What was the rationale for the current research (the answer to this should often include previous literature or theory)?
Questions
What was the rationale for the current research (the answer to this should often include previous literature or theory)?
– limited literature on the subject of combining humor/violence
– comedic programming has more violence per hour than other programs (Potter & Warren 1998)
– humor being used to trivialize violence (Potter & Warren 1998)
– trivialized violence is the most likely to be imitated
– humor has a significant negative correlation with the perceived violence in a program (Sander 1997)
– perps of violence in tv programs use humor to dehumanize victims to undermine emotional responses from viewers (Bandura 1990)
What is the current hypothesis (or hypotheses if there are more than 1)?
When combined with humor, viewers will be desensitized to violent acts. Furthermore, this desensitization will cause viewers to engage in violent behavior.
How many participants were in the study? Describe the group of participants (gender, age, race, religion).
3 participants as judges: 30 year old male customer service rep, 29 year old female social worker and 63 year old female former academic administrator in a college
Describe the procedure. In other words, what happened to the participants from the time they began the study until the time it ended. Make sure to include any measures (surveys or questionnaires) and/or materials (technology or props).
– years chosen: ‘05, ‘07, ‘09
– tv slot: Superbowl
– why SB: consumers more likely to watch ads as opposed to ffw or flip channel (McAllister 1999); rel. Between company stock prices and viewership during SB is positive (Kim & Morris 2003)
– promos for not for profit orgs and networks not included; 180 commercials chosen
– judges assessed ads for 3 factors: humor, violence or both (combined and not combined)
– judges agreed 82% of the time and their ratings were averaged out for each factor in each commercial
– popularity ratings for each commercial were obtained publicly (USA TODAY) and privately (company sponsor data)
– violence/humor were defined for the purpose of this project
– judges classified remorse of perp, if act was harmful to victim, if perp was punished, if violent act was rewarded, if consumer would identify with perp
Did the data support or fail to support the hypothesis (or hypotheses)?
– data supported hypothesis
