View
309
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
It’s Fun! But is it Effective?:The Appreciation, Processing, and Persuasiveness
of Political Satire
Boukes, MarkBoomgaarden, HajoMoorman, MarjoleinDe Vreese, Claes
San Juan (PR), 22 May 2015ICA 65th Annual Conference
Political Communication Division:The Effects of Entertainment Media and Satire (3735)
2
Political satire’s democratic contribution
Humor is created by incongruity new ways of looking at political matters make the “taken-for-granted” less self-explanatory
Previous studies on political satire: Often found persuasive
effects that were often insignificant or rather weak.
Why?
3
Conceptual framework
4
Hypothesis 1a: Perceived funniness
When do people laugh about satire?
Literature:
a) always (e.g., Colbert Report, de Tegenpartij)
(selective procesing)
selectively processing it
in a non-threatening
manner
selectively processing it
in a non-threatening
manner
5
Hypothesis 1a: Perceived funniness
When do people laugh about satire?
Literature:
a) always; think of Colbert Report, de Tegenpartij
(selective procesing)
b) only when it is not threatening one’s self-image, i.e. when
it is in line with one’s political preferences (disposition theory)
selectively processing it
in a non-threatening
manner
selectively processing it
in a non-threatening
manner
6
Hypothesis 1a: Perceived funniness
When do people laugh about satire?
Literature:
a) always; think of Colbert Report, de Tegenpartij
(selective procesing)
b) only when it is not threatening one’s self-image, i.e. when
it is in line with one’s political preferences. (disposition theory)
7
Hypothesis 1a: Perceived funniness
When do people laugh about satire?
Literature:
a) always; think of Colbert Report, de Tegenpartij
(selective procesing)
b) only when it is not threatening one’s self-image, i.e. when
it is in line with one’s political preferences. (disposition theory)
To realize this,
the message needs to be overly clear
or
people need background information to “correctly” interpret the satire
To realize this,
the message needs to be overly clear
or
people need background information to “correctly” interpret the satire
Hypothesis 1b: Message discounting
Humorous messages: less credible less informational
Should not be used in serious considerations
The funnier the more counterarguing
8
Hypothesis 2a: Absorption
(The promise of) humor increases engagement with the message. hope to be rewarded with a laugh humor comprehension involves high cognitive loads
Emerging adults (<30) more absorbed in satire than in news: Need to develop world-views Feeling in between childhood and adulthood Self-focused
9
Hypothesis 2b: Decreased resistance
Absorption and processing satire: When absorped in fiction it’s hard and unnecessary to be
critical Enjoying satire and scrutinizing content are not compatible High cognitive loads of satire, no resources remain to
counterargue
Absorption less counterarguing more persuasive
10
11
Conceptual framework
Method
Online experiment.
5 conditions: non-humorous news item (n = 53) gentle satire item (n = 52) harsh satire item (n = 58) background information and gentle satire item (n = 56) background information and the harsh satire item (n = 49)
Created by Sander van de Pavert (LuckyTV)
12
13
Harsh satire condition
14
Background knowledge
Results
χ2 (90) = 110.36, p = .071,
CFI >.99
SRMR = 0.04,
RMSEA = .03, 90% CI [.00, .05].
15
16
Results 1a: Perceived funniness
Results 2a: Absorption
17
1b & 2b: Attitude effects
18
Independent variable Dependent variable B (SE) p
Perceived funniness Counterarguing 0.07 0.02 .000
Absorption Counterarguing-
0.160.05 .001
Age Counterarguing-
0.050.04 .262
Existing preference Counterarguing 0.09 0.02 .000
Counterarguing Attitude (satirized) 0.34 0.15 .025
Existing preference Attitude (satirized) 0.39 0.06 .000
Age Attitude (satirized)-
0.030.01 .004
1b & 2b: Attitude effects
19
Independent variable Dependent variable B (SE) p
Perceived funniness Counterarguing 0.07 0.02 .000
Absorption Counterarguing-
0.160.05 .001
Age Counterarguing-
0.050.04 .262
Existing preference Counterarguing 0.09 0.02 .000
Counterarguing Attitude satirized 0.34 0.15 .025
Existing preference Attitude satirized 0.39 0.06 .000
Age Attitude satirized-
0.030.01 .004
Conclusions
A persuasive effect (absorption) and discounting effect
(perceived funniness) at the same time = null effect
Insight when satire is perceived funny: In line with preferences or background knowledge
lacking
Insight in who more is engaged with political satire Emerging adults (<30)
20
It’s Fun! But is it Effective?:The Appreciation, Processing, and
Persuasiveness of Political Satire
Accepted for publication as:
Boukes, M., Boomgaarden, H. G., Moorman, M., & De Vreese, C. H. (forthcoming). Journal of Communication. At Odds: Laughing and Thinking? The Appreciation, Processing, and Persuasiveness of Political Satire.