:. I.

'>\: t, 'f I •;

,- '
<',\•":
-,\
\',\ ,.
I• ""i.
\,

FACUL TEIT SOCIALE WETENSCHAPPEN

DEPARTEMENT COMMUNICATIEWETENSCHAP
E. VAN EVENSTRAAT 2A
B-3000 LEUVEN

KATHOLIEKE
UNIVERSITEIT
LEUVEN

COPING STYLES AS PREDICTORS OF TELEVISION

VIEWING MOTIVES IN CRIME VICTIMS

Jurgen Minnebo

Verantwoordelijke uitgever: Departement Communicatiewetenschap, intern rapport 2004 nr. 8

 Coping style and television viewing motives

Coping Styles as predictors of Television Viewing Motives in Crime Victims.

Paper presented at the 54th Annual Conference of the International Communication
Association "Communication in the Public Interest", 27-31 May 2004, New Orleans, USA.

Jurgen Minnebo
 Coping style and television viewing motives 2

Abstract

Psychological research has indicated that people dealing with criminal victimization may do

so in three ways: by coping actively, avoidantly or by seeking social support. From a uses and

gratifications perspective, this study hypothesizes that coping styles are reflected in crime

victims' motives to watch television. It is expected that victims develop motives for watching

television that are analogous to the way in which they cope with their criminal victimization.

To test this hypothesis, 215 crime victims completed a paper-and-pencil questionnaire

containing the Coping Strategy Indicator, a television viewing motives scale and several

control measures. Hierarchical regression analyses offer significant support for the proposed

hypothesis. Perspectives for further study are outlined.

 Coping style and television viewing motives 3

Introduction

There is a significant body of literature exploring how people cope with stressful life

events like, for example, criminal victimization, motor vehicle accidents or natural disaster

(e.g. Bryant & Harvey, 1995; Dunmore, Clark & Ehlers, 1999; Kilpatrick, Saunders, Amick-

McMullan, Best, Veronen & Resnick, 1989; Gibbs, 1989; Wirtz & Harrel, 1987). However,

even though there are good reasons to suspect that these coping efforts also take shape in

media exposure and may thus be related to gratifications sought in media use, only a limited

number of studies have hinted directly at this possibility (Potts & Sanchez, 1994). The aim of

the present study was to investigate whether the coping styles of crime victims are significant I ,)
! ,,
predictors of television viewing motives.

Coping Styles

Coping is a concept that moderates the impact of stressful events on a person's mental

and physical health (Billings & Moos, 1981; Felsten, 1998). It involves the individual's

cognitive and behavioural attempts to manage the consequences of the stressful event (Mazel,

Terry, & Gribble, 1996). Four coping strategies have typically been put forward: problem-

focused coping, emotion-focused coping, avoidance and social support seeking (Carver,

Scheier & Weintraub, 1989; Torestad, Magnusson, & Olah, 1990; Masel et al. 1996; Felsten,

1998). Problem-focused coping involves active cognitive and/or behavioural efforts by the

individual to resolve or lessen the impact of the stressors. For example, a rape victim

engaging in problem-focused coping could do so by cognitively redefining the event to make

it more manageable, by gathering information about it or by taking direct action like

engaging in self-defensive measures to prevent future victimization. Emotion-focused coping

is aimed at regulating emotional responses to the event and keeping emotions balanced on a

personal optimal level. Typically, emotion-focused coping has been operationalized as

 Coping style and television viewing motives 4

wishful thinking, fantasizing, self blame, blaming others, avoiding negative thoughts and

venting emotions (Felsten, 1998; Folkman & Lazarus, 1980; Frieze, Hymer & Greenberg,

1987; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Mazel et al., 1996). A third coping strategy is avoidant

coping, which may result in reactions such as denial of the event, distraction, thought

suppression, avoidance of other people or substance use (Amirkhan, 1990; Felsten, 1998;

Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Finally, social support seeking represents as a coping strategy

such actions as turning to others for assistance with tasks, emotional support or social

diversion (Amirkhan, 1990; Felsten, 1998; Frieze et al., 1987). Obviously, however, the

emotion-focused and avoidant coping strategy overlap to some extent, resulting in divergent

operationalizations of these strategies in measurement instruments (Suls, David & Harvey,

1996) and difficulties in comparing results. Therefore, more recently a number of coping

scales have been constructed that discern between social support seeking, avoidant and

problem-focused coping (Suls et al., 1996). In addition, some researchers have performed

higher order analyses on existing scales to reflect this tripartition in coping styles, thus

improving comparability ofresults (e.g. Kamphuis & Emmelkamp, 1998).

Numerous studies have examined the efficacy of these coping styles in dealing with

stressful life events. Reliance upon avoidant coping styles has been consistently linked with

higher psychological distress in general and such symptoms as depression and low self-

esteem in particular (Bryant & Harvey, 1995; Harrison & Kinner, 1998; Kamphuis &

Emmelkamp, 1998; Mazel et al. 1996; Mcfarlane, 1988; Rohde, Lewinsohn, Tilson &

Seeley, 1990). A plausible explanation for these findings is that avoidant coping keeps an

individual from cognitively processing the stressful event, perpetuating a state of high arousal

and distress (Creamer, Burgess, Buckingham & Pattison, 1990). Social support seeking on

the other hand has been shown to have essential stress-relieving effects, resulting in better

adjustment and a quicker return to life 'as usual' (Bard & Sangrey, 1986; Billings & Moos,
 Coping style and television viewing motives 5

1981; Felsten, 1998; Frieze et al., 1987). The adequacy of problem-focused coping styles has

been illustrated less well. Even though Gieser, Green & Winget (1981) found male victims of

a flooding who were able to engage in self-help activities (like cleaning and repairing their

homes) to manifest less psychological distress afterwards, Wirtz & Harrell (1987) found no

such relationship in a study of crime victims. Even though results are equivocal, there is a

certain consensus that avoidant coping strategies are maladaptive while problem-focused

coping and social support seeking are considered to be more succesful coping styles (Felsten,

1998).

The Uses and Gratifications Perspective and Coping Styles

One of the basic assumptions of the uses- and gratifications perspective is that an

individual's media use is shaped by social and psychological origins or dispositions (Katz,

Blumler & Gurevitch, 1974; McQuail, 1997). Only a fairly small amount of research has

tested this assumption empirically, however (Palmgreen, Wenner & Rosengren, 1985). Over

the past fifteen years, research has demonstrated links between television use and

psychologic predictors in general, based on McGuire's (197 4) paradigm of psychological

theories (Conway & Rubin, 1991) and more specific concepts like lifestyles (Dono hew,

Palmgreen, Rayburn, 1987), social isolation and loneliness (Rubin, Perse & Powell, 1985;

Finn & Gorr, 1988; Canary & Spitzberg, 1993), depression (Potts & Sanchez, 1994) and

personality traits (Finn, 1997; Potts, Dedmon & Halford, 1996).

The present article wants to add coping styles to this list. Hitherto, relationships

between coping styles and television use have only been hinted at in both the communication

(Potts & sanchez, 1994) and coping literature (Amirkhan, 1990; Kleinke, 1988) but have

never been tested empirically. Three arguments warrant such a research effort. First, the way
I
I
I .
an individual deals with a stressful event is in itself a psychological concept that originates '·
 Coping style and television viewing motives 6

certain needs and habits. These needs and habits are likely to affect television use.

Furthermore, coping styles are related to an individual's personality (Suls et al., 1996), which /

adds to the possible role of coping styles in shaping television use given the demonstrated

links between personality traits and television use cited above. Second, a number of studies

have reported alterations in television use as a consequence of experiencing stressful life

events (Anderson, Collins, Schmitt & J acobvitz, 1996; Shearer, 1991 ). The possibility that

this shift in viewing behaviour is related to the coping style an individual uses to adjust to the

stressor has not yet been explored. Third, the few references made to television use in the

field of coping research are more likely to lead to the confounding of television use and

coping style than to differentiate both concepts empirically and then study their relationship

to each other. For example, the Coping Strategy Indicator (CSI) (Amirkhan, 1990), which is

often used in coping research (e.g. Felsten, 1998; Bijttebier & Vertommen, 1999), contains

two items that refer to television use ('watch more television than usual' and 'identify with

characters from novels/movies' 1). These items, however, are considered to measure avoidant

coping strategies. From a uses and gratifications perspective this is a contestable assumption,

since watching more television may just as well be indicative of a problem-focused coping

strategy; for example, a person confronted with a stressful life event can watch more

television to satisfy his/her information needs about ways to deal with the problem.

More specifically, we aim to investigate whether coping styles are related to television I

viewing motives. The exploratory nature of this study inspires the investigation of viewing

motives as dependent variables rather than specific television exposure. Television viewing

motive scales can be summarized in interpretable clusters of gratifications sought; this is

seldom the case when studying exposure to specific content, since, to a certain limit,

individuals can interpret similar content within the framework of their own needs and

limitations (Finn & Gorr, 1988; McQuail, 1997). The most widely used measures identifying
 Coping style and television viewing motives 7

viewing motives are those of Greenberg (1974) and Rubin (1981, 1983) and have been

adapted to several contexts (Perse, 1994) and to include additional motives inspired by

specific research needs (e.g. Conway & Rubin; 1991; Potts & Sanchez, 1994). The motives

typically derived from these scales are 'relaxation', 'companionship', 'habit', 'pass time',

'entertainment', 'social interaction', 'information', 'arousal' and 'escape'. The general research

question underlying this research can thus be formulated as follows:

RQ 1: How and to what extent do coping styles explain and predict television viewing

motives?

In the following paragraphs, more precise, but, given the lack of research, tentative

hypotheses will be proposed about the role of specific coping styles in explaining certain

television viewing motives.

Previous research has suggested that crime victims who rely on avoidant coping

strategies do not cognitively process the event and as a consequence remain highly aroused

(Creamer, et al., 1990). Furthermore, as has been discussed already, avoidant coping

systematically predicts higher levels of depression (e.g. Felsten, 1998). These findings imply

that avoidant coping styles are evidently related to dysphoric mood states. A theory linking

mood states to media use is Zillmann & Bryant's (1985) theory of affect-dependent stimulus

arrangement, which predicts that individuals regulate their media exposure to minimize

negative affects and dysphoric moods. This suggests that strained individuals may use

television to lower their level of arousal or to distract themselves from their negative moods.

In line with these assumptions Potts & Sanchez (1994) reported a positive relationship

between depression and escape viewing motivation. It can thus be expected that crime
 Coping style and television viewing motives 8

victims who cope avoidantly are more likely to remain stressed and aroused. In relationship

to television use it is thus predicted that:

H 1: More use of avoidant coping strategies will predict escape viewing motivation.

The cognitive aspect of problem focused-coping may manifest itself in information

seeking activities that help to facilitate the adjustment process (Felsten, 1998). It can thus be

hypothesized that

H2: More use of problem-focused coping strategies will predict information v1ewmg

motivation.

The hypothesis concerning social support seeking is based primarily on earlier

research looking into the relationship between loneliness, social support and gratifications

sought from media use. Finn & Gorr (1988) reported that an increase in social support was

related to utilizing television to satisfy needs like relaxation, entertainment, arousal and

information. They found mostly insignificant (negative) relationships with television viewing

for reasons of 'social compensation' (=companionship, escape, habit and pass time viewing).

To a certain degree, we could extrapolate these findings to social support seeking as well, for

it could be assumed that individuals relying on social support seeking have no deficit in

social contact, since they would probably prefer different coping strategies if this were the

case. Thus, we anticipate that

H3: More use of social support seeking strategies will predict more relaxation, entertainment,

arousal and information viewing.

 Coping style and television viewing motives 9

Method

Subjects

Subjects for this study were 215 recent victims of crime, aged sixteen or older, who

were contacted by the national Victim Support Unit2 between October 2002 and July 2003.

Within three months after this contact, the victim received a paper-and-pencil self-report

questionnaire. Subjects reported having become victim of a wide scope of crimes ranging

from attempted murder to burglary3. The victims in the sample were predominantly female

(76%), resembling previous research in victim populations (e.g. Wirtz & Harrell, 1987), and

were on average 41.8 years old (sd: 16.3). Repondents' highest level of education was no

education or only grade school, 13.3%; the first three years of high school, 23.3%; high

school, 41.4%; three or four year college education, 22%.

Measures

Coping styles. The Coping Strategy Indicator (CSI; Amirkhan, 1990) is a 33-item

self-report measure assessing the use of problem-solving coping, avoidance coping and of

seeking social support in reaction to a recent stressful event. The Dutch version of the CSI

(Bijttebier & Vertommen, 1997), which was used for this study, has been proven to reflect

psychometrically the original instrument (Bijttebier & Vertommen, 1997; Bijttebier &

Vertommen, 1999). Respondents are asked to think of a stressful event they experienced

recently and to rate subsequently all items on a scale of Oto 2: a lot - a little - not at all. Each

coping strategy subscale (problem-solving, avoidance, social support seeking) consists of 11

items for which scores can be calculated by summing the responses to the relevant items.

Sample items4 are: 'I carefully planned a course of action' (problem-solving), 'I just wanted

others to leave me alone' (avoidant coping), 'I confided my fears and worries to a friend'

(social support seeking). The scores on each subscale range from 0 to 22.
 Coping style and television viewing motives 10

Television viewing motives. Respondents rated 23 items (table 2) about television

viewing motives based on the scale developed by Rubin (1981, 1983) and reflecting the nine

original viewing motivation categories (cited above). Respondents indicated on a scale of Oto

4 to what extent they thought each motive applied to them: never true for me - occasionally

true for me - often true for me - most of the time true for me - always true for me.

Television exposure. As a traditional control variable, we included a quantitative

measure of exposure to television. For each day of the week, respondents indicated on a

timetable divided into half hours and ranging from 07:00am to 02:00am the following night

(=38 half hours) when they usually watch television that day. The weekly amount of

television exposure was calculated by summing all half hours marked as being spent

watching television and dividing that score by two.

Television affinity. The television affinity concept measures the importance television

carries in people's lives. Like television exposure, it is used as a control variable, since it has

been found to mediate or moderate reasons for television viewing (Conway & rubin, 1991;

Perse, 1994; Rubin, 1981, 1986). We used the four-item four-point version of the original

five-item scale developed by Rubin (1981), omitting the negatively worded item ('if the

televsion wasn't working, I would not miss it') to increase reliability (Perse, 1994). Scores

were calculated by summing the items and ranged from O tot 12.

Demographics. We assessed three sociodemographic variables: gender, age and

educational level. Educational level was measured using an 11-point scale ranging from 'I did

not complete any education' to 'I hold a four year college degree'.
 Coping style and television viewing motives 11

Results

Measurement

Means, standard deviations and -if applicable- Cronbach alpha coefficients for coping

styles, television viewing motives, television affinity and television exposure are reported in

table 1. Due to the subject of this study, two items from the CSI that are supposed to measure

avoidant coping ('I watched more tv than usual' and 'I identified myself with characters from

novels/movies') were omitted; the reason for this decision has been discussed earlier on. The

scores for avoidance thus range from O to 18. The fact that avoidant coping has a lower

Cronbach alpha coefficient than problem-solving and social support seeking is in line with

the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the CSI (Bijttebier & Vertommen, 1997).

Since in the CSI high scores indicate less use of a strategy, we reversed the item scores to

facilitate interpretability, so that high scores on a strategy indicate more use of that strategy.

TABLE 1 ABOUT HERE

Scores on the television viewing motives were obtained by summing and averaging

the scores of the 23 items that loaded on factors resulting from a principal component

analysis using oblique rotation. Since there is a subtle difference between certain subscales

(e.g. relaxation viewing, escape viewing, entertainment viewing), and using the eigenvalue~

1.0 criterion proved to be too strict to discern between these subscales, we followed Jolliffe's

(1972, 1986) recommendation and retained factors with minimum eigenvalues of .70. Of the

nine hypothesised factors, seven were retained, explaining 79, 1% of the total variance:

entertainment (factor 1, 35.1 % of total variance), companionship (factor 2, 14.3% of total

variance), information (factor 3, 10.2% of total variance), escape (factor 4, 7 .6% of total

variance), arousal (factor 5, 4.5% of total variance), habit (factor 6, 4.0% of total variance)
 Coping style and television viewing motives 12

and pass time (factor 7, 3.8% of total variance). The items measuring relaxation loaded on

entertainment and escape viewing and the items measuring social interaction failed to load

consistently and were omitted. Table 2 reports this analysis.

TABLE 2 ABOUT HERE

Research Question and Hypotheses

In order to investigate whether coping styles predict television viewing motives, seven

hierarchical regression analyses were performed with each viewing motive in turn as

dependent variable. Three blocks of variables were entered into the equation. The first block

consisted of the demographical control variables age, gender and educational level; the

television related controls (television affinity and amount of television exposure) made up the

second block. Finally, the three coping styles (problem-solving, avoidant coping and social

support seeking) were entered in block three. The results of these seven analyses are reported

in table 3.

TABLE 3 ABOUT HERE

Entertainment viewing motivation was only predicted significantly by the block of

television related control variables, which accounted for 18.9% of the variance. Demographic

control variables explained 4.5% of the variance and coping styles 3.8%. Even though the

block of coping style variables did not significantly increase the explained variance, two

coping styles proved to be significant predictors of entertainment viewing. Less use of

problem-solving and more use of social support seeking predicted entertainment viewing. In

summary, younger age, higher levels of television affinity and social support seeking and
 Coping style and television viewing motives 13

lower levels of problem-solving explained entertainment viewing (R2=.27, F(3,139)=6.49,

p<.001), with television affinity, social support seeking and problem-solving being the

strongest predictors. This finding partially supports hypothesis 3, which predicted a positive

relationship between social support seeking and entertainment viewing.

All blocks of variables added significantly to the explained variance in television

viewing for reasons of companionship. Demographic controls explained 7.4% of the

variance, television related controls explained 17.5% and coping styles an additional 5.2%.

Companionship was predicted significantly by female gender, lower educational level,

greater amounts of television exposure and higher levels of television affinity; furthermore,

more use of avoidant coping and social support seeking predicted companionship viewing

(R2=.30, F(3, 139)=7.44, p<.001). Once again, television affinity and both coping styles were

the strongest predictors.

The explained variance in watching television for information also increased

significantly for each block of variables entered into the equation. Demographic control

variables explained 5.6% of the variance, television related controls 4.8% and coping styles

6.0%. Information viewing was predicted significantly by older age, higher levels of

television affinity and -unexpectedly- higher levels of avoidant coping (R2=. 16, F(3, 139),

p=.001 ). Of these predictors age was the strongest, followed by avoidant coping and

television affinity. The fact that problem-solving and social support seeking were unrelated to

information viewing refutes hypotheses 2 and (partially) 3. The finding that more use of

avoidant coping predicts information viewing, raises interesting questions about certain

aspects of the avoidant coping style. We will address this issue later on.

Escape viewing motivation was predicted significantly by all blocks of variables.

Demographic controls accounted for 13 .3 % of the variance, television related controls

explained an additional 15.7% and coping styles added another 14.3% to the total explained
 Coping style and television viewing motives 14

variance. Escape viewing was predicted significantly by female gender, higher levels of

television affinity and more use of avoidant coping (R2=.43, F(3, 139)=13.26, p<.001).

A voidant coping was the strongest predictor of escape viewing, confirming hypothesis 1. I
1

The variance in arousal was mainly explained by both blocks of control variables,

with demographic control variables accounting for 7.4% and television related controls for

26.3% of the variance. Coping styles added only 2.3%. Three variables predicted

significantly television use for arousal: younger age, higher levels of television affinity and,

despite the limited variance explained, more use of social support seeking (R 2=.35, F(3,

139)=9.74, p<.001). Affinity was by far the strongest predictor. The significant beta

coefficient for social support seeking offers support for hypothesis 3. J

Televison related controls accounted almost exclusively for the total variance

explained in habitual viewing (35.6% ); sociodemographic controls added 5.5%. Coping

styles explained no additional variance at all. Habit viewing was predicted significantly by

higher levels of television affinity and greater amounts of television exposure and marginally

significant (p=.051) by lower educational level (R2=.4 l, F(3, 139)= 12.16, p<.001 ).

Finally, demographics (9.4%) and especially television related controls (21.6%)

explained most of the variance in pass time viewing. Coping styles added only 2.9% to the

total explained variance. However, apart from younger age, lower educational level, higher

levels of affinity and greater amounts of television exposure, more use of social support

seeking predicted significantly pass time viewing (R2=.33, F(3, 139)=8.92, p<.001).

Furthermore, social support seeking was one of the three strongest predictors besides

television affinity and amount of exposure.

 Coping style and television viewing motives 15

Discussion

The aim of this study was to find out whether the way people cope with stressful I;
events affects their motives for watching television. Furthermore we wanted to test three

more specific but tentative hypotheses about the relationship between coping styles and

television viewing motives.

Overall, the block of coping styles explained significant portions of the variance in

three out of the seven viewing motives. Entertainment, companionship, information, escape,

arousal and pass time viewing all had one or two coping styles as significant predictors. With

regard to the general research question underlying this study it can be concluded that indeed

when dealing with a major stressful event like criminal victimization, coping styles to some

extent predict television viewing motives. 1

The majority of the proposed hypotheses were confirmed; as expected, more use of

avoidant coping strategies predicted escape viewing motivation and more use of social

support seeking predicted entertainment and arousal viewing. However, some very interesting

unexpected results emerged as well. Plausible explanations for some of these findings will be

put forward; however, each of these explanations needs further empirical testing.

First, hypothesis 2 was refuted. Information viewing motivation was not predicted by \
V.

problem-solving but, counterintuitively, by avoidant coping. The insignificance of problem-

solving as a predictor of information seeking is puzzling. However, a closer look at the

problem-solving items of the CSI suggests that the scale focuses mainly on behavioural

aspects of problem-solving coping. This may explain the insignificance of problem-solving as

a predictor of almost all viewing motives.

Second, more use of avoidant coping predicted television viewing for companionship./,

It has been found that avoidant capers tend to be poor social support seekers (Schwartz &

Kowalski, 1992); social support seeking is conceptualized as getting both social diversion
 Coping style and television viewing motives 16

and help, advice or information from friends or family (Amirkhan, 1990; Bijttebier &

Vertommen, 1997; Felsten, 1998; Frieze et al., 1987), while avoidant coping is specifically

characterized by social withdrawal (Scheppele & Bart, 1983). It could be hypothesised then,
--1
1
that even avoidant copers have a basic need of companionship and information in the

aftermath of the ordeal they went through; but since they do not turn to other people to satisfy

these basic needs, they may tum to television instead, which has the additional advantage that

they remain in control of the amount of information they expose themselves to.

Finally, social support seeking proved to be a significant predictor of companionship

and pass time viewing, but not of information viewing. Two explanations for these divergent

findings can be put forward. First, the tentative predictions made in hypothesis three are

based on previous research by Finn & Gorr (1988) into the relationship between viewing

motives and perceived social support; however, the present study deals with social support

seeking. It has been argued that crime victims are at risk of becoming socially isolated (Frieze

et al., 1987), since people may avoid them because they tend to see victims as responsible for

their victimization, consider them to be losers or generally feel uncomfortable in their vicinity

(Bard & Sangrey, 1986; Coates, Wortman & Abbey, 1979; Lerner, 1970; Silver, Wortman &

Crofton, 1990). Thus, despite their social support seeking effort, support seekers may receive

less support than usual, causing them to turn to television for more ritualistic purposes

(Rubin, 1984) like additional companionship and to pass time and less instrumental purposes

like information viewing. A second possible explanation is that social support seekers use this

strategy on all fronts, turning to family, friends and television for companionship. If this were

the case, however, one would also expect a positive relationship between social support

seeking and the information viewing motivation, which was not found.

A limitation to this study is the possible influence of the sample selection on the

reported coping styles. It has been noted that only a minority of crime victims report the
 Coping style and television viewing motives 17

event to the police (Frieze et al, 1987). The possibility that victims who report to the police

and/or the Victim Support Unit are somewhat more problem-solving or social support

seeking oriented than victims who do not report their experiences, needs to be considered.

The results presented here offer a number of suggestions for refinements that should

be addressed in future research. In order to obtain a more complete understanding of the

relationship between coping styles and television viewing motives, additional variables

should be studied; first, personality traits should be included. Previous research has reported

that personality traits are related to both media use (Conway & Rubin, 1991; Finn, 1997;

Potts et al., 1996) and coping styles (Lu, 1991; Parkes, 1984, 1986; Suls et al., 1996). Second,

distress levels should be taken into account. Not only is there a significant body of literature

relating coping styles to distress level (Felsten, 1998; Masel et al., 1996; Torestad et al.,

1990), but distress symptoms like, for example, depression have also been linked to media

use (Dittmar, 1994; Potts & Sanchez, 1994). Finally, apart from social support seeking,

measures of perceived social support should be included as well; this may give more insight

in the differences between the results in this study and the findings reported by Finn & Gorr

(1988).

Nevertheless, we believe the results of this study are worth mentioning in themselves,

since they add a new contribution to the exploration of the roots of television viewing

behaviour and may have uncovered some ramifications that have been overlooked until now.
 Coping style and television viewing motives 18

Footnotes

1. Item wording is paraphrased

2. In Belgium, police officers are legally bound to offer the assistance from a delegate

from the Victim Support Unit to persons who report having become victim of a crime

involving direct contact with the perpetrator or violation of the home. If this offer is accepted,

the VSU contacts the victim within five days of being notified.

3. 2.4% were victims or next of kin of victims of (attempted) murder/manslaughter;

5.2% were rape victims, 5.2% victims of indecent assault; 10% domestic assault victims,

21. 8% non-domestic assault victims; 14.2% stalking victims; 17 .5% robbery victims and

20.4% burglary victims; the remaining 3.3% were victims of other types of crime (e.g. false

allegations, destruction of property, ... ).

4. Item wording is paraphrased

 Coping style and television viewing motives 19

Table 1

Means, Standard Deviations and Cronbach Alpha Coefficients for

Coping Styles, Television Viewing Motives, Television Affinity and

Amount of Television Exposure.

Measures Mean so Cronbach Score

Alpha Range

Problem-solving 11.98 6.33 .91 0- 22

Avoidance 8.07 4.19 .75 0 - 18

Social Support Seeking 13.15 5.31 .86 0- 22

Entertainment 1.78 .99 .88 0-4

Companionship .92 1.00 .81 0-4

Information 1.03 .98 .83 0-4

Escape 1.28 1.03 .84 0-4

Arousal 1.08 .91 .86 0-4

Habit 1.52 1.18 .80 0-4

Pass time .89 .98 .80 0-4

Television Affinity 3.12 2.86 .74 0 - 12

Television Exposure 23.77 15.76 0 - 133

 Coping style and television viewing motives 20

Table 2

Principal Components Analysis of Television Viewing Motives: Item Factor Loadings; Oblimin

Rotation

Factor

Entertain- Companion- Infor- Escape Arousal Habit Pass

Item ment ship mation time

I watch television ...

Because I think it's relaxing .82

Because it's fun .79

Because it amuses me .78

Because I think it's pleasant .76

To feel less lonely .91

So I'm not alone .79

When there's no one else to talk to .61

To see how other people deal with .87

problems

To learn how I can prevent unpleasant .85

things

To learn about things I haven 't done .83

myself

To soothe my nerves -.87

To forget about my problems -.79

To forget the things I'm doing for a -.66

while
 Coping style and television viewing motives 21

Because it makes me calm down -.48

Because it's exciting -.88

Because it's suspenseful -.86

Because it cheers me up -.49

Because it's something I do every day -.77

Out of habit -.55

Out of boredom .76

In order to have something to do .72

Factor Correlations

Entertainment

Companionship .11

Information .23 .31

Escape .40 .54 .29

Arousal .68 .27 .34 .43

Habit .42 .37 .20 .30 .44

Pass time .31 .46 .04 .40 .38 .58

Note. Item wording is paraphrased.

 Coping style and television viewing motivations 22

Table 3

Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Television Viewing Motives Using Demographics, Television Affinity, Television Exposure and Coping Styles as predictors

Entertainment Companionship Information Escape Arousal Habit Pass time

p R2 ~R2 p R2 ~R2 p R2 ~R2 p R2 ~R2 p R2 ~R2 p R2 ~R2 p R2 ~R2

Block I .04 .07* .06* .13** .07* .05* .09*

Sex .05 .16* -.03 .18* -.06 .07 .08

Age -.18* .05 .21* -.14 -.25* -.04 -.15*

Educational level .04 -.15* -.01 -.07 -.08 -.14 -.17*

Block 2 .23** .19*** .25** .17** . II* .05* .29** .16** .34** .27** .41** .36** .31 ** .22**

Television Exposure .05 .17* .03 .06 .03 .28** .28**

Television Affinity .42*** .29** .17* .33** .50** .43** .27**

Block 3 .27** .04 .30** .05* .16** .06* .43** .14** .36** .02 .41** .00 .34** .03

Problem-solving -.19* -.08 .II -. 10 -.01 .02 -.15

Avoidance .05 .20* .20* .42** .05 -.03 .09

Social Support Seeking .20* .18* .03 .08 .15* -.01 .17

Note. Betas are standardized beta coefficients from final regression equations with all blocks of variables entered.

* p~.05 ** p~.01
 Coping style and television viewing motivations 23

References

American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental

Disorders, Fourth Edition (4th ed.). Washington, DC: APA.

Amirkhan, J. H. (1990). A factoranalytically derived measure of coping: The Coping Strategy

Indicator. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 1066-1074.

Anderson, D.R., Collins, P.A., Schmitt, K. L., & Jacobvitz, R. S. (1996). Stressful Life

Events and Television Viewing. Communication Research; 23(3), 243-261.

Bard, M., & Sangrey, D. (1986). The Crime Victim's Book. New York: Brunner/Mazel.

Bijttebier, P. & Vertommen, H. (1997). Psychometric properties of the Coping Strategy

Indicator in a Flemish sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 23(1), 157-

160.

Bijttebier, P. & Vertommen, H. (1999). Coping strategies in relation to personality disorders.

Personality and Individual Differences, 26, 847-856.

Billings, A. G., & Moos, R.H. (1981) The role of coping responses and social resources in

attenuating the impact of stressful life events. Journal of Behavioural Medicine, 4,

139-157.

Bryant, R. A., & Harvey, A. G. (1995). Avoidant coping style and post-traumatic stress

following motor vehicle accidents. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33(6), 631-635.

Canary, D. J., & Spitzberg, B. H. (1993). Loneliness and media gratifications.

Communication Research, 20(6), 800-822.

Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A

theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 267-

283.
 Coping style and television viewing motivations 24

Coates, D., Wortman, C. B., & Abbey, A. (1979). Reactions to victims. In I. H. Frieze, D.

Bar-Tai, & J. S. Carroll (Eds.), New approaches to social problems: Applications of

attribution theory (pp. 21-52). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Conway, J.C., & Rubin, A. M. (1991). Psychological Predictors of Television Viewing

Motivation. Communication Research, 18, 443-463.

Creamer, M., Burgess, P., Buckingham, W., & Pattison, P. (1990). A community based

mental health response to a multiple shooting. Australian Psychologist, 26(2), 99-102.

Dittmar, M. L. (1994). Relations among Depression, Gender, and Television Viewing of

-i
College Students. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 317-328.

Donohew, L., Palmgreen, P., Rayburn, J. D., II. (1987). Social and psychological origins of

media use: A lifestyle analysis. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 31,

255-278.

Dunmore, E., Clark, D.M., & Ehlers, A. (1999). Cognitive factors involved in the onset and

maintenance of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after physical or sexual assault.

Behaviour Research and therapy, 37, 809-829.

Felsten, G. (1998). Gender and Coping: Use of Distinct Strategies and Associations with

Stress and Depression. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 11, 289-309. 'I.
Finn, S. & Gorr, M.B. (1988). Social isolation and social support as correlates of television

viewing motivations. Communication Research, 15, 135-158.

Finn, S. (1997). origins of media exposure. Communication Research, 24, 507-529.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community

sample. Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, 21, 219-239.

Frieze, I. H., Hymer, S., & Greenberg, M. S. (1987). Describing the Crime Victim:

Psychological Reactions to Victimization. Professional Psychology: Research and

Practice, 18(4), 299-315.

 Coping style and television viewing motivations 25

Gibbs, M. S. (1989). Factors in the victim that mediate between disaster and

psychopathology: a review. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 2(4 ), 489-514.

Gieser, G. C., Green, B. L., & Winget, C. (1981). Prolonged psychological effects of

disaster: a study of Buffalo Creek. New York: Academic Press.

Greenberg, B. S. (197 4 ). Gratifications of television viewing and their correlates for British

children. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications:

Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp.71-92). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Harrison, C. A., & Kinner, S. A. (1998). Correlates of Psychological Distress Following

Armed Robbery. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 11(4), 787-798.

Janoff-Bulman, R. (1989). Assumptive Worlds and the Stress of Traumatic Events:

Applications of the Schema Construct. Social Cognition, 7, 113-136.

Jolliffe, I. T. (1972). Discarding variables in a principal component analysis, I: artificial data.

Applied statistics, 21, 160-173.

Jolliffe, I. T. (1986). Principal component analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Kamphuis, J. H., & Emmelkamp, P. M. G. (1998). Crime-Related Trauma: Psychological

Distress in Victims of Bankrobbery. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 12(3), 199-208.

Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the

individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications:

Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp.19-32). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Kilpatrick, D.G., Saunders, B., Amick-McMullan, A., Best, C.L., Veronen, L.J., & Resnick,

H.S. (1989). Victim and crime factors associated with the development of crime-

related post-traumatic stress disorder. Behavior Therapy, 20, 199-214.

Kleinke, C.L. (1988). The Depression Coping Questionnaire. Journal of Clinical Psychology,

44, 516-526.
 Coping style and television viewing motivations 26

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer-

Verlag.

Lerner, M. J. (1970). The desire for justice and reactions to victims. Social psychological

studies of some antecedents and consequences. In J. Macaulay & L. Berkowitz (Eds.),

Altruism and helping behavior (pp.205-229). New York: Academic Press.

Lu, L. (1991). Daily hassles and mental health: a longitudinal study. British Journal of

Psychology, 82, 441-447.

Mazel, C. N., Terry, D. J., & Gribble, M. (1996). The effects of coping on adjustment: Re-

examining the goodness of fit model of coping effectiveness. Anxiety, Stress and

Coping, 9, 279-300. 7
McFarlane, A. C. ( 1988). The phenomenology of posttraumatic stress disorders following a

natural disaster. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disorders, 176, 22-29.

McGuire, W. J. (1974). Psychological motives and communication gratification. In J. G.

Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on

gratifications research (pp.167-196). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

McQuail, D. (1997). Mass Communication Theory. An Introduction. London: Sage.

Palmgreen, P., Wenner, L. A., & Rosengren, K. E. (1985). Uses and gratifications research:

The past ten years. In K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner, P. Palmgreen (Eds.), Media

gratifications research: Current perspectives (pp. 11-37). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Parkes, K. R. ( 1984). Locus of Control, Cognitive Appraisal, and Coping in Stressful

Situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 655-668.

Parkes, K. R. (1986). Coping in stressful episodes: The role of individual differences,

environmental factors, and situational characteristics. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 51, 1277-1292.

 Coping style and television viewing motivations 27

Perse, E. M., (1994). Television Affinity Scale. In R. B. Rubin, P. Palmgreen & H. E. Sypher

(Eds.), Communication research measures: A sourcebook (pp. 367-370). New York,

NY: The Guilford Press.

Perse, E. M., (1994). Television Viewing Motives Scale. In R. B. Rubin, P. Palmgreen & H.

E. Sypher (Eds.), Communication research measures: A sourcebook (pp. 371-376).

New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Potts, R., Dedmon, A., & Halford, J. (1996). Sensation seeking, television viewing motives,

and home television viewing patterns. Personality and Individual Differences, 21(6),

1081-1084.

Potts, R., Sanchez, D. (1994). Television viewing and depression: no news is good news.

Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 38(1), 79-90.

Rohde, P., Lewinsohn, P. M., Tilson, M., & Seeley, J. R. (1990). Dimensionality of coping

and its relation to depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 499-

511.

Rubin, A. M. ( 1981 ). An examination of television viewing motives, Communication

Research, 8, 141-165.

Rubin, A. M. (1983). Television uses and gratifications: The interactions of viewing patterns

and motivations. Journal of Broadcasting, 27, 37-51.

Rubin, A. M. (1984). Ritualized and instrumental television viewing. Journal of

Communication, 34(3), 67-77.

Rubin, A. M. (1986). Uses, gratifications, and media effects research. In J. Bryant & D.

Zillmann (Eds.), Perspectives on media effects (pp. 281-301). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum.

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

local television news viewing. Human Communication Research, 12, 155-180.

 Coping style and television viewing motivations 28

Scheppele, K. L., & Bart, P. B. (1983). Through women's eyes: Defining danger in the wake

of sexual assault. Journal of Social Issues, 39(2), 63-80.

Schwartz, E. D., & Kowalski, J.M. (1992). Malignant memories. Reluctance to utilize health

services after a disaster. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 180, 767-772.

Shearer, A. (1991). Survivors and the Media. London: Broadcasting Standards Council

London.

Silver, R.C., Wortman, C.B., & Crofton, C. (1990). The role of coping in support provision:

The self-presentational dilemma of victims of life crises. In B.R. Sarason, LG.

Sarason, & G.R. Pierce (Eds.), Social support: An interactional view (pp.397-426).

New York: Wiley.

Suls, J., David, J.P., & Harvey, J. H. (1996). Personality and Coping: Three Generations of

Research. Journal of Personality, 64(4), 711-735.

Torestad, B., Magnusson, D., & Olah, A. (1990). Coping, Control, and Experience of

Anxiety: an Interactional Perspective. Anxiety Research, 3, 1-16.

Wirtz, P. W., & Harrell, A. V. (1987). Victim and Crime Characteristics, Coping Responses,

and Short- and Long-term Recovery from Victimization. Journal of Consulting and

Clinical Psychology, 55(6), 866-871.

Zillmann, D. & Bryant, J. (1985) Affect, mood, and emotion as determinants of selective

exposure. In D. Zillmann & J. Bryant (Eds.), Selective exposure to communication

(pp. 157-190). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.