4
th
ed., pp. 504-53). Boston: McGraw-
Hill.
Eisenberger, N. I., Lieberman, M. D., Williams, K. D. (2003). Does Rejection Hurt? An
fMRI Study of Social Exclusion. Science. 301(5643), 290-292.
Fattore, T., Turnbull, N., Wilson, S. (2003). ‘More Community!’ Does the Social Capital
Hypothesis Offer Hope for Untrusting Societies?. The Drawing Board: An
Australian Review of Public Affairs. 3(3), 165-179.
Gardner, W. L., Pickett, C. L., Brewer, M. B. (2000). Social Exclusion and Selective
Memory: How the Need to belong Influences Memory for Social Events.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 26, 486-496.
Gerbner, G., Gross, G., Morgan, M., Signorielli, N., Shanahan, J. (2002). Growing Up
with Television: Cultivation Processes. In Media Effects: Advances in Theory and
Research. Ed. Bryant & Zillman, 43-67.
Gerbner, G., Gross, L. (1976). Living with Television: The Violence Profile. Journal of
Communication. 26, 172, 173-199.
Graves, S. B. (1999). Television and Prejudice Reduction: when Does Television as a
Vicarious Experience Make a Difference?. Journal of Social Issues. 55(4), 707-
725.
Kashima, E. S., Kashima Y. Hardie, E. A. (2000). Self-typicality and Group
Identification: Evidence for their Separateness. Group Processes & Intergroup
Relations. 3(1), 97-110.
53
Kelly, K. M. (2001). Individual differences in reactions to rejection. In M. R. Leary (ed.)
Interpersonal Rejection. New York: Oxford University Press.
Leary, M. R. (1990). Responses to social exclusion: social anxiety, jealousy, loneliness,
depression and low self-esteem. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology: 9,
221-229.
Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., Downs, D. L. (1995). Self-Esteem as an
Interpersonal Monitor: The Sociometer Hypothesis. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology. 68(3), 518-530.
Leary, M. R. (2001). Toward a Conceptualization of Interpersonal Rejection. In Leary,
M. R. (Ed.). Interpersonal Rejection. Oxford Univesrity Press, New York, NY.
3-20.
Leary, M. R., Twenge, J. M., Quinlivan, E. (2006). Interpersonal Rejection as a
Determinant of Anger and Aggression. Personality and Social Psychology
Review. 10(2), 111-132.
Lickel, B. et al (2000). Vareities of Groups and the Perception of Group Entitavity.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 78(2), 223-246.
Lieberman, M. D., Eisenberger, N. I. (2005). A Pain by any other Name (Rejection,
Exclusion, Ostracism) still Hurts the Same: The Role of Dorsal Anterior
Cingulate Cortex in Social and Physical Pain. 167-187.
Livingstone, S. (1990). Making Sense of Television: The Psychology of Audience
Interpretation. Pergamon Publishers.
Luhtanen, R., Crocker, J. (1992). A Collective Self-Esteem Scale: Self-Evaluation of
One’s Social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 18(3), 302-
318.
Newswire (2006). The Asian Pacific Media Coalition Releases 2006 Report Card on
Television Diversity. December 7, 2006. Retrieved December 12, 2007 from
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=77239
Pedersen, W. C., Denson, T. F., Goss, R. J., Vasquez, E. A., & Miller, N. (in press). The
impact of rumination on aggressive thoughts, feelings, behavior, and arousal.
Phinney, J. S. (1992). The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure; a New Scale for Use with
Diverse Groups. Journal of Adolescent Research. 7, 156-176.
54
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Rosenberg, M. Schooler, C., Schoenbach, C., Rosenberg, F. (1995). Global Self-Esteem
and Specific Self-Esteem: Different Concepts, Different Outcomes. American
Sociological Review. 60(1), 141-156.
Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A. J., Kim, Y. (2001). What is Satisfying About Satisfying
Events? Testing 10 Candidate Psychological Needs. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology. 30(2), 325-339.
Sommer, K. (2001). Coping with rejection: Ego-Defensive Strategies, Self-Esteem, and
Interpersonal Relationships. In Leary, M. R. (ed.). Interpersonal Rejection.
Oxford University Press, New York, NY. 167-188.
Smith, A., Williams, K. D. (2004). R U There? Ostracism by Cell Phone Test Messages.
Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice. 8(4), 291-301.
Spigel, L. The Suburban Home Companion: Television and the neighborhood Ideal in Post-
War America. In Television Studies Reader.
Steele, S. (2006). White Guilt: How Blacks and Whites Together Destroyed the Promise
of the Civil Rights Era. HarperCollins
Tuchman, G. (1978). Symbolic Annihilation. In Tuchman, G., Kapan, D., Benet, J.
(Eds). Hearth and Home: Images of Women in the Mass Media. Oxford
University Press. New York, NY. 3-38.
Twenge, J. M., Cantanese, K. R., Baumeister, R. F. (2002) Social Exclusion Causes Self-
Defeating Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 83(3), 606-
615.
Twenge. J. M., Cantanese, K. R., Baumeister, R. F. (2003). Social Exclusion and the
Deconstructed State: Time Perception, Meaningless, Lethargy, Lack of Emotion,
and Self-Awareness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 85(5). 409-
423.
U. S. Census Bureau News (2007). Minority Population Tops 100 Milion. May 17, 2007.
Retrieved September 15, 2008 from http://www.census.gov/Press-
Release/www/releases/archives/population/010048.html
U. S. Census Bureau (2000). State & County Quickfacts: Los Angeles County. Retrieved
September 15, 2008 from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06037.html.
55
USC Factbook (2008). Retrieved September 15, 2008 from
http://www.usc.edu/private/factbook/2008.
Watson, D., Clark L. A., Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and Validation of Brief
Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: the PANAS Scales. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. 54(6), 1063-1070.
Williams, K. D., Govan, C. L., Crocker, V., Tynan, D., Cruichshank, M., Lam, A. (2002).
Investigations into differences between Social- and Cyberostracism. Group
Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice. 6(1), 65-77.
Williams, K. D., Cheung, C. K. T., Choi, W. (2000). Cyberostracism: Effects of Being
Ignored Over the Internet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 79(5),
748-763.
Williams, K. D., Sommer, K. L. (1997). Social Ostracism by Coworkers: Does Rejection
Lead to Loafing or Compensation?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
23(7), 693-714.
Williams, K. D., Zadro. (2001). Ostracism: On Being Ignored, Excluded, and Rejected.
In Interpersonal Rejection, Leary, M. R. (Ed.). Oxford University Press, New
York, NY. 21-54.
Zadro, L., Boland, C., Richardson, R. (2006). How long does it last? The persistence of
the effects of ostracism in the socially anxious. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology. 42, 692-297.
Zadro, L., Williams, K.D., Richardson, R. (2005), Riding the ‘O’ Train: Comparing the
Effects of Ostracism and Verbal Dispute on Targets and Sources. Group
Processes & Intergroup Relations. 8(2), 125-143.
56
APPENDIX A: MEASUREMENT SCALES
Word Completion Task (Pederson et al. in press)
Directions: Below is a list of words with missing letters. Please fill in the missing
letters to form a word. All of the items can be made into several
possible words so please just make the first word that comes to mind.
Please complete this task as fast as you can.
(1) s h o _ t (16) m _ d (31) d i s g _ _ _ e
d
(2) u _ _ e _ (17) a t t _ c _ (32) s _ _ b
(3) _ r _ _ s e d (18) j _ _ _ y (33) _ e l l
(4) h a _ e (19) s l _ p (34) _ r a t e
(5) p r o v _ _ e (20) _ _ a t e (35) _ _ _ a g e
(6) _ _ t t e r y (21) t e _ s _
(7) a l _ _ _ (22) a _ _ _ _ e d
(8) o u t _ _ _ e (23) l _ _ e l y
(9) i n s _ _ _ (24) f i _ _ t
(10) k i _ _ (25) i n _ e n _ e
(11) e x _ _ _ e d (26) o f f _ _ _
(12) _ _ m i n g (27) _ e e _ e d
(13) a n g _ _ (28) h _ t
(14) h _ r _ (29) _ _ t t e r
(15) ac_ _ _ _ (30) i n _ _ r e
57
Positive and Negative Affect Scale (Watson, Clark. & Tellegen, 1988)
This scale consists of a number of words that describe different feelings and emotions.
Read each item and then select the appropriate answer to that word. Indicate to what
extent you currently feel.
1. Interested
2. Distressed
3. Excited
4. Upset
5. Strong
6. Guilty
7. Scared
8. Hostile
9. Enthusiastic
10. Proud
11. Irritable
12. Alert
13. Ashamed
14. Inspired
15. Nervous
16. Determined
17. Attentive
18. Jittery
19. Active
20. Afraid
Adapted Collective Self-Esteem Scale (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992)
We would like you to consider your membership with the group "USC," and respond to
the following statements on the basis of how you feel about USC and your membership
with the university There are no right or wrong answers to any of these statements; we
are interested in your honest reactions and opinions.
1. I am a worthy member of USC.
2. I often regret that I belong to USC.
3. Overall, USC is considered good by others.
4. Overall, my USC membership has very little to do with how I feel about myself.
5. I feel I don’t have much to offer USC.
6. In general, I’m glad to be a member of USC.
7. Most people consider USC, on average, to be more ineffective than other
universities.
8. USC is an important reflection of who I am.
9. I am a cooperative participant at USC.
10. Overall, I often feel that USC is not worthwhile.
11. In general, others respect USC.
12. USC is unimportant to my sense of what kind of person I am.
13. I often feel I’m a useless student at USC.
14. I feel good about USC.
15. In general, others think that USC is unworthy.
16. In general, belonging to USC is an important part of my self-image.
58
State Self-Esteem (Rosenberg, 1965)
Below is a list of statements dealing with your general feelings about yourself. Please
indicate if you Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, or Strongly Agree with the following:
1. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself.
2. At times, I think I am no good at all.
3. I feel that I have a number of good qualities.
4. I am able to do things as well as most other people.
5. I feel I do not have much to be proud of.
6. I certainly feel useless at times.
7. I feel that I am a person of worth, at least on an equal plane with others.
8. I wish I could have more respect for myself.
9. All in all, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure.
10. I take a positive attitude toward myself.
Community Belongingness Scale (Fattore, Turnbull, & Wilson, 2003)
Please respond...
1. I would be really sorry if I had to move away from the USC community.
2. I have a lot in common with the USC community.
3. People in the USC community make it a difficult place to live in.
4. I am good friends with many people in the USC community.
5. I have little to do with people in the USC community
6. People in the USC community are very willing to help each other out.
7. If I no longer lived here, hardly anyone around here would even notice.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The effects of media exclusion are discussed in communications and critical studies, but the topic has received limited attention from social psychologists. This experiment investigates the effects of viewing a university promotional video that excludes individuals of a subject’s race, integrating Social Exclusion Theory (exclusion from a social group causes deficits in self-esteem, belonging, and control) and Symbolic Annihilation (individuals not represented in media may suffer from low self-esteem and reduced feelings of belongingness). Racially excluded Caucasians reported greater belongingness to the university, while Asians and Latinos reported lower belongingness when excluded. Furthermore, replicating prior social exclusion research, racially excluded women experienced reported greater importance of the group to personal identity, while racially excluded men experienced a decrease. This research provides evidence that exclusion from media may induce similar processes to that of social exclusion and highlights the different reactions of racial groups to exclusion from a visual medium.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Racial and gender exclusion affect novel group identity
PDF
When it's good to feel bad: how responses to virtual environments predict real-life sexual risk-reduction
PDF
“Under the radar”: the relative effectiveness of gay-vague, gay-explicit, and control anti-smoking messages for targeted and nontargeted audiences
PDF
Evaluating a cultural process model of depression and suicidality in Latino adolescents
PDF
Examining the effect of fertility on lifespan using data from the Swedish Twin Registry
PDF
Insula activity during safe-sex decision-making in sexually risky men suggests negative urgency and fear of rejection drives risky sexual behavior
PDF
Relational displacements: visual and textual cultures of resistance in the east Los Angeles barrios and banlieues of Paris, France
PDF
Trunk control during dynamic balance: effects of cognitive dual-task interference and a history of recurrent low back pain
Asset Metadata
Creator
Corsbie-Massay, Charisse
(author)
Core Title
Effects of racial exclusion from media
School
College of Letters, Arts and Sciences
Degree
Master of Arts
Degree Program
Psychology
Publication Date
05/09/2009
Defense Date
09/22/2008
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
community belonging,cultivation theory,media effects,OAI-PMH Harvest,Social exclusion,symbolic annihilation
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Read, Stephen J. (
committee chair
), Huey, Stanley J., Jr. (
committee member
), Miller, Lynn Carol (
committee member
)
Creator Email
charisse.corsbiemassay@usc.edu,charisselpree@alumn.usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2224
Unique identifier
UC1101996
Identifier
etd-CorsbieMassay-2517 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-235435 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2224 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-CorsbieMassay-2517.pdf
Dmrecord
235435
Document Type
Thesis
Rights
Corsbie-Massay, Charisse
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Repository Name
Libraries, University of Southern California
Repository Location
Los Angeles, California
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
community belonging
cultivation theory
media effects
symbolic annihilation