a e j m c morality culture and morality ( nick bowman)
DESCRIPTION
Abstract: While nationality is often considered a proxy measure for culture, it is also the case that understanding morality subcultures within and across different nationalities might be a more robust approach to understanding variance in these audiences’ reactions to media. This discussion will explain the root of cultural differences in terms of differences in moral codes which may or may not be reflected by one’s nationality, and how this approach – using moral salience to better understand cultural differences – is currently being applied to understanding differences in audience preference for and reactions to various media products.TRANSCRIPT
Panel presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, St. Louis, August 14, 2011.
Nicholas David Bowman, Ph.D.
Sven Jöckel, Dr. phil.Leyla Dogruel
Implications of cross-cultural differences in
moral salience for multi-national media psychology research
Session Overview
• Four main questions:– What is culture? – How does it vary?– How does morality explain this variance?– How does this variance influence media
psychology research?
• Discussion rooted in MIME (Tamborini, 2011)
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 2
What is culture?
• “Collective programming of the mind” (Hofstede, 2001)
• Shared value structures• Learned through:
– Socialization – Narratives of our people – Non-mediated environment
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 3
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 4
How does it vary?
• As narratives vary, so does culture
• Culture can be understood in terms of shared values
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 5
Morality’s explanation of ∆ culture
• Different stories emphasize different values – Care/harm– Fairness/reciprocity– Authority/respect– Ingroup/loyalty – Purity/sanctity
• Different patterns lead us to a definition of morality subcultures (Zillmann, 2000)
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 6
∆ Culture and Media Psychology
• Morality is central to understanding media consumption and production
• Both provided in MIME (Tamborini, 2011)
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 7
MIME (Tamborini, 2011)
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 8
Automatic Response
• Attention • Positive/Negative response to Adhering/Violating content
Automatic Response
• Attention • Positive/Negative response to Adhering/Violating content
Appraise/Rationalize
• Accept/Reject need to violate one foundation in order to conform to another
Appraise/Rationalize
• Accept/Reject need to violate one foundation in order to conform to another
Patterns of Selective Exposure
Patterns of Selective Exposure
Mass Production of
Domain-Adhering Media
Mass Production of
Domain-Adhering Media
Non-Mediated Cultural
Environment
Non-Mediated Cultural
Environment
Exposure to Domain-
Adhering Media
Exposure to Domain-
Adhering Media
Exemplar Salience
Exemplar Salience
Domain SalienceDomain Salience
Consumption ProcessConsumption Process
MIME (Tamborini, 2011)
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 9
Automatic Response
• Attention • Positive/Negative response to Adhering/Violating content
Automatic Response
• Attention • Positive/Negative response to Adhering/Violating content
Appraise/Rationalize
• Accept/Reject need to violate one foundation in order to conform to another
Appraise/Rationalize
• Accept/Reject need to violate one foundation in order to conform to another
Patterns of Selective Exposure
Patterns of Selective Exposure
Mass Production of
Domain-Adhering Media
Mass Production of
Domain-Adhering Media
Non-Mediated Cultural
Environment
Non-Mediated Cultural
Environment
Exposure to Domain-
Adhering Media
Exposure to Domain-
Adhering Media
Exemplar Salience
Exemplar Salience
Domain SalienceDomain Salience
Production ProcessProduction Process
Evidence in support of macro
• Content-side: English vs. Spanish soaps (Mastro et al., 2011)
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 10
Evidence in support of macro
• Content-side: English vs. Spanish soaps (Mastro et al., 2011)
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 11
Evidence in support of macro
• Content-side: English vs. Spanish soaps (Mastro et al., 2011)
•
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 12
Evidence in support of macro
• Audience-side: German vs. US media appeal
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 13
German US Overall
Harm/Care* 4.65 (.62) 4.45 (.80) 4.60 (.69)
Fairness* 4.74 (.54) 4.47 (.70) 4.66 (.60)
Authority* 3.47 (.72) 4.14 (.79) 3.67 (.80)
Loyalty* 3.42 (.60) 4.09 (.83) 3.61 (.74)
Purity* 2.82 (.83) 3.64 (1.04) 3.06 (.97)
Evidence in support of macro
• Audience-side: German vs. US media appeal
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 14
β from Nationality
β from Morality
Movies
Comedy .190 .214
Drama .131 .325(C)*
Action .215 .142
TV
Comedy .178 .199
Documentary -.122 .307(C)*
News -.312 .439* [.528(C)]
Implications
• What is culture as a variable? – Cross- national research suggests values >
nationality in explaining media appeal – Intra-national research suggests values > social
identity in explaining media content– ∆ in content = ∆ in values– Culture as value salience:
• More robust indicator• More accurate indicator• More interesting indicator?
* (c) ND Bowman, 2011 15