Mass Media And Interpersonal Channels - Case Study Example

Mass Media And Interpersonal Channels The premise of the study centers on the theory that “mass-media-generated interpersonal communication networks vary according to an individual’s behavior-change stage.” .Valente 1977. This primarily centers on changes provoked by individual’s developing levels of sophistication, insight and knowledge in areas meeting their interests and needs. In common terms this suggests that people will shift from their present communications network into others that specifically make possible communications that resonate with outcomes in their developing enhanced or altered states of behavior. A firm recognition of the inexorable links between interpersonal and mass communication is at the root of communication researcher’s investigations. However, little is known of how the two modes of communication interact. In the survey paper it’s cited that opinion leadership “varies with stage of behavior change and how opinion leadership interacts with information seeking behavior” This area of consideration has largely been neglected in studies of interpersonal and mass communication, and how stages of behavioral change impact opinion leadership’s affect on information seeking behavior. What is opinion leadership? “Opinion leadership is a social phenomenon that affects the way a message is perceived because of the social interaction of the receivers.” http://www.ciadvertising.org/student_account/spring_02/adv382j/ortega/Index.htm. “The opinion leader is the agent who is an active media user and who interprets the meaning of media messages or content for lower-end media users. Typically the opinion leader is held in high esteem by those that accept their opinions…” http://www.answers.com/topic/opinion-leadership The bulk of mass communication studies have largely focused on how to employ mass media to disseminate information to influence behavior. The shortcomings in research have been failing to survey audiences in context of behavioral change and how its process influences their choice of sources of information. In any social group, there can be little or no equality in awareness, knowledge or exposure to an area of information from mass media. Therein, a social group may exist with no opinion leadership in any particular area involving mass media information dissemination. At any given time, based on the emergence of a concern or interest in a mass media dissemination opinion leadership is engendered in the process of behavioral change serving as the compass giving direction to its process. There are mass media campaigns purposed to affect behavioral change in health or social problems in particular communities. An existing social dilemma may have a stifling effect on the life of a community. Without options providing viable outcomes for behavioral change opinion leaders have little more to do than steer and keep a discussion open. In those situations, there can be little or no effectual behavioral change. Mass communication incorporated in outreach campaigns promotes options to focus behaviors to improve the quality of life. Community based organizations have the benefit of access to mass media through public service announcements, relationships with other providers and their own outreach to generate interpersonal communications on issues that have significant implications to the life of a target population. While there is an inexorable link between mass communications and interpersonal communications, there remains a lack of clarity on points aforementioned, 1. The variance of interpersonal communication networks that may be generated by mass media communications 2. The stage of behavior change and how opinion leadership interacts with information seeking behavior” According to the project article “Media campaign research affirms that campaigns often generate interpersonal communication about a topic (e.g., Valente, Kim, Lettenmaier, Glass, & Dibba, 1994; Vaughan, Swalehe, & Rogers, 1995). Few studies, however, have measured whether the interpersonal communication was generated specically by the campaign or with whom the communication occurred.” This is an inherent problem to research measuring outcomes in information dissemination alone. “Indeed, there has been a lack of cross-fertilization between mass media and interpersonal communication research (Barnett & Danowski, 1992; Chaffee, 1982; Hawkins, Wiemann, & Pingree, 1988; Reardon & Rogers, 1988; Rice, Borgman, & Reeves, 1988).” In light of this issue diffusion-of-innovation studies have taken account the different roles of the mass media and interpersonal communication (Lin & Burt, 1975; Valente, 1993). Diffusion of innovations models assume “the mass media are effective at bringing about awareness of innovations, but interpersonal communication is effective at bringing about adoption. Diffusion theorists have created network models of diffusion that account both implicitly and explicitly for the distinct roles of mass and interpersonal communication.“ (Coleman, Katz, & Menzel, 1966, Rogers and Kincaid, 1981; Valente, 1965). Even so, efforts to comprehend behavioral change stages in relation to mass communication and how these influence social group’s choices of information remain obscure. What findings that have been derived from studies of the interaction between mass media and interpersonal communication have yielded some results that appear to be coherent and applicable to the survey questions. 1. Individuals further along in the adoption of behavior processes will have higher media message recall. 2. Mass media are effective at disseminating information that makes people aware and knowledgeable about innovations. Interpersonal communication about those innovations (both informal and technical) is associated with more rapid change. Mass media and interpersonal communication models are liable to be incapable of developing a definitive theory that circumscribes the influence of opinion leadership on behavior change stages. This is due to what may well be an infinite complex of variables that are possible to comprise the make up of a group of persons, the particular individual who would provide opinion leadership and what areas of interest are enlivened by a mass media campaign. Our society is extraordinarily diverse. In some areas the dynamics of the cultural and psycho-emotional reality of respective people’s experience are stark in their distinction. Social interactions occur on planes of cultural reference that can be too distant from any mean value to develop a viable working model that can have any predictive power to describe how opinion leadership will impinge on behavioral change under the influence of mass media campaigns. In the early times of the HIV scare infected White homosexual men were showing up in hospitals in significant numbers. The lack of knowledge of the causes and means to prevent/intervene the disease were largely unknown. The only certainty to it was what would be the outcome. Massive mass media campaigns were mounted to educate and to stimulate strategies to impact the onslaught of the disease. Funds were shoveled into the creation of community-based organizations and a steady flow of information was generated to provide what education was available on the disease. For some time the problem was only associated with White gay men, as were efforts to intervene. It didn’t take long before the incidence levels of HIV among the White gay population began to fall and those of minorities began to rise. Today, in their communities are the highest incidence levels, where there is the least tolerance for homosexuality. And, despite mass media and a wealth of interpersonal communications focusing on HIV, the lowest levels of behavioral change are in evidence. In many ways dynamics of interpersonal communications are defiant for measure, whereas understanding of the dynamics of interactions in communications are practically self evident. Works Cited Valente, T. W., Kim, Y. M., Lettenmaier, C., Glass, W., & Dibba, Y. (1994). Radio and the promotion of family planning in the Gambia. International Family Perspectives Planning, 20(3), 96–100. Vaughan, P., Swalehe, R., & Rogers, E. M. (1995, April). Effects of an entertainment education radio soap opera on HIV/AIDS preventive and family planning adoption in Tanzania. Paper presented at the Boston Health Communication Conference. Vaughan, Swalehe, & Rogers, 1995). Barnett, G. A., & Danowski, J. A. (1992). The structure of communication: Anetwork analysis of the International Communication Association. Human Communication Research, 19(2), 264–285. Barnett & Danowski, 1992; Chaffee, S. H. (1982). Mass media and interpersonal channels: Competitive, convergent, or complementary? In G. Gumbert & R. Cathart (Eds.), Inter/media: Interpersonal communication in a media world. New York: Oxford University Press. Hawkins, R., Wiemann, J., & Pingree, S. (1988). Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal processes. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Reardon, K. K., & Rogers, E. M. (1988). Interpersonal versus mass media communication: A false dichotomy? Human Communication Research, 15, 284–303. Rice, R. E., Borgman, C. L., & Reeves, B. (1988). Citation networks of communication journals, 1977– 1985: Cliques and positions, citations made and citations received. Human Communication Research, 15, 256–283. Lin, N., & Burt, R. S. (1975). Differential effects of information channels in the process of innovation diffusion. Social Forces, 54, 256–274. Coleman, J., Katz, E., & Menzel, H. (1966). Medical innovation: Adiffusion study. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merril. Rogers, E. M., & Kincaid, D. L. (1981). Communication networks: A new paradigm for research. New York: Free Press. http://www.ciadvertising.org/student_account/spring_02/adv382j/ortega/Index.htm. http://www.answers.com/topic/opinion-leadership Read More