Chapter III

STUDY OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

The research literature surveyed in the earlier chapter portrays how the new
medium of Internet has come to accepted and used in divergent ways by societies
worldwide. Though some describe it the “most transforming technological event
since the capture of fire” (Barlow et al, 1995, p.40), others criticize such description
as “presentist, unscholarly and historically uninformed” (Wellman & Gulia, 1999;
p.169). No matter what the eulogizers and critics think it to be, it is being
accepted, used and depended upon by an increasing number of people
everywhere, in the developed economies of the West as well as in the developing
societies across continents.

Though the number of Internet users is steadily increasing in India making it one of
the top five users of Internet in the world, commensurate attention has not been
paid through research in understanding the nature of Internet users and their
varied uses. There are hardly a couple of studies executed in India and published in
national and international media journals. For a clear picture of Internet users and
their uses, studies need to be conducted in different parts of the country, if not on
a pan Indian level. Such studies will certainly help in understanding functional
relevance of Internet from an active audience perspective. In addition, such studies
will also help in making the new medium more relevant to the varied sections of
users. Some of the findings will also be of help in predicting the uses of Internet
which in turn will be of value to WWW industry. Aside all these possible benefits,
Indian studies will also help to examine various aspects of uses and gratification
theory, especially the gratifications that drive people to use the new medium. In
this context, the present study was conceived to examine the uses of Internet by
the student community of Kerala from the uses and gratification perspective.

A question can be raised, why confine the study to student community? Audience
analysis by several organizations at different points of time have shown that teens
70
 Chapter III

and young adults are the most avid users of Internet. A 2005 survey conducted in
India by Internet firm Wesra showed that teenagers were spending more time
online than anyone else, it was the youth in the age group of 20-27 who hogged
maximum Internet time (Natu, 2005). Such a trend appears to be universal. For
instance, in USA, 86.7 percent of youngsters in the age group 18 to 24 were online
during 2003 (Hargittai & Hinnant, 2008). According to 2005 Pew Internet and
American Life project survey young adults (18 – 24 years) were using social
networks more than the older adults (Lenhart, 2009). That being the case, it is
appropriate to assess the uses and gratifications of Internet among students, the
dominant users of Internet as has been done by most researchers elsewhere .

Kerala was chosen as study locale as it happens to be the most literate State in
India with an even spread of educational facilities. Another reason for selecting
Kerala is that it is yet to get on the IT superhighway unlike few other States which
boast of a fast growing, world class IT industry. This makes it a part of the majority
of the States where information technology is being assimilated as a part of normal
growth with some special projects undertaken by the government to take
information technology to towns and villages.

1.0 STUDY OBJECTIVES

The severe paucity of research on users and uses of Internet in India calls for the
conduct of exploratory studies so as to map Internet usage habits and motives
among students. Hence, the present study was conceived as exploratory in nature
and was designed to investigate a wide gamut of areas ranging from students’
Internet use habits, affinity, gratifications and the differences among students
belonging to various socio demographic backgrounds. These were some of the
aspects this study delved into with the following specific objectives:

1. To assess students’ usage patterns of Internet and other mass media –

newspapers, magazines, television and radio – in terms of usage (i)
regularity and (ii) time spent.
71
 Chapter III

2. To assess students’ Internet usage (i) longevity, (ii) regularity and (iii) time
spent in respect of users’ socioeconomic variables: gender, age, education,
income and location.
3. To assess students’ Internet affinity and correlate it with Internet usage (i)
longevity, (ii) regularity and (iii) time spent.
4. To gauge students’ Internet affinity variations, if any, in respect of users’
gender, education, income and location; and correlate Internet affinity with
Internet satisfaction.
5. To assess the gratifications students seek from the Internet.
6. To examine the bearing of students’ gender, age, education, income and
location on their Internet gratifications.

2.0 SURVEY METHOD

New media researchers have made use of a number of methodologies

independently or in combination to gain information on use and gratification
patterns. Perhaps due to the nature of the Internet, surveys have been used more
often in previous studies, though a few have conducted content analysis and
experiments. As detailed in the previous chapter, face-to-face surveys with self
administered questionnaires call for more time, manpower and cost as against the
relative ease inherent in online surveys. But the return rate in online surveys is
low. A low return rate also affects the sample from being representative of the
population. Therefore, face-to-face surveys with self administered questionnaires
remains the most appropriate data collection method as it ensures data collection
from a sample drawn to represent the population. In view of these advantages,
survey method was used in this study and the data was collected from the sampled
groups of students through a structured questionnaire.

72
 Chapter III

3.0 SAMPLING PROCEDURE

The universe of this study was students in Kerala studying in class IX, X, Plus One
and Plus Two courses in higher secondary schools, and Undergraduate and Post
Graduate courses in colleges.

To arrive at a representative student sample of Internet users in the state of Kerala,

a multi- stage sampling procedure was adopted. In the first stage, Kerala was
categorized into three regions namely Southern Kerala (consisting of
Thiruvananthapuram, Kollam, Pathanamthitta, Idukki, and kottayam districts),
Central Kerala (Alleppey, Ernakulam, Thrissur and Palakkad districts) and Northern
Kerala (consisting of Malappuram, Kozhikode, Wayanad, Kannur and kasargode
districts). One district from each of these regions was chosen randomly. The
chosen districts were: Thiruvananthapuram, Ernakulam, and Kozhikode. This
enabled the researcher to obtain a cross section of the population so that regional
differences if any could be factored in.

In the second stage, two higher secondary schools and two colleges were randomly
selected from each district. Keeping in view the limited resources available for
deployment of large manpower and also the factors of time and logistics, only
those higher secondary schools which were offering IX, X as well as Plus One, Plus
Two courses were included in the sampling frame. Likewise, only those colleges
which were offering Graduate and Post graduate courses were taken into
consideration for sampling. Of the two selected higher secondary schools and two
colleges randomly selected from each district, one was from the urban location and
the other from a rural area. Thus, a total of six higher secondary schools, and six
colleges represented the entire state. See Table 1 for sampling schema.

In the third stage, a quota sample of 50 students was fixed for each of the higher
secondary schools; 25 students from classes IX and X and the remaining 25 from
Plus One and Plus Two classes. A quota of 100 students comprising of 50 from
Graduate courses and 50 from Post Graduate courses was fixed for each of the
73
 Chapter III

randomly chosen urban and rural colleges. In this manner, each district was be
represented by 300 students.

Table 1: Sampling Schema

Students
SL. Urban/
Districts School/ College Sample
No Rural
size
1. Kozhikode Urban Silver Hills Higher Secondary 50
(North Kerala) School, Kozhikode
Rural Govt Higher Secondary 50
School, Chaliyam
Urban Govt Arts &Science College, 100
Meenchanda
Rural S.N College, Chelannur 100
2 Ernakulam Urban The Choice School, Ernakulam 50
(Middle Kerala) Rural Govt. Higher Secondary 50
School, Ezhikkara
Urban Sacred Heart College, Thevara 100
Rural S.N.M College, Maliankara 100
3. Thiruvananthapuram Urban St Thomas Higher Secondary 50
(Southern Kerala) School, Mukkola
Rural Govt Higher Secondary 50
School, Keezharoor
Urban Mar Ivanios College, 100
Thiruvananthapuram

Rural S.N College, Chempazhanti 100

Total Sample 900

For the final selection of the designated quota of students from each of the
sampled schools, one class was randomly selected from IX and X classes and
another from Plus One and Plus Two classes. Thus, two classes were selected from
each school and from the classes Internet users were identified. From the identified

74
 Chapter III

Internet users, 50 students were randomly picked. The selected users were
assembled in a group and were administered the questionnaire. A similar approach
was used in the case of colleges too. But the strength of the Graduate class was
less than 40 students in one class. So two classes had to be randomly drawn from
each college to arrive at the quota of 50 graduate students who were users of
Internet. In the case of Post Graduate classes, the class strength was far lower, just
about 25 students in a class. Therefore, three Post Graduate classes had to be
randomly drawn from all classes so as to arrive at the quota sample of 50 Post
Graduate students who were users of Internet. The Internet users were
administered the questionnaire in groups as was done in the case of students from
schools.

The students were briefed about the study and were given instructions in
responding to the questions (See questionnaire in Appendix I).

In this manner, a total of 900 students were surveyed in the three districts; 300
each in Thiruvananthapuram, Ernakulam, and Kozhikode districts respectively. The
data collection was completed in the month of September 2009.

4.0 QUESTIONNAIRE AND OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF VARIABLES

To collect the data pertaining to the study a questionnaire was prepared. It had
items to elicit data on key variables such as students’ socio demographic variables;
Internet and mass media usage; Internet affinity and Internet satisfaction; and the
motives, i.e., gratifications sought from Internet. The measures of the key
variables which also serve as operational definitions are detailed hereunder.

4.1 Mass Media Usage

The usage pattern of the mass media - newspapers, magazines, radio and television
- was gauged in terms of two dimensions: (i) regularity of use and (ii) time spent
using each medium.

75
 Chapter III

The regularity of use of a medium was gauged in terms of three categories: (i)
regular, (ii) occasional and (iii) rare. Those using the medium four days or more in a
week were categorized as regular users; those consuming it for one to three days in
a week were categorized occasional users; and those using it less frequently
constituted the rare users.

The amount of time spent using a medium was assessed through four categories:
(a) less than ½ hour, (b) ½ hour to 1 hour, (c) 1 hour to 2 hours, (d) more than 2
hours. Those using the medium for more than 2 hours were reckoned as heavy
users and those using it for only less than ½ an hour were the light users. The
moderately heavy users used it for 1 to 2 hours, while the moderately light users
used it for ½ hour to 1 hour.

4.2 Internet Usage

In this study, Internet usage pattern was explored from three perspectives of
(i) longevity of use, (ii) regularity of use, and (iii) time spent using Internet.

The longevity of use was measured through four longevity slots: (i) Less than six
months, (ii) six months to less than one year, (iii) one year to less than three years,
and (iv) more than three years. Those using the medium for less than six months
were reckoned as newcomers to the cyber world, while those using it for more
than three years were the netizens who were familiar with the medium since a long
time.

Internet is a new medium and it may not be accessible like other media every day
to most users, therefore the regularity of Internet use was defined differently in
terms of three categories: (i) regular, (ii) occasional, and (iii) rare. Those using the
medium once a week or more were categorized as regular users, those consuming
it once a fortnight or more, but less than once a week were the occasional users.
And those using it less frequently than the occasional users constituted the rare
users.

76
 Chapter III

Time spent using Internet was evaluated in an identical manner to time spent using
other media described above. Time spent online was assessed through four
categories: (i) less than ½ hour (light users), (ii) ½ hour to 1 hour (moderately light
users), (iii) 1 hour to 2 hours (moderately heavy users), and (iv) more than 2 hours
(heavy users).

4.3 Affinity

As described in previous chapter, media researchers consider media affinity to have

a bearing on media use patterns, and uses and gratifications. In simple terms,
media affinity can be defined as an attitude towards a medium that reflects the
importance people attach to a medium and its content. In other words, it is an
indicator of audience attachment to a medium as well as its importance in their
life. In this study, Rubin’s TV affinity scale (1981) was adapted to assess the
importance of Internet among students. The five-point, five-item Likert type scale
consisted of the following five statements: (i) I would rather access Internet than
do anything else, (ii) I could easily do without Internet for several days, (iii) I would
feel lost without Internet, (iv) If I am unable to access Internet I would not miss it,
and (v) Accessing Internet is one of the most important things I do each day. For
each statement, respondents were expected to indicate their level of agreement
on a five-point scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree which were
to be scored from 1 to 5 to develop an affinity index. The affinity index could range
from 5 – 25. The higher the mean index score, the higher is the affinity; the lower
the score, the lower the affinity towards Internet.

4.4 Satisfaction

Communication satisfaction is an outcome that reflects fulfillment of media users’

expectations from the media. It has been described as an affective dimension of
audience activity (Hecht, 1978; Perse & Rubin, 1988). In this study a single item
was used to assess satisfaction with Internet use. Students were asked ‘overall,
how satisfied are you with the job the Internet does in providing you with the
77
 Chapter III

things you are seeking?’ Three response options were: satisfied, not satisfied,
neither.

5.0 GRATIFICATIONS SCALE

Ever since Greenberg (1974, 1975) developed a motives scale to assess London
school students’ reasons for watching television, researchers have used motives
scales in determining the gratifications audience seek from mass media including
Internet. In that path, the television motives scale developed and refined by Rubin
(1981, 1983) has been adapted in varying ways either independently or in
combination with other motives scales in Internet gratifications studies. Such
studies are not being dealt here as these have been detailed in the previous
chapter. But the concept of motives and gratifications as is being used in
gratification research need to be explained from the definitional point of view.

Going by the meaning of the word, motive can be defined as a need, want, interest,
or desire that propels people in a certain direction. In the context of the media
use, it is the motives that make audience seek out and use certain media and their
content to satisfy their need(s). The motives are driven by certain socio-
psychological needs resulting in the gratification of needs. Thus, gratification is
defined as a source of satisfaction, reward, pleasure or fulfillment of a need. The
socio-psychological and goal directed media use activity driven by motives has
been well explained by Rubin (1994): "communication behavior, including media
selection and use, is goal-directed, purposive, and motivated; people take the
initiative in selecting and using communication vehicles to satisfy felt needs or
desires; a host of social and psychological factors mediate people's communication
behavior; and media compete with other forms of communication (i.e., functional
alternatives) for selection, attention, and use to gratify our needs or wants"
(p.420).

However, since the early years of uses and gratification research, media scholars
(Katz, Blumler & Gurevitch, 1974; Greenberg, 1974; Rosengren, 1974) had
78
 Chapter III

expressed the need to distinguish between the motives for media consumption and
the gratifications perceived from this experience. By way of making a distinction
between the two interrelated concepts, Palmgreen et al (1980) differentiated
between (i) ‘gratification sought’, which is a motive-centric, and (ii) ‘gratification
obtained’, which is an evaluation of perceived outcome of a particular experience.
Palmgreen et al (1980) and Wenner (1982) through empirical studies validated the
concepts and showed the correlations between the motives or gratification sought
and the gratifications obtained. Thus, motives function in concert with one
another to produce certain patterns of media gratifications (Rubin, 1983). As a
result of such refinements of the concepts, motives or gratifications sought have
come to refer to the same concept (Stone, 2003).

Against this background, most uses and gratification studies have used motive
statements to assess the gratifications audiences seek from the media. As
explained in the previous chapter, it has been a common practice among Internet
uses and gratifications researchers, to adapt the motives scales developed and
validated by past researchers in conjunction with identification of new motives
elicited from a sample of media users. Rubin’s television motives scale (1981) in
particular has been adopted in quite a few Internet uses and gratifications studies
conducted by Perse and Dunn (1998), Kaye (1998),Ferguson and Perse (2000),
Papacharissi and Rubin (2000). Several of the subsequent studies such as Johnson
& Kaye (2003a, 2003b), Kaye & Johnson (2002, 2004), Lin (2002), Kaye (2005) and
others have combined motivation items from several sources and modified them
for the study of Internet uses and gratifications. Choi, Watt, Dekkers and Park
(2004) in their study of Internet use in the US, the Netherlands and South Korea,
identified varying gratification typologies which included two new gratifications of
self improvement and economic incentive. Dawning upon from these studies, a
scale was developed to assess the gratification students seek from Internet.

79
 Chapter III

5. 1 Internet Gratification Scale

To construct an Internet gratification scale, a set of gratifications common to past

studies cited above were identified. To verify whether Indian students have unique
motives associated with Internet, a focus group of 15 students was asked to list the
reasons for using Internet. This exercise yielded Internet-specific answers such as
using Internet for learning computers, IT applications and also using Internet to
search for bargain prices, online purchases, e-banking and education. From these
two approaches, a set of 11 motives dimensions were identified. Of these, the
relaxation motive which appears in many earlier uses and gratification studies was
dropped as the interactive nature of the Internet demands attention and
involvement from the audience. As is well known, activities such as accessing the
websites, browsing, reading and understanding the content, choosing the
appropriate hyperlinks by pointing and clicking make Internet an active experience
devoid of rest and relaxation. Some researchers (Ferguson & Perse, 2000) have not
found relaxation to be a salient Internet motive. Hence, relaxation was dropped
and 10 motives dimensions were retained. The retained dimensions were:
entertainment, pass time, information, education, IT application, escape, habit,
social interaction, interpersonal relations and financial transactions. On each
dimension, three statements were formulated to constitute the 30-item Internet
gratification or motives scale. The 30 statements were:

1. I use the Internet because I want to be entertained.

2. I use the Internet because it is fun.
3. I use the Internet because I enjoy it.
4. I use the Internet because it is a habit
5. I use the Internet because it is part of my daily routine.
6. I access the Internet at the same time everday.
7. I use the Internet to maintain interpersonal relations.
8. I use the Internet to belong to a group
9. I use the Internet to let others know I care about them
80
 Chapter III

10. I use the Internet to interact with others.

11. I use the Internet because it makes me feel less lonely.
12. I use the Internet to meet new people online
13. I use the Internet to pass time when bored.
14. I use the Internet when I have nothing better to do.
15. I use the Internet to occupy my time.
16. I use the Internet to escape from day to day pressures and responsibilities.
17. I use the Internet to forget about my problems.
18. I use the Internet because it makes me feel less tense.
19. I use the Internet to learn what is going on in the world and in the
neighbourhood.
20. I use the Internet to look for information.
21. I use the Internet to find out things I need to know in my daily life.
22. I use the Internet because it helps me in my educational activities.
23. I use the Internet because it helps me to prepare for seminars/ assignments
/research.
24. I use the Internet because it enables me to practice online tests/send online
application forms to colleges/universities etc.
25. I use the Internet so as to gain control of information technology.
26. I use the Internet because it enables me to become familiar in computer use
27. I use the Internet to learn many web applications.
28. I use the Internet because it helps me to save money.
29. I use the Internet to look for products/ services at bargain prices.
30. I use the Internet for online job hunting/banking/e-commerce activities.

The statements in a mixed format were included in the questionnaire and the
student respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with reasons
for using Internet on a five-point Likert type scale (See Questionnaire in Appendix
I). The five points were: strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree

81
 Chapter III

and strongly disagree. These were to be scored as 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1 respectively (See

Questionnaire in Appendix I for the 30-item five-point Likert type scale).

In the analysis of data relating to the 30-items motives scale, the standard
procedure of Principal Component Analysis with Varimax rotation was planned to
be used to extract the motives factors. In retaining factors, Kaiser Criterion (Kaiser
1960), was to be applied. This criterion retains factors with an Eigen value of
greater than 1. Based on their components, the factors were to be given
appropriate gratifications labels. Statistical tests like t test, ANOVA, needed to be
conducted to find out how Internet gratifications differ across various socio
demographic groups. To indentify the group(s) where the differences are marked
and statistically significant, Bonferoni test was to be conducted.

The data generated from above described instruments was analysed in respect of
the five socio demographic variables: age, gender, education, location, and income
to examine whether these have any bearing on Internet use and gratification and
affinity to Internet. Standard statistical procedures were used in testing their
significance as described in the succeeding chapter.

6..0 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

In today’s multimedia scenario, Internet is rapidly gaining in popularity and

importance. Its uses and applications are varied; while some uses are extensions of
the older media, some other uses are unique to this new medium. In this context,
this study is a timely attempt to gain a better understanding of the uses and
gratifications of Internet.

As mentioned in earlier chapters, while there is an impressive array of Internet

research literature in the Western context, such studies are still relatively scarce in
developing countries like India. Perhaps this is an indication that “new media
themselves have developed and diffused according to different time scales in

82
 Chapter III

different places.” (Lievrouw, 2007, p.20). In the context of a paucity of detailed

studies in India, this study assumes importance.

The results of the study will be of value in ascertaining the gratifications students
seek from Internet. Students could use it as a powerful aid for education and
information or as a tool to pass time, socialize and entertain. Therefore, it is
pertinent to know how and why, various sections of students use this medium. The
analysis will throw light on the extent of digital divide. This aspect may be value in
bridging the urban-rural gap. In fact, Internet itself can become a powerful
equalizing force in developing countries if planned wisely.

This study has a few limitations. First of all, the sample is drawn from student
population of Kerala. So, the findings of the study are applicable to Kerala and
other student populations similar to Kerala students’ demographics. Another
limitation is that the results of this study cannot be generalized for the general
population.

The details of analysis and findings are reported in the next chapter.

83
 Chapter III

REFERENCES

Barlow, J.P., Birkets, S., Kelly, K., & Slouka, M. (1995). ‘What are we doing online?’,
Harper’s, August :35-46.

Choi, J., James, Watt., Ad Dekkers., & Sung, Hee Park. (2004). ‘Motives of Internet
uses: Crosscultural Perspective - the US, the Netherlands, and S. Korea’,
Paper presented at the 2004 annual meeting of the International
Communication Association, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved March 23, 2011
from http://www.allacademic.com

Ferguson, D. A., & Perse, E.M. (2000). ‘The World Wide Web as a Functional
Alternative to Television’, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(2):
155-174.

Greenberg, B. S. (1974). ‘Gratifications of television viewing and their correlates for

British children’. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (eds), The uses of mass
communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research, Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage publications,pp. 71-92.

Greenberg, B. S. (1975). ‘British children and televised violence’, Public Opinion

Quarterly, 38: 531-547.

Hargittai, E., & Hinnant, A. (2008). ‘Digital inequality: Differences in young adults’
use of the internet’, Communication Research, 35(5): 602-621.

Hecht,M. L.(1978). ‘Toward a conceptualization of communication satisfaction’,

Quarterly Journal of Speech,64:47-62.

Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (2003a). ‘Around the World Wide Web in 80 ways: How
motives for going online are linked to Internet activities among politically
interested Internet users’, Social Science Computer Review, 21 (3): 304-325.

Johnson, T. J. & Kaye, B. K. (2003b,). ‘The World Wide Web of sports: A path model
examining how online gratifications and reliance predict credibility of online
sports information’, Paper presented to the Association for Education in
Journalism and Mass Communication, Kansas City, KS.

Kaiser, H. F. (1960). ‘The application of electronic computers to factor analysis’,

Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20: 141-151.

Katz, E., Blumler, J., Gurevitch, M.( 1974) ‘Utilization of mass communication by the
individual’. In J.G.Blumler & E. Katz (eds), The uses of mass communications:
84
 Chapter III

Current perspectives on gratifications research, Beverley Hills : Sage

publications, p.20.

Kaye, B. K. (1998). ‘Uses and gratifications of the World Wide Web: From couch
potato to Web potato’, New Jersey Journal of Communication, 6: 21-40.

Kaye, B. K. (2005). ‘It's a Blog, Blog, Blog, Blog World’, Atlantic Journal of
Communication, 13 (2), 73 – 95.

Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2002). ‘Online and In the Know: Uses and
Gratifications of the Web for Political Information’, Journal of Broadcasting
and Electronic Media, 46 (1): 54-71.

Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2004). ‘A Web for all reasons: Uses and gratifications of
Internet resources for political information’, Telematics and Informatics. 21
(3): 197-223.

Lenhart, A. (2009). ‘Adults and social network websites’, Retrieved March 23, 2011
from http://www.pewinternet.org

Lievrouw, L.A., & Livingstone ,S.(2007). ‘Introduction to the first edition (2002), The
social shaping and consequences of ICTs’ In Leah. A. Lievrouw & Sonia
Livingstone (eds), The handbook of new media, social shaping and
consequences of ICTs, London: Sage publications , pp.15-32.

Lin, C.A. (2002). ‘Perceived gratifications of online media services among potential
users’, Telematics and Informatics, 19: 3-19.

Natu, N. (2005). ‘Teens top Internet usage survey’, Retrieved March 23, 2011 from
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Palmgreen, P., Wenner, L. A., & Rayburn II, J. D. (1980). ‘Relations between
gratifications sought and obtained: A study of television news’,
Communication Research, 7(2): 161-192.

Papacharissi, Z., & Rubin, A. M. (2000). ‘Predictors of Internet Use’, Journal of

Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 44 (2): 175 – 196.

Perse, E. M., & Dunn, D. G. (1998). ‘The utility of home computers and media use:
Implications of multimedia and connectivity’, Journal of Broadcasting &
Electronic Media, 42: 435-456.

85
 Chapter III

Perse, E.M., & Rubin, A.M. (1988). ‘Audience activity and satisfaction with favorite
television soap opera’, Journalism Quarterly,65: 368-375.

Rosengren, K.E. (1974). ‘Uses and Gratification: A Paradigm Outlined’. In J. G.

Blumler & E. Katz (eds), The uses of mass communications: Current
perspectives on gratifications research, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage publications,
pp. 269-286.

Rosengren, K.E. (1974). ‘Uses and Gratification: A Paradigm Outlined’. In J. G.

Blumler & E. Katz (eds), The uses of mass communications: Current
perspectives on gratifications research, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage publications,
pp. 269-286.

Rubin, A. M. (1981). ‘An examination of television viewing motivations’,

Communication Research, 8: 141-165.

Rubin, A. M. (1994). ‘Media uses and effects: A uses-and-gratifications perspective’.

In J. Bryant & D. ZiIImann (eds), Media effects:Advances in theory and
research, Hillsdale, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 417-436.

Rubin, A.M. (1983). ‘Television uses and gratifications: The interactions of viewing
patterns and motivations’, Journal of Broadcasting, 27 (1):37-51.

Stone, G., Singletary, M., & Richmond, V.P. (2003). ‘Clarifying communication
theories’, Delhi: Surjeet publications.

Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). ‘Netsurfers don’t ride alone: Virtual communities
as communities’. In P.Kollock & M.Smith (eds), Communities in
cyberspace,Berkeley,CA: University of California Press, pp 167-194.

Wenner, L. A. (1982). ‘Gratifications sought and obtained in program dependency:

A study of network evening news programs and 60 Minutes’,
Communication Research, 9: 539-560.

86