Foundations of Media  Psychology

Pamela Rutledge, PhD, MBA
Summer 2012 | Fielding Graduate University
12 weeks

Syllabus designed for the last term I taught this course, Summer 2012.  What’s fascinating about media psychology is that every term requires updating as the field evolves.

COURSE DESCRIPTION

Media psychology has emerged as a significant field of study thanks to the proliferation of media technologies.  The integration of technology throughout society highlights the need for the application of psychological theory and research to better understand its impact and potential.  Media technologies are increasingly integral to all parts of life, from entertainment and late-breaking news to mundane chores.  As technologies become more sophisticated and fluid, media developers and designers need an understanding of the psychology of media experience.   Media psychology, therefore, will become increasingly essential to a broad range of fields including some that have yet to emerge.

Media psychology offers a rich toolbox in the body of psychological thought, including developmental, sensory, cognitive, environmental, cultural, narrative, and positive psychology.  Within those areas, we can draw on theories of personality, systems, interaction, motivation, persuasion, attitude change, and learning.  In addition, media psychology is not confined to a single ivory tower.  Many scholars and researchers come from other academic and applied fields, from sociology, anthropology, communications, media studies, computer science, and education to business and political science.

This course will provide an overview of some of the primary areas of media psychology and examine the use of psychological theory on emerging media content and presentation–from traditional pictures, sounds, and graphics to new interactive and digital media.  You will gain an understanding of the specific benefits of understanding human behavior and experience when working with media applications, how media affects individuals and cultures, and how media can be used for socially constructive purposes.

Learning Objectives

• Examine personal and society-wide beliefs and biases toward media and technology
• An understanding of the power and qualitative impact of media technologies in context
• Demonstration of how theories from psychology apply to legacy and emerging technologies, including persuasion, attention, social influence, cognition, engagement, and emotion.
• An understanding media literacy and digital citizenship
• Demonstrate how media technologies can be used to promote positive change
• Understand the benefits of a multi-disciplinary approach to media psychology

Conceptual questions to consider:

• What is “media’?
• What are the benefits of applying media psychology?
• How does a globally networked world influence our understanding of others and ourselves?
• How do media and technology impact individuals and groups across cultures, socioeconomic status, and geography?
• What are the benefits of understanding human behavior when working with media applications in educational, entertainment, health services, commercial or public policy environments?
• How can media be used effectively and for socially constructive purposes?
• Is there a distinction between online and offline in how we communicate and make meaning of the world around us?
• How do we unleash the potential in media technologies to facilitate human goals?

REQUIRED TEXTS

Media psychology is a very broad field.  The required books are meant to give you a glimpse at some areas and ways of approaching media technologies.

Gee, J. P. (2007). What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy (Revised & Updated) (2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Giles, D. C. (2010). Psychology of the Media. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Baym, Nancy  K. (2010). Personal Connections in the Digital Age.  Digital Media and Society Series.  Malden, MA: Polity.

Weinschenk, S. M. (2009). Neuro Web Design: What Makes Them Click? Berkeley: New Riders.

***If you have not already read Jenkins’ Convergence Culture, it can be helpful, especially if you are just starting the program.  You will find it gives you some good context from a non-mass media perspective.  It is required in a couple other MSC courses.

Find an introductory psychology textbook that you like to use as a reference to explore any theory that interests you.  A free online version is:

Dewey, R. (n.d.) Psychology: An Introduction.  http://www.intropsych.com/

About the texts:

Baym addresses some very important aspects of digital life from a pretty balanced perspective.  She brings together a lot of good resources, so I find the reference list to be as valuable as the prose. Gee and Weinschenk are nontechnical, written for a general rather than academic audience.  I have assigned some chapters for each week, but you will benefit more from reading Gee through and then coming back to things that interest you.  Weinschenk’s book highlights some basic aspects of human behavior related to web design.  Web design is another way of saying visual design.  These are not full descriptions of theory, but great starting points to see how psychology is applied and to point you in a direction for future research.  If an author refers to someone else’s work, look for the primary source.  Primary sources give you a much better understanding.

Giles’ book is an overview of some of the research and theories.  You will get a good historical view of the concerns of media psychology and the focus of research pre-Internet that has carried over across all media.  None of the theory is presented in depth.  (For backup you can also use: Giles, D. C. (2003). Media psychology. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (It is available free online).  Like Weinschenk, it is very useful to get a sense of the field and to know where to look to get a better understanding of an area.

Consider all books these as “gateway” not end points. You will see that I have posted many resources each week.  These are optional but are there to support learning beyond the required readings in areas that are of interest and value to you.

If you have trouble finding an article OR if you are not sure how to apply theory, please do not hesitate to ask.

RECOMMENDED READING

Cialdini, R. B. (2007)Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (Revised ed.). New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

***Jenkins, H. (2008). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: NYU Press.

This is an entertaining read and sets the premises for the blurring of boundaries among technologies, transmedia storytelling as a participatory communication strategy and the shifting roles of consumers and producers (or prosumers, as some have called them.)

Johnson, J. (2010). Designing with the Mind in Mind. Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufman.

McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is Broken: Why Games Make us Better and How They Can Change the World. New York: Penguin Books. (McGonigal, 2011)

Shirky, C. (2008). Here Comes Everybody. New York: Penguin Books.  (Shirky, 2008)

ASSIGNMENTS

There are different types of required assignments.

DISCUSSION POSTS (35%)

Primary discussion posts are short essays related to a question or to the readings.  These are critical thinking pieces, not editorials.  The length is short, approximately 4 to 5 paragraphs.  Support your opinions by the readings and outside research that you have done.  Every initial post must include citation(s) and reference(s) following APA format.  I will provide an APA format cheat sheet for a short list of key formatting issues.  Primary posts are due no later than Sunday by midnight PST.  It’s good to post earlier than later for the most and best feedback from everyone.   Note: Moodle is not always cooperative about formatting, so things like hanging indents don’t work.  Don’t worry about that.  If you’re trying, I can tell.  Review the grading rubric to get a better idea of post content and structure.  Please review the academic writing and APA style information.

IMPORTANT: I will be looking for the application of theory and academic literature to social media experience in every posting.  If you do not integrate theory into your posts, you will not receive credit without a rewrite.

COMMENTS TO DISCUSSION POSTS (20%)

Make substantive comments to two of your peers’ essay postings each week.  By the end of the course, make sure you have responded at least once to everyone in the class.  It’s okay to disagree but be respectful, say why, and use evidence with citations to support your point.  Substantive means that your comment contains content that furthers or contributes to the conversation, such as questions, additional information, or similar issues, and not “Hey, great post!”   Comments are due no later than the following Wednesday by midnight PST.

FINAL PROJECT (45% | Paper 30%; Media 15%)

The final project has two parts.  Part A is an academic paper from 8 to 10 pages (plus references) in APA style.  Part B is an accompanying piece of media that 1) either presents the project (such as a PowerPoint, sliderocket, or glogster presentation) in a way that furthers understanding of the topic through the addition of visuals or 2) illustrates how you would implement a project (such as a mock-up of an element of a social media strategy).

Grading Criteria:

PRIMARY POST

Writing:

• Well-organized and focused with clear thesis statement (main argument)
• Introduction and conclusion
• Good grammar, spelling and original writing (no more than 20% of document/post as quotations from references)
• Original writing (no more than 20% of document or post may be quotations from references)

Format:

• Posts and comments:  APA style for in-text citations and references
• Final paper only:  Word document using APA 6^th edition formatting (see http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/)

Content:

• Critical thinking
• Opinions and arguments are constructed logically and well-supported by academic evidence
• Integration of psychological theory and research*
• Contribution through research with additional ideas, resources and references beyond assigned readings.
• Appropriate academic resources

PARTICIPATION:

• Substantive response related to content, literature and research
• Additional resources to further discussion

*Psychological theory and research must be integrated into your posts.  If the score for this item is 0, the post will not receive a passing grade without a rewrite.

1 Introductions and Defining Media Psychology

Demonstrate an understanding of the field of media psychology, the value in pursuing a definition, and the challenges of defining a field with the continual emergence of new technologies and applications

Video: Did You Know 4.0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ILQrUrEWe8
Media Psychology Overview PowerPoint/QuickTime

Baym, Nancy K. (2010). Personal Connections in the Digital Age, Chapter 1

Giles, D. C. (2010). Psychology of the Media. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Chapters 1, 2, 11, and 12

Articles:

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Media Psychology, 3(3), 265-299.

Reeves, B., & Anderson, D. R. (1991). Media studies and psychology

Rutledge, P. (2012). Is There a Need for a Distinct Field of Media Psychology? In K. Dill (Ed.), Oxford Handbook of Media Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. (PDF)

PLEASE NOTE #1:  EVERY WEEK YOU MUST RESPOND SUBSTANTIVELY TO THREE OTHER CLASSMATES.

PLEASE NOTE #2: You must use the readings and research in your primary post.  Academic writing is not the same as editorializing.  Media can be an emotionally charged subject.  We all have things we believe to be true.  However, in academic writing, any opinion you express MUST be justified by evidence from research or theory (and cited accordingly.)

Week 1 is the only week with two postings.

Posting #1:

Submit a brief introduction (up to one-page) introducing you to the online community.  Include your interests or goals that led you to study media psychology, and your general feelings about media technologies and society. This is a good chance to exchange some information and get to know one another, as well as to examine the beliefs and assumptions you hold about media and media technologies.

(Bandura, 2001; Giles, 2003, 2010; Reeves & Anderson, 1991; Rutledge, 2012)

Posting #2

Write a short statement using the readings and your own research (no longer than one page).

Define and discuss Media Psychology as a field.  For example, based on the readings and your research, what is it? How and why do definitions differ?  What difference does the definition make?  What do we even mean when we say ‘media’?

2 Public Opinion About Media: Framing and Mental Models

Show an understanding of the way internal bias and external framing can influence the way media messages are constructed and perceived

Baym, Nancy K. (2010). Personal Connections in the Digital Age, Chapter 2

Giles, D. C. (2010). Psychology of the Media. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Chapters 9-10.

Gee, J. P. (2007). What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy (Revised & Updated) (2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Chapters 1, 2, and 6.

Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, R. (2000). Mental Models: A Gentle Introduction, from http://www.tcd.ie/Psychology/other/Ruth_Byrne/mental_models/index.html

EXTRA RESOURCES:

Brewer, P. R. (2006). National Interest Frames and Public Opinion About World Affairs. The Harvard International Journal Of Press/politics, 11(4), 89-102.

Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Three Types of Conceptual Change: Belief Revision, Mental Model Transformation, and Categorical Shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change (pp. 61-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Iyengar, J. (2005). Speaking of Values: The Framing of American Politics. The Forum, 3(3), 1-9

Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, Agenda Setting, and Priming: The Evolution of Three Media Effects Models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9-20. doi: 10.1111/j.0021-9916.2007.00326.x

Scheufele, D. (1999). Framing as a Theory of Media Effects. Journal of Communication, Winter, 103-122.

We all have preconceived ideas about “media.”  In this week, we will look at some issues related to research and how information is presented. As you read in Giles’ book, media psychology research started with a focus on mass media.  “Framing,” describes the presentation of information in a way that guides perception.  There is a lot of research on how media frames information and variations on how this impacts perception and public discourse.  Framing often occurs by juxtaposing one issue with another that has an embedded meaning, i.e. a common belief, metaphor, or mental model.

Mental models (aka cognitive maps, schema) are the beliefs we hold, often unconsciously about how the world works.  This is the primary filter we use to understand any new information.  These models are different for everyone.  They can make information delivery very efficient.  They also are an implicit bias in information processing, for better or worse.  They can also be activated by context to influence perception through association.

(Bandura, 2004; Billings & Eastman, 2003; Brewer, 2006; Brown & Singhal, 1990; Chi, 2008; Cialdini, 2001; Do Kyun et al., 2009; Gee, 2007; Iyengar, 2005; Johnson-Laird & Byrne, 2000; Papa et al., 2000; D. Scheufele, 1999; D. A. Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007; Singhal, Cody, Rogers, & Sabido, 2003; Singhal & Obregon, 1999; Singhal & Rogers, 2002)

POSTING:

Write a short statement (no longer than one page):

Discuss an aspect of framing or perception in mediated communication.  You can take a broad view, such the as public perception of the media or technology or a more narrow, content-focused one, such as how media technologies can influence perception of a specific topic.  This can be anything from media presentation of the news, politics or advertising to edu-entertainment.  Use examples.

3 Measuring Media & the Experience of Technology

Demonstrate an understanding of the some of the dominant research issues, challenges and methodologies in media psychology

Baym, Nancy K. (2010). Personal Connections in the Digital Age, Chapter 3

Giles, D. C. (2010). Psychology of the Media. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Chapters 3-8.

Garton, L., Haythornthwaite, C., & Wellman, B. (1997). Studying Online Social Networks. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(1).

EXTRA RESOURCES:

Anderson, C. A., Berkowitz, L., Donnerstein, E., Huesmann, L. R., Johnson, J. D., Linz, D., et al. (2003). The Influence of Media Violence on Youth. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4 (3), 81-110. Retrieved December 5, 2009 from http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/pspi/pspi43.pdf.

Ferguson, C. J. (2009). Media Violence Effects: Confirmed Truth or Just Another X-File? Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 9 (2), 103-126.

Ferguson, C. J. (2009). Violent Video Games: Dogma, Fear, and Pseudoscience. Skeptical Inquirer, September/October.

Kutner, L., & Olson, C. K. (2008). Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games and What Parents Can Do. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Sternheimer, K. (2009)  Connecting Social Problems in Popular Culture, Westview Press.

Giles, D. C. (2003). Media Psychology. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates., Chapter 3

Links:

Blog postings discussing book reviews by Christopher Ferguson on Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games and What Parents Can Do and Media Violence and Aggression: Science and Ideology: http://psyccritiquesblog.apa.org/2008/09/do-violent-medi.html

Videos:

George Gerbner, The Killing Screens: Media & the Culture of Violence http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PHxTr-59hE

Hip Hop Messages  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjxjZe3RhIo

Throughout most of the 20^th century, ‘media’ has been synonymous with ‘mass media’ and mass media has been the focus of academic inquiry. Consistent with this heritage, the topics of many of the listed authors are informed by the ‘media effects tradition’ within the mass media model.  Major research areas of this tradition have been largely dealing with the concerns of a worried society trying to understand technology: media violence, portrayals of sexuality and gender, and other concerns about potential negative impact on individual behaviors and social interaction.  This research extended to other media and narrative forms as they gained prominence, most notably video and web-based gaming.  Much of this research is based on social cognitive theory, as described by Bandura.

Where research is responding to society’s concerns, there is often disagreement supported with empirical research on both sides.  This means we have to notice not just what scholars say, but how they ask questions, how they define variables, how they measure, who they measure and how they interpret the results.

Often at the heart of these questions is the implicit bias of the investigator and their understanding of technology and society from a deterministic or constructivist perspective.  Baym does a nice job introducing this discussion.

(Anderson et al., 2003; Ferguson, 2009a, 2009b; Garton, Haythornthwaite, & Wellman, 1997; Kutner & Olson, 2008; Sternheimer, 2009; Wellman et al., 1996)

 

POSTING:

Write a short statement using the readings and your own research (no longer than one page)

Identify a topic area that interests you where there is disagreement among scholars, such as media violence, Internet use, stereotyping, body image, or the use of media, such as gaming or social media, etc.  Pick an angle to discuss, such as the conflicts in the research or perspectives and the problems inherent in measuring and presenting information that has different perspectives to the public.  What is responding to a moral panic? When does research turn into advocacy?  Discuss your own conclusion based on the theoretical arguments and research by scholars as evidence.

4 Media Literacy and Digital Citizenship

Demonstrate an understanding of differing views of media literacy, the socioeconomic issues of media access and how producing media influences the concept the media literacy.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 (5). Part 1

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants: Do They Really Think Differently? On the Horizon, 9 (6). Part 2

Strudley, G. (2008). The Media Literacy of Primary School Children: Literature Review, from http://gdstrudley3.webs.com/

EXTRA RESOURCES:

Jenkins, H. (2008). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide (Revised ed.). New York: New York University Press., Chapters 5 and 6

Longford, G. (2007). Pedagogies of Digital Citizenship and the Politics of Code. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 9 (1),    http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v9n1/longford.html

Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Clinton, K., Weigel, M., & Robinson, A. J. (2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Retrieved September, 12, 2009   http://newmedialiteracies.org/

Definition of Media Literacy (YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzeVjAM-drg )

Henry Jenkins on Media Literacy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibJaqXVaOaI

Killing us softly: Advertising and Women, Media Education Foundation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FpyGwP3yzE

Sexualized Images to Sell Products: Media and Teens http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVS64af4dko

LINKS:

Center for Media Literacy http://www.medialit.org/

Common Sense Media http://www.commonsensemedia.org/

Media Literacy has roots in media studies tradition of content analysis and is often cited as an antidote to media misrepresentations of many social groupings, such as gender, race, sexuality, and religious.  That presumes, of course, that media is having negative effects and that analysis will demystify or defuse the power of the messages.

Now that nearly everyone is a content producer as well as consumer, with infinite ability to self-select and customize information, where does that leave media literacy?  For example, we can Photoshop our profile pictures and we see videos of the manipulation for mass media advertising (i.e. Dove Evolution video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYhCn0jf46U).  If critical thinking moderates the impact of media, as proponents of media literacy education say, what effect does this producer/control have on our perceptions of images and messages?

Media literacy also raises issues of access and proficiency.  (You will find lots of data in the Pew Internet Research Reports about usage by demographics.)

(Jenkins, Purushotma, Clinton, Weigel, & Robinson, 2006; Longford, 2007; Prensky, 2001a, 2001b; Strudley, 2008)

Write a short statement using the readings and your own research (no longer than one page), addressing an issue surrounding digital literacy and digital citizenship.  For example.:

• What does it mean to be media literate ?
• Why does it matter?
• How does media literacy compare to technological literacy or are they the same thing now?
• Where does digital citizenship fit in?  How should we be thinking about the ‘digital divide’?

5 Technology, Motivation, and Learning

Identify the arguments around technology in learning and education. 

Gee, J. P. (2007). What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy (Revised & Updated) (2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The Role of Transportation in the Persuasiveness of Public Narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701-721.

Lee, J. J., & Hammer, J. (2011). Gamification in Education: What, How, Why Bother? Academic Quarterly, 15(2), 1-5.

World Trends and Forecasts. (2011). The Gamification of Education. The Futurist, September-Cotober, 16-17.

EXTRA RESOURCES:

Johnson, S. (2005). Everything Bad is Good for You. New York: Berkeley Publishing Group.

Latitude Research. (2012). Robots @ School. Boston: latd.com.

Shaffer, D. W., Squire, K. R., Halverson, R., & Gee, J. P. (2004). Video games and the future of learning.

Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., & Ritterfield, U. (2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media entertainment. Communication Theory, 14(4), 388-408

Videos:

Jenkins on Game Based Learning http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmUQKStba10

Gee Breakthrough Learning http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RmreVieKl0

We hear a lot of talk about getting technology into the schools, but there is also a lot of resistance.  Where does the resistance come from? What do technologies like gaming or mobile devices offer in terms of learning environments?

The debate over technology in the classroom, particularly using video games, triggers many emotions.  Parents who were not born clutching cell phones and video controllers are raising children who were.  We talked about the public concerns about violent content in video games that have been the subject of a great deal of research.

At the same time, there are many who argue that video games have many benefits, including cognitive flexibility, manual dexterity, perceptual skill, and the teach problem-solving and logic, not to mention motivation.  Game dynamics are now being integrated into all kinds of applications, from marketing (Yelp), to Social TV.

Gaming is not the only way to introduce technology into education.  Does gaming keep us focused on content and not on the learning process?  Mobile technologies can effectively expand the walls of the classroom to encompass the entire world.  Augmented reality can make content come alive.

(Dietz-Uhler & Bishop-Clark, 2003; Green & Brock, 2000; Johnson, 2005; Latitude Research, 2012; Lee & Hammer, 2011; Shaffer, Squire, Halverson, & Gee, 2004; Vorderer, Klimmt, & Ritterfield, 2004; World Trends and Forecasts, 2011)

Posting:

Research and discuss an educational technology issue that interests you around gaming research and education, serious games, gamification, immersive educational technologies (augmented reality, virtual worlds) or robotics (AI).  If you take a side, make sure you acknowledge the arguments for the positives and the negatives.

6 Social Technologies and Networked Society

Demonstrate an understanding of how social networking and social media are changing the way information travels.

Identify how changes in communication technologies influence the distribution and perception of information and relationships across society, from interpersonal to international

Baym, Nancy  K. (2010). Personal Connections in the Digital Age, Chapter 4, 5

Giles, D. C. (2010). Psychology of the Media. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Chapters 11-12.

Bandura, A. (2002). Growing Primacy of Human Agency in Adaptation and Change in the Electronic Era. [Journal; Peer Reviewed Journal;]. European Psychologist, 7(1), 2-16.

Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007).  The benefits of Facebook ‘‘friends:’’ social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites.  Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168.

EXTRA RESOURCES:

Beaudoin, C. E. (2008). Explaining the Relationship between Internet Use and Interpersonal Trust: Taking into Account Motivation and Information Overload. [Journal; Peer Reviewed Journal]. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 13(3), 550-568.

Shirky, C. (2003). A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy from http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html

The media landscape is shifting from a “one to many” model to a “many to many” model.  This is a new communications paradigm based on networks.  The rules for an information system dictate transfer and connectivity in networks and have implications for individuals, groups, business, government, and nations.  Information is no longer controlled by a small number of sources and, in fact, it clear that it is not possible to completely control information at all, evidenced by the Twitter reports of political upheaval and WikiLeaks.

In a participatory culture, everyone has a voice.  People are no longer just media consumers, but are active producers of content.  They have what Bandura (and others) call “agency.”  They act on their own behalf.  In doing so, they look for context and confirmation in order to establish the credibility of information.  With social media, the facts are hard to hide.  Authenticity and transparency are necessary to establish credibility.

Social media tools are a great way to communicate with more people more inexpensively than you ever have before.  Mobile is making technology more personal.

All this connectivity changes how people are influenced and whom they trust. The flip side of this is the impact on how people perceive, develop and spend social capital.  (Bandura, 2002; Beaudoin, 2008; Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007; Shirky, 2003)

POSTING:

Based on readings and research, discuss the psychological implications of social network connectivity on trust, persuasion or social capital in some aspect of business, education, politics, or interpersonal relationships.

7 Community & Collaboration

Understand the impact of group affiliation and community on identity and behavior

Baym, Nancy  K. (2010). Personal Connections in the Digital Age, Chapter 6

Chayko, M. (2007). The Portable Community: Envisioning and Examining Mobile Social Connectedness. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 3 (4), 373-385

Hampton, K., & Wellman, B. (2003). Neighboring in Netville: How the Internet Supports Community and Social Capital in a Wired Suburb. 2 (4), 277

Haythornthwaite, C., & Kendall, L. (2010). Internet and Community. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(8), 1083-1094.

Yu, T.-K., Lu, L.-C., & Liu, T.-F. (2010). Exploring Factors That Influence Knowledge Sharing Behavior Via Weblogs. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(1), 32-41.

EXTRA RESOURCES:

Black, R. W. (2009). Online Fan Fiction, Global Identities, and Imagination. [080 s; 143 Reports: Research]. Research in the Teaching of English, 43(4), 397-425.

Caronia, L., & Caron, A. H. (2004). Constructing a Specific Culture: Young People’s Use of the Mobile Phone as a Social Performance. Convergence: The Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 10(2), 28-61.

Carter, D. (2005). Living in Virtual Communities: An Ethnography of Human Relationships in Cyberspace. Information, Communication & Society, 8(2), 148-167.

Audience participation is central to forums, transmedia campaigns, wikis, and defines social and networked media.   The role of community has profound impact on individuals and groups — persuasion, redefining norms, and promoting attitude and behavior change.  Online communities have also raised questions about the relevance of geography to sense of community and proximity to social support and a sense of belonging.  Mobile technologies are making social connectivity more personal and local.

(Black, 2009; Caronia & Caron, 2004; Carter, 2005; Garton et al., 1997; Haythornthwaite & Kendall, 2010; Yu, Lu, & Liu, 2010)

POSTING

Based on the readings and your research, discuss an application that relies on a community, such as how it impacts things like behavior and identity or why and how communities work psychologically.

For example: fan forums, support communities, fan fiction, ARGs (alternate reality games), geotagging (e.g. Foursquare), collaborative art, flash mobs, etc.

8 Mobile and Persuasive Media

Demonstrate an understanding of the ways in which technologies can become persuasive devices.

Cialdini, R. B. (2001). The Science of Persuasion. Scientific American, 284 (2), 76-81

Escalas, J. E. (2007). Self-Referencing and Persuasion: Narrative Transportation Versus Analytical Elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research, 33, 421-429.

Fogg, B. J. (2009). The Behavior Grid: 35 Ways Behavior Can Change. Paper presented at the Persuasive 09, Claremont, CA.

Fogg, B. J. (2008). Mass Interpersonal Persuasion: An Early View of a New Phenomenon. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Persuasion, Berlin.

Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2002). In the Mind’s Eye: Transportation-Imagery Model of Narrative Persuasion. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Intille, S. S. Ubiquitous Computing Technology for Just-in-Time Motivation of Behavior Change.

Jung, Y., Perez-Mira, B., & Wiley-Patton, S. (2009). Consumer Adoption of Mobile TV: Examining Psychological Flow and Media Content. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 123-129. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2008.07.011

RESOURCES:

Calefato, C., Vernero, F., & Montanari, R. (2009, 21-23 May 2009). Wikipedia as an Example of Positive Technology: How to Promote Knowledge Sharing and Collaboration with a Persuasive Tutorial. Paper presented at the Human System Interactions, 2009. HSI ’09. 2nd Conference on. Retrieved 21-23 May 2009

Fogg, B. J., & Eckles, D. (Eds.). (2007). Mobile Persuasion: 20 Perspective on the Future of Behavior Change. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

Norman, G. J., Zabinsk, M. F., Adams, M. A., E., D., Rosenberg, Yaroch, A. L., et al. (2007). A Review of Ehealth Interventions for Physical Activity and Dietary Behavior Change. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 33(4), 336-345.

Slater, M. D. (1999). Integrating Application of Media Effects, Persuasion, and Behavior Change Theories to Communication Campaigns: A Stages-of-Change Framework. Health Communication, 11(4), 335-354.

Technology is redefining our understanding of the persuasion equation.  Until recently, the elements of persuasion were attributed to communication rhetoric; computers and technology were not seen as persuasive experiences independent of message The ubiquity of computers, tablets, and mobile devices that are increasingly customizable and interactive has drawn attention to the power of technology, devices, and objects to communicate experience, identity, and emotion.  Aspects of persuasion include behavior models but also the theories of flow and narrative transportation that influence behavior through focus, presence and empathy and lower cognitive resistance.

POSTING:

Research a media piece, application or device that has been developed to influence human behavior.  Based on the research, discuss how your example fits into the trend toward persuasive devices and the psychological aspects that make it persuasive.

(Calefato, Vernero, & Montanari, 2009; Fogg, 1999; Fogg, Cuellar, & Danielson, 2007; Fogg & Eckles, 2007).

9 User Experience and Nonlinear Messages

Demonstrate an understanding of the role of nonlinear and visual communication in message construction and perception

Weinschenk, S. M. (2009). Neuro Web Design: What Makes Them Click? Berkeley: New Riders.

King, A. (2003). Optimizing Flow in Web Design Speed up Your Site: Web Site Optimization: New Riders.

Media psychology’s early traditions tend to keep us focused on the text-based or linear-based messaging.  Digital communication uses multiple media channels, visuals, audio, movement, along with text to reach people with impact.  The wealth of information has place an even greater importance on visual communication, from websites to data visualization (or data “liberation”).

(Fogg, 2008; King, 2003; Weinschenk, 2011)

POSTING:

Select a visual display of information, such as a website, data display, inforgraphic, or digital artwork that is intended to communicate.  Use the example as a case study and analyze it using some of the principles of Weinschenk’s book.  When you find a theory that fits from Weinschenk, DO NOT STOP THERE.  Do some research so you understand the theory and how it’s being applied in a scholarly way.

10 Final Paper and Media Piece: Applying Media Psychology

In a paper of approximately 8-10 pages plus references, select a media psychology topic or application that fits with your career and/or intellectual goals. This could be a goal, topic, cause, population, or application, from media literacy to social media use or multi-modal communication. You can analyze a type of application as a case study or go broader such as the blending of different communication forms. You could alternatively select a topic that came up during the course to explore in depth.  If you are unclear about ideas or if your topic is ok, please contact me!

Please submit the paper as a Word document.  Put your NAME in the file name so I can tell who it belongs to when I download it.  Be sure to use APA formatting, citations, references, title page, and spell check etc.  If you don’t, I’ll send it back for reformatting.

Media Piece:

Choose one of the many tools available: glogster, cell phone novels, digital storytelling using video or PowerPoint, or ???  Use the tool you select to present either 1) a presentation version of your final paper topic OR 2) a media piece that is an example of what you discuss in your paper.

Include a one page explanation of the theoretical basis for the design decisions you made, i.e. how your media piece incorporates psychology to communicate your ideas.

11 Reading & responding week

Read and respond to three final papers and media projects.  (You can mix and match.)

12 Changing Perspectives

Post a short casual reflection on anything that was meaningful about the course: something that challenged your thinking, was different than you had thought, inspired you to investigate, suggested new areas of interest, etc.

References

Anderson, Craig A., Berkowitz, Leonard, Donnerstein, Edward, Huesmann, L. Rowell, Johnson, James D., Linz, Daniel, . . . Wartella, Ellen. (2003). The Influence of Media Violence on Youth. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(3), 81-110. http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/pspi/pspi43.pdf

Bandura, Albert. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory of Mass Communication. Media Psychology, 3(265-299).

Bandura, Albert. (2002). Growing primacy of human agency in adaptation and change in the electronic era. European Psychologist, 7(1), 2-16.

Bandura, Albert. (2004). Health Promotion by Social Cognitive Means. Health Education & Behavior, 31(2), 143-164.

Beaudoin, Christopher. (2008). Explaining the Relationship between Internet Use and Interpersonal Trust: Taking into Account Motivation and Information Overload. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 13, 550-568.

Billings, Andrew C., & Eastman, Susan Tyler. (2003). Framing Identities: Gender, Ethnic, and National Parity in Network Announcing of the 2002 Winter Olympics. Journal of Communication. Vol, 53(4), 569-586.

Black, Rebecca W. (2009). Online Fan Fiction, Global Identities, and Imagination. Research in the Teaching of English, 43(4), 397-425.

Brewer, Paul R. (2006). National Interest Frames and Public Opinion about World Affairs. The Harvard International Journal Of Press/politics, 11(4), 89-102.

Brown, William J., & Singhal, Arvind. (1990). Ethical Dilemmas of Prosocial Television. Communication Quarterly, 38(3). http://www.arvindsinghal.com/entertainment-education/index.htm

Calefato, C., Vernero, F., & Montanari, R. (2009, 21-23 May 2009). Wikipedia as an example of positive technology: How to promote knowledge sharing and collaboration with a persuasive tutorial. Paper presented at the Human System Interactions, 2009. HSI ’09. 2nd Conference on.

Caronia, Letizia, & Caron, André H. (2004). Constructing a Specific Culture: Young People’s Use of the Mobile Phone as a Social Performance. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 10(2), 28-61. http://con.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/10/2/28

Carter, Denise. (2005). Living in Virtual Communities: An ethnography of human relationships in cyberspace. Information, Communication & Society, 8(2), 148-167.

Chi, Michelene T. H. (2008). Three Types of Conceptual Change: Belief Revision, Mental Model Transformation, and Categorical Shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cialdini, Robert B. (2001). The Science of Persuasion. Scientific American, 284(2), 76-81.

Cialdini, Robert B. (2007). Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (Revised ed.). New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

Dietz-Uhler, Beth, & Bishop-Clark, Cathy (2003). The Psychology of computer-mediated communication: Four classroom activities. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 2(1), 25-31.

Do Kyun, Kim, Singhal, Arvind, Hanaki, Toru, Dunn, Jennifer, Chitnis, Ketan, & Min Wha, Han. (2009). Television Drama, Narrative Engagement and Audience Buying Behavior. International Communication Gazette, 71(7), 595-611. doi: 10.1177/1748048509341894

Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The Benefits of Facebook ‘‘Friends:’’ Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168.

Ferguson, Christopher J. (2009a). Media Violence Effects: Confirmed Truth or Just Another X-File? Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 9(2), 103-126.

Ferguson, Christopher J. (2009b). Violent Video Games: Dogma, Fear, and Pseudoscience. Skeptical Inquirer, September/October.

Fogg, B.J. (1999). Persuasive Technologies: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman.

Fogg, B.J. (2008). Mass Interpersonal Persuasion: An Early View of a New Phenomenon. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Persuasion, Berlin.

Fogg, B.J., Cuellar, Gregory, & Danielson, David. (2007). Motivating, Influencing and Persuading Users. In A. Sears & J. A. Jacko (Eds.), The human-computer interaction handbook: fundamentals, evolving technologies and Emerging Applications (pp. 133-147). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Fogg, B.J., & Eckles, Dean (Eds.). (2007). Mobile Persuasion: 20 Perspective on the Future of Behavior Change. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

Garton, Laura, Haythornthwaite, Caroline, & Wellman, Barry. (1997). Studying Online Social Networks. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(1).

Gee, James Paul. (2007). What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy (Revised & Updated) (2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Giles, David C. (2003). Media Psychology. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Giles, David C. (2010). Psychology of the Media. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Green, Melanie C., & Brock, Timothy C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701-721.

Haythornthwaite, Caroline, & Kendall, Lori. (2010). Internet and Community. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(8), 1083-1094. doi: 10.1177/0002764209356242

Iyengar, Jayanthi. (2005). Speaking of Values: The Framing of American Politics. The Forum, 3(3), 1-9

Jenkins, Henry, Purushotma, Ravi, Clinton, Katherine, Weigel, Margaret, & Robinson, ALice J. (2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. http://newmedialiteracies.org/

Johnson, Steven. (2005). Everything Bad is Good for You: How Today’s Popular Culture is Actually Making Us Smarter. New York: Berkeley Publishing Group.

Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, Ruth. (2000). Mental Models: A Gentle Introduction. from http://www.tcd.ie/Psychology/other/Ruth_Byrne/mental_models/index.html

King, Anthony. (2003). Optimizing Flow in Web Design Speed Up Your Site: Web Site Optimization: New Riders.

Kutner, Lawrence, & Olson, Cheryl K. (2008). Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games and What Parents Can Do. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Latitude Research. (2012). Robots @ School. Boston: latd.com.

Lee, Joey J., & Hammer, Jessica. (2011). Gamification in Education: What, How, Why Bother? Academic Quarterly, 15(2), 1-5.

Longford, Grant. (2007). Pedagogies of Digital Citizenship and the Politics of Code. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 9(1). http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v9n1/longford.html

McGonigal, Jane. (2011). Reality is Broken: Why Games Make us Better and How They Can Change the World. New York: Penguin Books.

Papa, MJ, Singhal, A, Law, S, Pant, S, S Sood, Rogers, EM, & Shefner-Rogers, CL. (2000). Entertainment-education and social change: an analysis of parasocial interaction, social learning, collective efficacy, and paradoxical communication. The Journal of Communication, 50(4), 31-55.

Prensky, Marc. (2001a). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5). http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky – Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants – Part1.pdf

Prensky, Marc. (2001b). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants: Do They Really Think Differently? On the Horizon, 9(6). http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky – Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants – Part2.pdf

Reeves, Byron, & Anderson, Daniel R. (1991). Media Studies and Psychology. Communication Research, 18(5), 597-600.

Rutledge, Pamela Brown. (2012). Arguing for a Distinct Field of Media Psychology. In K. Dill (Ed.), Oxford Handbook of Media Psychology (pp. 43-58). New York: Oxford University Press.

Scheufele, Dietram. (1999). Framing as a Theory of Media Effects. Journal of Communication, Winter, 103-122.

Scheufele, Dietram A., & Tewksbury, David. (2007). Framing, Agenda Setting, and Priming: The Evolution of Three Media Effects Models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9-20. doi: 10.1111/j.0021-9916.2007.00326.x

Shaffer, David Williamson, Squire, Kurt R., Halverson, Richard, & Gee, James P. (Eds.). (2004). Video games and the future of learning. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison and Academic Advanced Distributed Learning Co-Laboratory.

Shirky, Clay. (2003). A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy from http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html

Shirky, Clay. (2008). Here Comes Everybody. New York: Penguin Books.

Singhal, Arvind, Cody, Michael, Rogers, Everett M., & Sabido, Miguel (Eds.). (2003). Entertainment-Education and Social Change: History, Research, and Practice New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Singhal, Arvind, & Obregon, Rafael. (1999). Social Uses of Commercial Soap Operas: A Conversation with Miguel Sabido. Journal of Development Communication, 10(1), 68-77. http://www.arvindsinghal.com/entertainment-education/index.htm

Singhal, Arvind, & Rogers, Everett M. (2002). A Theoretical Agenda for Entertainment-Education. Communication Theory, 12, 2.

Sternheimer, K. (2009). Connecting Social Problems in Popular Culture. Kindle: Westview Press.

Strudley, Grant. (2008). The Media Literacy of Primary School Children: Literature Review. from http://gdstrudley3.webs.com/

Vorderer, Peter, Klimmt, Christoph, & Ritterfield, Ute. (2004). Enjoyment: At the Heart of Media Entertainment. Communication Theory, 14(4), 388-408.

Weinschenk, Susan M. (2011). 100 Things Every Designer Needs to Know About People. Berkeley: New Riders.

Wellman, Barry, Salaff, Janet, Dimitrova, Dimitrina, Garton, Laura, Gulia, Milena, & Haythornthwaite, Caroline. (1996). Computer Networks as Social Networks: Collaborative Work, Telework, and Virtual Community. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 213-238. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0360-0572%281996%2922%3C213%3ACNASNC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-B

World Trends and Forecasts. (2011). The Gamification of Education. The Futurist, September-Cotober, 16-17.

Yu, Tai-Kuei, Lu, Long-Chuan, & Liu, Tsai-Feng. (2010). Exploring factors that influence knowledge sharing behavior via weblogs. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(1), 32-41.

—-