Cover not available
Article published In:
Scientific Study of Literature
Vol. 7:1 (2017) ► pp.109–128

Mediated relationships with TV characters

The effects of perceived and actual similarity in personality traits

 | University of Haifa
 | University of Haifa
Five TV actors completed the Big Five personality scale for a character they played on a popular Israeli TV comedy. Viewers of each of these series completed the same scales both for themselves and as they thought the characters would have completed them. They then completed parasocial relationship and identification scales with respect to the same character. Perceived and measured similarity scores (i.e., using the actors’ scores) were computed for each viewer-character pair. These similarity scores were then used to predict both parasocial relationship strength and the degree of identification. Results show that perceived and measured similarity are mostly unrelated and that perceived similarity, but not measured similarity, is related to parasocial relationships and identification. Implications of these results for mediated relationships theory and measurement validity are discussed.
Keywords: identification, parasocial relationships, mediated relationships, perceived similarity, media characters, character-audience similarity
Article outline
  • Similarity, identification, and parasocial relationships
    • Parasocial relationships
      • Identification
  • Similarity and perceived similarity
  • External and internal similarity
  • Hypotheses
  • Method
    • Overview
    • Sample
    • The characters
    • Measures
      • The Five Factor Model (FFM)
  • Results
    • Preliminary analysis
    • Hypotheses testing
  • Discussion
    • Perceived similarity is not a proxy for similarity
  • Differences between parasocial relationships and identification
    • Limitations and future direction
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 23 November 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.7.1.05coh
References (44)
References
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Media psychology, 3(3), 265–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Branch, S. E., Wilson, K. M., & Agnew, C. R. (2013). Committed to Oprah, Homer, or House: Using the investment model to understand parasocial relationships. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 2(2), 96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., & Livi, S. (1994). Mapping personality dimensions in the Big Five model. European Review of Applied Psychology, 441, 9–15.Google Scholar
Cohen, E. L. (2010). Expectancy violations in relationships with friends and media figures. Communication Research Reports, 27(2), 97–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication & Society, 4(3), 245–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009). Mediated Relationships and Media Effects: Parasocial Interaction and Identification. In R. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Media Processes and Effects (pp. 223–236). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Cohen, J., Weimann-Saks, D. & Mazor-Tregerman, M. (2017). Does Character Similarity Increase Identification and Persuasion? Media Psychology, 1–>23, Published online: 04 Apr 2017. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cole, T., & Leets, L. (1999). Attachment styles and intimate television viewing: Insecurely forming relationships in a parasocial way. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16(4), 495–511. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-P) and NEO five factor inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Costa, P. T., McCrae, R. R., & Dye, D. A. (1991). Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness: a revision of the NEO personality inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 12(9), 887–898. DOI logo.Google Scholar
De Graaf, A. (2014). The Effectiveness of Adaptation of the Protagonist in Narrative Impact: Similarity Influences Health Beliefs through Self‐Referencing. Human Communication Research, 40(1), 73–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eyal, K., & Rubin, A. M. (2003). Viewer aggression and homophily, identification, and parasocial relationships with television characters. Journal of Broadcasting& Electronic Media, 47(1), 77–98. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Etzion, D., & Laski, S. (1998). The “Big Five” Inventory – Hebrew Version by Permission. Tel Aviv University, Faculty of management, the Institute of Business Research.Google Scholar
Eyal, K., & Dailey, R. M. (2012). Examining relational maintenance in parasocial relationships. Mass Communication and Society, 15(5), 758–781. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Funder, D. C. (2001). Annual review of psychology. Personality, 521, 197–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feilitzen, C., and Linné, O. (1975). Identifying with television characters. Journal of Communication, 25(4), 51–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychology, 4(3), 279–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, T., & Goldhoorn, C. (2011). Horton and Wohl revisited: Exploring viewers’ experience of parasocial interaction. Journal of communication, 61(6), 1104–1121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoeken, H., Kolthoff, M., & Sanders, J. (2016). Story Perspective and Character Similarity as Drivers of Identification and Narrative Persuasion. Article first published online: 2 FEB 2016, Human Communication Research. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffner, C. (1996). Children’s wishful identification and parasocial interaction with favorite television characters. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40(3), 389–402. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffner, C., & Cantor, J. (1991). Perceiving and responding to mass media characters. In J. Bryant and D. Zillmann (Eds.), Responding to the screen: Reception and reaction processes (pp. 63–101). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. London, United Kingdom: Penguin.Google Scholar
Kaufman, G. F., Libby, L. K. (2012). Changing beliefs and behavior through experience-taking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(1), 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klimmt, C., Hartmann, T., & Schramm, H. (2006). Parasocial interactions and relationships. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.). Psychology of entertainment, (PP. 291–313), Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Konjin, E. A., Nije Bijvank, M., & Bushman, B. J. (2007). I wish I were a warrior: the role of wishful identification in the effects of violent video games on aggression in adolescent boys. Developmental Psychology, 43(4), 1038. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maccoby, E. E. & Wilson, W. C. (1957). Identification and observational learning from films. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 55(1), 76–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2008). The five-factor theory of personality. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins & L. A. Pervin (eds.). Handbook of personality: Theory and research (third edition) (pp. 159–181). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
McKinley, C. J. (2010). Examining dimensions of character involvement as contributing factors in television viewers’ binge drinking perceptions. Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Arizona. Retrieved from [URL]
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual review of sociology, 271, 415–444. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mount, M. K., & Barrick, M. R., (1995). The Big Five Personality dimensions: Implications for research and practice in human resources management. Research in Personality and Human Resource Management, 131, 153–200.Google Scholar
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. Handbook of personality: Theory and research, 2(1999), 102–138.Google Scholar
Perse, E. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1989). Attribution in social and parasocial relationships. Communication Research, 16(1), 59–77. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Pervin, L. A. (1989). Personality: Theory and research. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Rubin, R. B., & McHugh, M. P. (1987). Development of parasocial interaction relationships. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 31(3), 279–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rubin, A. M., Perse, E. M., & Powell, R. A. (1985). Loneliness, parasocial interaction, and local television news viewing. Human Communication Research, 12(2), 155–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schramm, H., & Wirth, W. (2015). Testing a universal tool for measuring parasocial interactions across different situations and media. Journal of Media Psychology, 22(1), pp. 26–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silvia, P. J. (2005). Deflecting reactance: The role of similarity in increasing compliance and reducing resistance. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27(3), 277–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simons, H. W., Berkowitz, N. N., & Moyer, R. J. (1970). Similarity, credibility, and attitude change: A review and a theory. Psychological Bulletin, 73(1), 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tian, Q., & Hoffner, C. A. (2010). Parasocial interaction with liked, neutral, and disliked characters on a popular TV series. Mass Communication and Society, 13(3), 250–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tukachinsky, R. (2014). Experimental Manipulation of Psychological Involvement with Media. Communication Methods and Measures, 8(1), 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tukachinsky, R., & Tokunaga, R. S. (2013). The effects of engagement with entertainment. In E. L. Cohen (Ed.), Communication yearbook 37 (pp. 287–321). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Turner, J. R. (1991). Interpersonal and psychological predictors of parasocial interaction with different television performers. Communication Quarterly, 41(4), 443–453. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, B. J. (2007). Designing media messages about health and nutrition: what strategies are most effective? Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 39(2), S13–S19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (16)

Cited by 16 other publications

Brooks, John J., Christopher M. Dobmeier & Nathan Walter
2024. “How Do We Put the Country Back Together?” Mitigating Affective Polarization Through Mediated Intergroup Contact. Mass Communication and Society ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Ferchaud, Arienne, Ashley Johns & Emory S. Daniel
2024. Beloved Bingeable Breakups? The Impact of Binge Watching on Retrospective Imaginative Involvement, Parasocial Relationships, and Parasocial Breakups. Media Psychology ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Huang, Kate Y., Helene H. Fung & Peifeng Sun
2024. The effect of audience–character similarity on identification with narrative characters: A meta-analysis. Current Psychology 43:8 ► pp. 7026 ff. DOI logo
Lin, Sheng-Wei & Chia-Ding Huang
2024. Hooked on audio! Unveiling the secrets of podcast stickiness through social identity and uses and gratification theories. Technology in Society 76 ► pp. 102422 ff. DOI logo
Marple, Catherine A. & Marina Krcmar
2024. Exploring the effects of similarity in basic needs on moral judgment of characters. Communication Research Reports 41:3 ► pp. 131 ff. DOI logo
Olbermann, Zoe, Hannah Schrand & Holger Schramm
2024. You Are So Much Like Me—You Just Have to Tell the Truth: Impact of User-Influencer Similarity on Parasocial Interactions in the Perception of Diversity Washing in Advertising. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising 45:4 ► pp. 456 ff. DOI logo
Żerebecki, Bartosz G., Suzanna J. Opree, Joep Hofhuis & Susanne Janssen
2024. Beyond Perceived Similarity: Development and Validation of the Character Recognizability Scale (CRS). Mass Communication and Society 27:5 ► pp. 1220 ff. DOI logo
Żerebecki, Bartosz G., Suzanna J. Opree & Joep Hofhuis
2024. Mediated Contact with LGBTQ Characters: Associations Between Recognizability, Parasocial Friendship, Wishful Identification, and LGBTQ Prejudice. Communication Studies ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Möri, Michelle & Andreas Fahr
2023. Parasocial interactions with media characters: the role of perceived and actual sociodemographic and psychological similarity. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Igartua, Juan-José, Alejandro González-Vázquez & Carlos Arcila-Calderón
2022. Using testimonial narratives to persuade people about artificial intelligence: the role of attitudinal similarity with the protagonist of the message. El Profesional de la información DOI logo
Igartua, Juan-José & Iñigo Guerrero-Martín
2022. Personal migrant stories as persuasive devices: Effects of audience–character similarity and narrative voice. Journal of Social and Political Psychology 10:1 ► pp. 21 ff. DOI logo
Ma, Zexin
2022. The use of immersive stories to influence college students’ attitudes and intentions related to drinking and driving. Journal of American College Health 70:7 ► pp. 2042 ff. DOI logo
Żerebecki, Bartosz G., Esther van der Vliet & Julia Kneer
2022. I Want to Be You(r Friend): An Investigation of the Effects of Gendered Personality Traits on Engagement with Different Modern Family Characters. Journalism and Media 3:2 ► pp. 362 ff. DOI logo
Guerrero-Martín, Iñigo & Juan-José Igartua
2021. Reduction of prejudice toward unaccompanied foreign minors through audiovisual narratives. Effects of the similarity and of the narrative voice. El profesional de la información DOI logo
Tukachinsky, Riva, Nathan Walter & Camille J Saucier
2020. Antecedents and Effects of Parasocial Relationships: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Communication 70:6 ► pp. 868 ff. DOI logo
Holladay, Holly Willson & Amanda Nell Edgar
2019. ‘I’m never gonna stop watching it’: The paradox of parasocial break-ups in a post-object era. Journal of Fandom Studies, The 7:3 ► pp. 213 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.