Play it again, Sam. The role of familiarity and novelty in enjoyment of remixed media
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
2 gefällt mir•1,830 views
Overview of psychological concepts of novelty and familiarity in regards to enjoyment and interest of remixed/remade/mashup/blended media content. Touches on novelty, familiarity, mere exposure effect, curiosity, perceptual fluency, variety, mystery, conflict, enjoyment, appreciation, and interest.
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (16)
Ähnlich wie Play it again, Sam. The role of familiarity and novelty in enjoyment of remixed media
Ähnlich wie Play it again, Sam. The role of familiarity and novelty in enjoyment of remixed media (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Play it again, Sam. The role of familiarity and novelty in enjoyment of remixed media
- 1. Play it again... novelty versus familiarity as a predictor of enjoyment and interest Allison Eden Department of Communication Science VU University Amsterdam 01/08/2013 Summer School in Media and Communications: Repeat Remix Remediate – Modes and Norms of Digital Media Repurposing Hamburg
- 2. Basic question Why do we enjoy mashup/remixed/blended media?
- 3. Enjoyment • Enjoyment is “having been placed in a lingering, highly desirable mood state.” 3 Zillmann, 2003, p. 553
- 4. Psychology of Aesthetic Experience
- 6. Familiarity • “a warm glow” James • ‘a glow or warmth, a sense of ownership, a feeling of intimacy, a sense of being at home, a feeling of ease, a comfortable feeling’ (Titchener, 1910, p.408)
- 7. Preference • People have a general preference for familiar events, art, content, stories
- 9. Nostalgia
- 10. Repetition = Satiation • Repetition = satiation = less enjoyment Ratner, Kahn, & Kahneman, 1999 Experiment 1
- 12. Perceptual Fluency Misattribution • Exposure to a stimulus increases processing fluency (i.e., speed and efficiency) for the stimulus – Positive valence – High fluency = safe environment • When the perceiver has no explicit memory for the stimulus, fluency is misattributed as liking • After many exposures, the perceiver becomes aware of the source of fluency and no longer attributes it to liking.
- 13. Familiarity and Liking Familiarity L i k i n g Optimal Familiarity
- 15. Novelty • ‘novel’ – Oxford English Dictionary as ‘interestingly new or unusual’ – Latin word ‘novellus’, which comes from ‘novus’, which simply means ‘new’
- 16. Novelty and Threat • A novel stimulus has a high arousal potential because it is a possible threat or possible reward (but probably threat)
- 17. International Affective Picture System (IAPS)
- 19. Novelty and Attention to Threat • Exposure with benign consequences reduces the threat of the stimulus – lowering its arousal potential to a more optimal level – generating a more positive affective response • Over-exposure leads to further reductions in arousal potential below optimum levels
- 21. 21
- 23. Berlyne’s Collative Variables of Curiosity Appeal • Novelty – Lacks the quality of previous experience • Complexity – Extent to which parts represent the whole • Uncertainty – The probability that a specific event will occur • Conflict – When two or more incompatible responses are aroused simultaneously in an organism
- 24. Complexity
- 26. Uncertainty
- 27. Enjoyment from Uncertainty Reduction: Mysteries • Something has happened! • Viewer suspicion of guilt changes over time - joy increases with variance in uncertainty Uncertainty Model Surprise Model Confirmation Model
- 28. Literary Mashup as Uncertainty Reduction
- 29. Conflicting Needs: Enjoyment versus Appreciation • Entertainment theory divides appeal into – Enjoyment (pure pleasure) – Appreciation (…) • Appreciation – Meaningfulness (Oliver & Bartsch, 2010) • “thinking about human virtues” – Satisfaction of higher-order needs (Vorderer, 2011) • “a conflict between the heart and the head”
- 30. Lewis & Tamborini, 2012 Study 1 • Stimuli: – 12 short narratives • Three types of story endings: – All positive – Mixed positive – All negative
- 31. Response Time Results: Conflict = Deliberation
- 32. Lewis & Tamborini 2012 Exp 2 Appreciation Enjoyment
- 33. Conflicting needs: Now vs Later Ratner et al 1999 Experiment 4
- 34. New -Risky -Arousing -Need to know -Arousing -Interesting -Conflict Old -Comfortable -Warm glow -Threat protecting -Low arousal -Enjoyable -Low conflict M a s h u p Long and Short Term Enjoyment & Interest
- 35. Leaving with more questions… • Are there different factors which more strongly inform enjoyment of different types of mashups?
- 36. What factors contribute to enjoyment for whom? Personality variables as moderators Expertise/Ability Self Esteem Silvia, 2005 exp 4 Knobloch, 2006
- 37. How best to balance old and new content? • What denotes optimal balance for enjoyment? – PPZ = 15% original – GT = Familiar music, new context – Chart tracking Girl Talk Liking of new mix? • What past experience or initial emotional response is required before meta-emotions kick in? – Role of discrepancy with initial emotion – Incongruity theory of humor (interest?)
- 38. Thank you for listening! a.l.eden@vu.nl @allison_eden August 2013 Lecture prepared for : Summer School in Media and Communications: Repeat Remix Remediate – Modes and Norms of Digital Media Repurposing Hamburg, Germany
- 39. References • Berlyne, D.E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. • Bornstein, R.F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265–289. • Bornstein, R. F., & D'Agostino, P. R. (1992). Stimulus recognition and the mere exposure effect. Journal of personality and social psychology, 63(4), 545. • Förster, J., Marguc, J., & Gillebaart, M. (2010). Novelty Categorization Theory. Social Psychology and Personality Compass, 4, 736-755. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00289.x • Freitas, A.L., Azizian, A., Travers, S., & Berry Reber, R., Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science, 9, 45-48. doi:10.1111/1467- 9280.00008 • Gillebaart, M. (2012). Something old, something new: When people favor novelty over familiarity and how novelty affects creative processes. Faculty of social and behavioral sciences, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands • Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Keplinger, C. (2006). Mystery appeal: Effects of uncertainty and resolution on the enjoyment of mystery. Media Psychology,8(3), 193-212. • Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2008). International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual.Technical Report A-8. • Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology, 95(4), 489-508.
- 40. References • Lewis, R., Tamborini, R., Grizzard, M., Weber, R., & Prabhu, S. (2012). Reactions to moral conflict in narrative entertainment: The moderating influence of moral intuitions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Phoenix. • Oliver, M. B., & Bartsch, A. (2010). Appreciation as audience response: Exploring entertainment gratifications beyond hedonism. Human Communication Research, 36(1), 53-81. • Ratner, R. K., Kahn, B. E., & Kahneman, D. (1999). Choosing less-preferred experiences for the sake of variety. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(1), 1-15. • Rossman, G. (2008). By the numbers: Lessons from radio. Engaging Art: The Next Great Transformation of America’s Cultural Life, edited by Steven Tepper and William Ivey. NY: Routledge. • Routledge, C., Arndt, J., Sedikides, C., & Wildschut, T. (2008). A blast from the past: The terror management function of nostalgia. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(1), 132-140 • Silvia, P.J. (2006). Exploring the psychology of interest. New York, NY:Oxford University Press. • Vorderer, P. (2011). What’s next? Remarks on the current vitalization of entertainment theory. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 23(1), 60. • Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 9(2p2), 1. • Zillmann, D. (1991). The logic of suspense and mystery. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Responding to the screen. Reception and reaction processes (pp. 281–303). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
Hinweis der Redaktion
- It has been said that all stories are just variations on a few familiar themes. On the one hand, we relish stories that are instantly familiar to us, in which we can recognize the main characters and plots and feel instantly "at home." On the other, audiences are easily bored with the same old thing over and over again. Therefore, new stories created from old offer audiences the perfect opportunity to tread the line between familiarity and novelty to maximize enjoyment and interest. During this talk we will examine how audience attention and emotions are captured via the pathways of novelty and familiarity, and how "renewed" and "remixed" media may play on these psychological mechanisms to provoke enjoyment and interest in viewers.
- Balance between novelty and familiarity promoting both interest and enjoymentUse of meaning structures to build novel commentary via shared social concepts
- Schwarz (2007) stated that“To serve action in a given context, any adaptive system ofevaluation should be informed by past experience, but highlysensitive to the specifics of the present” (p. 639).
- (Bornstein, 1989; Zajonc, 1968). One experiment that was conducted to test the mere-exposure effect used fertile chicken eggs for the test subjects. Tones of two different frequencies were played to different groups of chicks while they were still unhatched. Once hatched, each tone was played to both groups of chicks. Each set of chicks consistently chose the tone prenatally played to it.[1] Zajonc tested the mere-exposure effect by using meaningless Chinese characters on two groups of individuals. The individuals were then told that these symbols represented adjectives and were asked to rate whether the symbols held positive or negative connotations. The symbols that had been previously seen by the test subjects were consistently rated more positively than those unseen. After this experiment, the group with repeated exposure to certain characters reported being in better moods and felt more positive than those who did not receive repeated exposure.[1]
- According to Zajonc, the mere-exposure effect is capable of taking place without conscious cognition, and that "preferences need no inferences".[7] This statement by Zajonc has spurred much research in the relationship between cognition and affect. Zajonc explains that if preferences (or attitudes) were merely based upon information units with affect attached to them, then persuasion would be fairly simple. He argues that this is not the case: such simple persuasion tactics have failed miserably.[7] Zajonc states that affective responses to stimuli happen much more quickly than cognitive responses, and that these responses are often made with much more confidence. He states that thought (cognition) and feeling (affect) are distinct, and that cognitions are not free from affect, nor is affect free of cognition.[7] Zajonc states, "...the form of experience that we came to call feeling accompanies all cognitions, that it arises early in the process of registration and retrieval, albeit weakly and vaguely, and that it derives from a parallel, separate, and partly independent system in the organism."[7]In regards to the mere-exposure effect and decision making, Zajonc states that there has been no empirical proof that cognition precedes any form of decision making. While this is a common assumption, Zajonc argues that the opposite is more likely: decisions are made with little to no cognitive process. He equates deciding upon something with liking it, meaning that more often we cognize reasons to rationalize a decision instead of deciding upon it.[7] Being that as it may, once we have decided that we 'like' something it is very difficult to sway that opinion. We are experts on ourselves, we know what we like, whether or not we have made cognitions to back it up.
- After time, repetition can bring about Nostalgia, which can buffer against pain and existential threat, and is associated with personal and contextual memories
- Helson, 1947; 1964; Mas-Colell, Whinston & Green, 1995Ratner, Kahn & Kahneman, 1999, Experiment 1Indeed, in one illustrative study, participants listened to a 45-second sample of a favorite song 15 times in quick succession, rating their enjoyment of the experience along the way. What began as an enjoyable experience became decidedly less so after only the 6th iteration (Ratner, Kahn & Kahneman, 1999, Experiment 1).
- Bornstein, 1992 and Bornstein and D’Agostino, 1992) perceptual fluency/attribution model suggests that
- So where I started was with what I think has the strongest intuitive response, and the one with the most research behind it. The idea here is that mashups represent a potentially ideal combination between familiarity and novelty, between old stuff and new stuff. Let me explain
- Berlyne (1970) & Stang (1974)
- Rate how appealing and how exciting each one is
- Highly pleasurable and unpleasant stimuli are also arousing
- So you minimize arousal, but also minimize liking
- Berlyne 1976
- People ratedtheir interest and enjoyment for each painting, and they appraisedeach painting on a wide range of appraisal dimensions.Our results showed that interest and enjoyment had contrastingwithin-person relationships with appraisals of the paintings.Paintings rated as interesting were appraised as complex, unfamiliar,negative, and disturbing; paintings rated as enjoyablewere appraised as simple, positive, and calming.
- Uncertainty is uncomfortable
- Balances novelty and familiarityCombines all models of mystery enjoyment via uncertainty reduction - we have reduced uncertainty via our familiarity with source content, which enables liking - We expect one thing and encounter another, which leads to pleasure - We are (perhaps) right
- So this has led to a distinction between the two responses, where enjoyment is conceived as pure pleasure ….(Oliver & Bartsch, 2010; Raney, 2004; Vorderer, 2009)Whereas appreciation is conceptualized as not necessarily pleasurable. But the appreciation response is still conceptually unclear.Why would someone give a positive evaluation to something that is sad or unpleasurable?
- So the first study is designed to test the logic of the dual-process model’s proposition that evaluations of conflicted narratives will be slower.We went back to the moral psychology literature and created 12 narratives based on classic moral dilemmas, and then manipulated whether the story endings resolved the conflict or maintained the conflict. We had three ending types. (All positive, mixed, positive, and all-negative). The mixed-positive endings are the conflicted endings. The all-positive endings are happy, and the all-negative endings are just horrible endings that you would almost never see in a movie.Here is an example …
- We see that indeed it takes people a short time to evaluate the all-positive endings. It takes people longer to evaluate the mixed-positive endings.Contrary to our expectation though it also took longer to evaluate the all-negative endings.We think this is partly due to bad stimulus materials and partly due to the fact that these bad endings present an expectancy violation. The newer version of our paper discusses this at length.
- Self-reported measure distinguishingEnjoyment (e.g., “This movie would be fun”)Appreciation (e.g., “This movie would be meaningful”)
- 12 songs over one hour
- Our data confirm the hypothesis that, as for rewardmagnitude, the neuronal response to novelty is scaledadaptively as a function of contextual predictions. In particular,hippocampus, rhinal cortex, and orbital–medialPFC participated in scaled adaptive coding of both rewardand novelty. This anatomical overlap was notably absentfor signals reporting absolute novelty or the linearly codedprediction error for novelty (the deviation of stimulus noveltyfrom contextual predictions).The common participation of these three regions inadaptive scaling is consistent with the well-establishedfunctional and anatomical connectivity of these regions.All these regions interact functionally through monosynapticprojections from the hippocampus to the medial PFCand from medial PFC to the rhinal cortex, the main inputand output gateway for the hippocampus [Miller andCohen, 2001; Wallis, 2007]. Our data demonstrate that thisnetwork adapts its gain and sensitivity during reward andnovelty processing in a manner that accords with the statisticsof likely prediction errors [Tobler et al., 2005].
- Rate of exposureIndividual differencesExpectancies