Overview Of Reality Television Programming

Published Date: 23 Mar 2015 Last Modified: 27 Apr 2017

Reality television programming has been around since the first broadcast of Candid Camera in the late 1940s, but this type of programming became more popular in recent years as a result of different factors. Rowen, (2000) attributed the debut of the Survivor in the year 2000 as the beginning of the infiltration of reality programming in today's television landscape. This type of television programming has now becoming popular among different television audience globally and has also gained recognition of the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences who in 2003 added "Best Reality Show" as an Emmy category. While studies in reality television are relatively limited despite the recent surge in its programming, efforts is hereby made in this study to review or summarize previous research on reality television programming.

The increase in reality television programming may undoubtedly be related to with the increasing number of cable channels, which allows advertisers to reach smaller markets (Hiebert and Gibbons, 2000) with the majority of reality television programming is geared towards the individuals under twenty five years old (Frank, 2003). MTV has been presenting the Real World to this target younger demographic for more than ten years. Frank (2003) suggests that younger viewers are attracted to reality television programmes because the programmes show individuals and situations which relates to what they are used to on daily basis. According to Rowen (2000), the popularity of reality television began with the debut of Survivor which was first aired in 2000. From thence, this genre of television programming started gaining attraction and attention on network primetime television. This was when reality programmes started to target an older demographic. There is a variety of programmes that still target the younger demographic, but now there are more programmes that target a much wider demographic. For example, network primetime programmes such as The Apprentice target the 18 - 49 demographic (Rowen, 2000). Because of this age range, it is most likely that a greater percentage of individuals now watch reality television today than in the time past.

Nabi, Biely, Morgan, and Stitt, (2003) examined the genre of reality television programming itself. It was observed that a multidimensional space analysis of all television programmes indicates that reality television is a genre that is distinct from all of the other pre-existing genres. However, not all reality programmes can be considered as one cohesive genre. There are two dimensions with the first one is presented as a continuum due to its suitability for primetime programming. The second dimension is 'fiction-real', this is a continuum based on whether the programmes were portrayed as fictional or realistic based programmes. Some reality programmes have been listed as fictional because for some reasons, audience members do not perceive them as realistic (Nabi et al, 2003). Interestingly, not all reality programmes were classified as reality, and not all fictional programmes were classified as fictional.

In another study, Nabi, Stitt, Halford and Finnerty, (2006) used multidimensional scaling to understand the subgroups of reality television programming. There were two dimensions along which viewers thought about reality television - romance and competitiveness. Dating programmes were found to be a unique type of programming with no relationship with other programme types. The other subgroups of reality television programming were found to be fluid and difficult for viewers to separate one from another because of the overlap among the categories. As a way of creating better understanding, Nabi et al (2006) encourages reality television researchers to focus on the qualities of the programmes and not the categories.

Some research has sought to discover why people watch reality television programmes. Reiss and Wiltz (2004) in a study, asked individuals to rate themselves on Reiss's 16 basic life motives and also to report how much they viewed reality programmes and how much they enjoyed these programmes. Results indicated that the appeal to reality television programmes was dependent on the amount of reality television programmes watched by the individuals. The more reality programmes an individual reported liking, the more status oriented the individual is likely to be. Individuals found to place a higher value on vengeance were found to be more motivated by social life, less motivated by honour, more focused on order, and more concerned with romance. Reiss and Wiltz (2004) found that the reality television programmes that people prefer to watch are those that stimulate their motives and fundamental values the most. For example, people who place premium on romance in relationships are very much likely to watch The Bachelor, but if they value work or entrepreneurship, then they may prefer to go for The Apprentice reality programme. Therefore, it can be concluded that the motif for watching reality television programmes is based on their individual values and desires. Many individuals would easily indicate that they enjoy watching other people on reality television programmes, but this is not to say that the competitors are not aware that they are being watched. Nabi et al (2003) in their study concludes that people watch reality programmes because they enjoy watching real people instead of actors and that the uses and gratifications sought by reality television audiences is the reason why regular viewers watch the programmes because they find it entertaining, for the enjoyment of watching other people's life, and the self-awareness they receive from these programmes.

Cognitive and emotional predictors of reality television were examined by Nabi et al (2006) and found that happiness, para-social relationships, dramatic challenge social self-awareness, comparison and negative outcomes are factors which affect the enjoyment of reality television programmes. It was also found that reality television programmes did not appeal much to the audience when compared to other genres of television programming. However, this was attributed to the limited ability of the programmes to evoke positive emotions rather than the negative emotions which the programmes provoked. They also determined that perceived reality was not related to enjoyment from viewing reality television programming and that various dimensions of perceived reality were related, but not as a whole.

Hall (2006) conducted focus groups to understand why participants enjoy watching reality television programming. It was found that participants enjoyed reality programmes most because of their humour and suspense as well as the fulfilment of social functions which participants get from watching the programmes. The participants noted that they have watched reality programmes with friends, and also discussed about the reality programmes they watched with their friends too. The study revealed that the participants' view of reality television programming as realistic was just weak as the criteria for judging (realness) were different from show to show and changed as new programmes were broadcast. This therefore, makes perceived reality to be a difficult concept to measure. Papacharissi and Mendelson (2007) examines the gratifications sought from reality television and their findings indicates that respondents reported watching reality television programmes mainly to pass the time or for entertainment purposes. They noted that the respondents who reported watching for entertainment reasons were most likely to perceive the programmes as being real.

Barton (2006) examined reality television programming and gratifications obtained by audience members. Findings from the study indicated that the content of the reality show influenced the gratifications obtained by the viewers. A new gratification known as "personal utility" which has not been studied was identified in the study. Personal utility was identified as one of the strongest predictors of overall gratifications obtained by reality television viewers. Personal utility refers to the viewer gaining something personally useful from the programme. It is therefore important to understand that viewers watch for different reasons. These reasons may lead to differing perceptions by viewers and thus differing effects. Therefore, individual difference variables have also been found to moderate why people watch reality television programmes (Barton 2006).

Nabi et al (2003) while examining the gratifications received from reality television programming, discovered sex as a significant distinguishing factor. For instance, men were noted to be more entertained by reality programmes and as such, formed para-social relationships more often than women do. Reiss and Wiltz (2004) in their study examined how sex moderates the effects of reality television programming on their respondents and reported that they did not find sex as a significant influence on reality television outcomes. Rather, age was found to be a significant influence on reality television outcomes. Younger viewers reported becoming more self-aware and entertained from watching reality programmes, while older viewers reported engaging in social comparisons from viewing reality television. Race was also found to have an impact on media use outcomes. For instance, whites were found to identify with the characters, while non-whites were found to learn more information from reality television programming (Nabi et al, 2003).

2.1.2 Perceived Reality and Reality Television Programming

Before the development of reality television programmes, perceived reality has been generating much interest among media researchers. Potter's (1988) conceptual definition of perceived reality is a construct composed of three dimensions, with the first being defined as the "belief in the literal reality of television messages" (p.31). This component, known also as the magic window deals with how much the viewer believes that the mediated message from television reflects the outside world. Secondly, utility is defined as the practicality of the viewer applying what is viewed on television in his/her daily living. It also denotes the importance and extent to which people can relate the information they get from television into their own lives. Thirdly, identity refers to relating with a character or personality television programmes and this is also seen as the extent to which the viewer thinks a character plays a part in the viewers' actual life (Potter, 1988). Magic window, utility, and identity are central to the understanding of a viewer's perception of reality because each of these components will affect how a viewer perceives reality in a television programme.

In examining perceived reality, Cavender and BondMaupin (1993) examined crime reality television programming, looking at programmes like America's Most Wanted. This was done based on story selection, the techniques of cinematographic as well as the producer's claims. Crime based reality television programmes were found to depict a very real sense of danger to the audience as they were found to be high in the identity component. Because of the images presented in crime reality programme programmes, it was easy for the viewers to identify with the characters that were presented as victims. Cavender and BondMaupin (1993) notes that participating in reality programmes means that the viewers are now part of the reality. This obviously makes it difficult to distinguish the reality in the programme from any other aspect of life. Their study suggests that reality programming has a unique form because of the presentation of realistic characters, settings, and plot. Another study which examined the perceived reality of reality television programmes is Meng and Lugalambi (2003). The study found that respondents did not view reality programmes as real. Perceived believability of the program mediated the relationship between the type of programme viewed and the perceived utility. The researchers argue that the best manner to examine perceived reality is by the degree of personal utility that the viewer receives from the reality programmes.

2.1.3 Defining reality television programming

Reality television programmes are gradually becoming the toast of television stations and networks in recent times (Hall, 2006 and Stern, 2007). Since the success of the genre's first big network hit, the Survivor (CBS), the number of reality programmes on television has multiplied, both on broadcast and cable networks. To Seibel and Kerschbaumer, (2004), Reality television programmes were first recognized as an official genre of television in 2004 even though it has become immensely popular in the years prior.

Reality programmes or, as they are alternatively known, "unscripted" dramas have been somewhat difficult to define, due to the rapid growth which has caused the genre to expand into various forms (Hall, 2006; Nabi et al., 2003). While they are all considerably different, programmes like the Big Brother Show, Biggest Looser, The Apprentice, Gulder Ultimate Search, Survivor, Fear Factor, etc. have all been considered to be reality programmes, although each is structured in a slightly different form. There must be caution in describing reality television as simply programming that represents reality because this would force the inclusion of news programmes and talk programmes, which, are generally not considered as part of the genre. Nabi et al (2003, p. 304) while attempting to situate the precincts of reality television programming described them as "programmes that film real people as they live out events (contrived or otherwise) in their lives, as these events occur." This description becomes Important as it assumes that the events on the television screen are chronological, and that the participants are not working from a script, the show is filmed in a non-studio environment and that the purpose of the programme must be entertainment. While it leaves room for a wide range of programming, this definition excludes talk programmes which, in some ways, draw upon some of the same appeals and strategies to attract viewers, and have been considered as forerunners of reality television (Reality Television, 2004). However, Hall, (2004) notes that the popular press has considered programmes, such as American Idol and Shocking Behaviour Caught on Tape, to be reality fare, even though they do not meet these criteria. Deery (2004) notes that reality television does not necessarily have to be "realistic", nor does it have to depict common or everyday experiences. Deery further notes that the reality of reality television programmes is usually translated as the experience of real or ordinary people (i.e., unknown non-actors) in an actual and unscripted environment. It does not require that the situation must be ordinary, but that there should be a particular kind of viewer access.

The definition of reality television to audiences seems to be as inconsistent as it is in academia, though slightly more inclusive. In a study of the public perception of reality programmes, Hall (2006) notes that some programmes such as Real World and Cops were unanimously considered by most respondents to be of the reality genre. Most of the respondents in the study believe that the presence of non-actors behaving independently from any sort of script was a mandatory criterion for reality television. Additionally, for some, a competition element helped define a show in the reality category. Hall noted that this was not necessarily a criterion because the competition was realistic, but rather that it seemed to be a central element for a large number of programmes that have been labelled as "reality." The most defining characteristic for these research participants was the realism factor.

Perhaps the most central element in determining the strength of a particular programme's membership in the programming category, however, was the nature of the show when compared to real life situations. Hall (2006, p. 198) notes that "the understanding that the programme was non-scripted, which carries the implication that the behaviour of the cast members is self-determined and a true expression of their own personalities and wills, was repeatedly implied to be a determining factor of whether a show should be considered a reality programme."

It seems, however, that a viewer's task of determining whether or not the content of a programme is real may not be a simple task. Stern (2007) points out that the reality element of reality television is, at best, only a claim. The desire of producers to create an entertaining programme often leads them to distort events to make them more dramatic. The result is a programme that dances on the line between truth and fiction, often leaving the viewers confused about what is real and what is not. Stern notes further that manipulation of reality can manifest as producers' interference with the cast, in addition to creative editing techniques.

2.2 Features of reality television (Characteristics)

Within the confines of reality television programming exists two sub-genres: voyeur-based programmes and competition-based programmes with the emphasis within each being on the different dramatic aspects of the reality being captured.

The first sub-genre, voyeur-based programmes, can most closely be compared to a documentary-style production. Programmes in this category are sometimes referred to as "docu-dramas" or "docu-soaps" (Jones, 2003). The component of producer involvement which is generally lacking in documentaries is accentuated in the voyeur-based programmes. However, this is a major area of differences between voyeur-based programming and actual documentaries. That is to say, voyeur-based reality programmes highlight the fact that the participants are incorporating the production units into their daily routines.

The second sub-genre of reality-based television is competition-based programmes. These programmes tend to bear a resemblance with traditional game shows, with the distinguishing factor being that game shows typically do not offer comprehensive surveillance of the contestants. The competition-based programmes focus on how human interaction is affected when contestants are forced to interact with each other while trying to succeed against each other in various events.

The following are the qualities that make a programme reality based.

Reality-based programming is not scripted

The most fundamental criterion for a television show to fall within the reality genre is that is must not have a script for the participants or contestants. This means that their actions and spoken words must be spontaneous. In its place, reality-based programming relies on established rules that govern the way the contestants interact with each other and their environment. These rules in essence act as a substitute for scripted materials in that they provide the contestants with a framework that dictates how their exchanges will be enacted. The idea behind this is that it offers an alternative to the predictability of fictional programming (Andrejevic, 2003).

Reality-based programming involves "ordinary" people instead of actors

It is argued that one thing that makes reality programming appealing is that it draws its contestants directly from the audience. Dovey (2000, p. 86) notes that "ordinary people and their dramatic experiences are the staple of Reality television" Syvertsen (2001 p. 319) describes "ordinary" people as, those "people who are not known in the media, they are not experts, celebrities or newsworthy for any other reason - people who are, in principle, interchangeable with one another." Andrejevic (2003, p.4).) notes that part of what makes reality-based programming appealing is "its lottery-like ability to make a star out of 'nobodys'"(sic)

Reality-based programming is characterised by spontaneous actions

The freedom for contestants to act on instinct or to adapt as they deem fit to any situation is a key element in what makes reality programming entertaining and unique. In most ways, the contestants are in control of the programme. There are rules governing the conduct of the contestants and operating within those set rules is an attribute possessed by reality programming alone. Andrejevic, (2003, p. 103) quoting The Real World and Road Rules producer, Jon Murray, said that "we don't have a lot of control during the production process, what we have is the control to make choices during editing." The naturalness and ingenuity displayed by the contestants is what makes reality-based programmes unique from other forms of unscripted programming such as traditional game shows. Ultimately, with reality programming, viewers get what really happens first hand since there are no re-takes or re-shoots as only that which is natural and uncontrived will be captured and ultimately aired. When looked at in terms of the benefits of spontaneity compared to traditional scripted programming, Andrejevic makes the case that the free-will of the contestants can prove to be one of the most powerful tools reality television possesses. Andrejevic, (2003) concludes that in reality programming, content becomes detached from the normal concept of scriptwriters and directors, which is now replaced by the spontaneous rhythms of real conflict and real romance.

Some element of producer involvement exists in Reality-based programming

Reality-based programming can be seen as a contrived reality where the producers create the reality in which the contestants live in. This could mean the establishment of rules for how they will get food as on Gulder Ultimate Search, Survivor and Big Brother, or requiring that they regularly update the audience through confessionals or video diary entries as on Big Brother, Gulder Ultimate Search, and The Real World Show. This is one of the key distinctions that have been made between reality-based programming and documentaries. Dovey (2000) clearly notes that interviewing participants, involving directors, producers, or cameramen in the production or in any way interacting with the subject of a documentary is considered interference and is a serious taboo in documentary filmmaking. These techniques, however, have all been used extensively in reality-based programming.

There is a comprehensive surveillance of subjects in Reality-based programmes

The primary component that distinguishes reality-based programmes from similar forms of entertainment including traditional game shows and programmes is that it provides the viewer with a perspective of how the participants are feeling and behaving outside the confines of a limited event. For example, viewers are not given the opportunity to see how contestants interact with each other after the final round has been played. This is exactly what separates reality-based programming from traditional game shows (Andrejevic 2003). According to Andrejevic (2003, p. 102), the difference between reality-based programming and traditional game shows lies in "the fact that they (reality television programmes) are based not on the documentation of exceptional moments but on the surveillance of the rhythm of day-to-day life."

This last criterion shows programmes such as The Debators, Maltina Family Dance All, and NBC's Fear Factor cannot be considered as reality-based programmes. This is because, the producers of these programmes shows film exceptional moments and do not offer comprehensive surveillance of the contestants' behaviours and interactions with others.

2.3 Reality television programmes and young audience

Reality programmes has generally been thought to appeal to a lower-income demographic (Nabi et al., 2003). The reality genre in general has been criticized as being exploitive of some of the worst characteristics, behaviours and ranks of the human race, and was long considered by the television industry to be low-brow entertainment (Freeman, 2001). Even as reality television programmes began to be accepted by the networks, advertisers were still sceptical about investing in them, primarily discouraged by audience demographic and possibly questionable materials in the programmes. Supporting Freeman's view, Atkinson and Fine (2004, p. 1) averred that "Advertisers once didn't like the thought of associating with what they regarded as often sleazy down-market fare"

A study in 2001 confirmed advertisers' suspicions when it found that 58% of regular reality audiences were in the middle to low income bracket, with annual incomes falling below $50,000 (Gardyn, 2001, p. 1). Carter (2003) notes that reality television appeals to a younger group of viewers between the age ranges of 18 - 49 years, or even narrower, between 18 - 30 years. This demographic profiles of the audience he notes, represents a coveted demographic for advertisers.

2.3.1 The appeal in reality television

The appeal of reality television ranges from mere voyeurism to a hope that it offers insights into the human condition. Nabi et al. (2003) found that the initial draw for casual viewers is generally related to boredom, while regular viewers of reality television tune in to be entertained. Some of the appeal may be the lure of watching "real people" on television. A study in 2001 revealed that 37% of the Americans polled preferred to watch real people on television, as opposed to scripted actors (Gardyn, 2001).

However, Nabi, Finnerty, Halford and Stitt (2006) suggests that some of the appeal of reality television may not reside in the quality of the "reality", but rather in the drama and suspense, elements of good storytelling, that are often found in reality programmes. Voyeurism has also been cited as a gratification of watching reality television (Hall, 2004). Although Nabi et al. (2003) questions whether or not voyeurism is an appropriate term to describe audience's motivations for viewing because cast members are aware that they are being watched and network constraints assure that explicit material does not make it on the air. Rather than the desire to view forbidden or immoral contents, the audience simply sit and enjoy watching other people's lives and interpersonal relationships. There is also the notion that reality television fulfils the ever growing American obsession with celebrity and stardom. Conlin, (2003, p. 1) avers that by making perceived nobodies into overnight superstars, reality programme seem to appeal highly to a set of American audience who are obsessed with stardom and those who crave for something different from Hollywood's celebrity system. Andrejevic (2005) also notes that part of the appeal of reality programming is the viewer's sense of access, or the thinking that the participants in the programmes could just be them. On a more basic level, reality programmes require minimum commitment from its audience.

2.4 Criticisms of reality television programmes

The actual realism of reality television (or lack thereof) and its presentation as "real" has been a subject of criticism. Nabi et al. (2003) found that while viewers perceived the casts of reality programmes to be real, they did not however see events in the programmes to be sufficiently real. Bagley (2001) says that much of what may be marketed to the public as "real" may actually be a creatively manipulated or faked reality brought about by the process of production and editing.

In his criticism of the Real World, Bagley discusses the potentially misleading production practices that attempt to give reality programmes the appearance of being real by borrowing from the documentary style. Real World, one of the first and most taunted prime examples of the reality programming, hold its authenticity to both its means of presentation and by direct statements. Every reality programme begins with the same claim of being original and authentic. In fact, Bagley (2001, p. 62) notes that "this is a true story of seven people, picked to work together, have their lives taped and find out what happens when people stop being polite and start getting real" Deery (2004) describes the reality genre as "postdocumentary". This implies that the genre has been transformed from its parent genre, documentary, but still retains some of its original elements, which are mainly in the form of its production. This semblance to documentary production is what Bagley (2001) refers to as "deceiving."

Real World's manner of presentation critically determines its acceptance as faithful documentation of material existence… with aspirations perfectly coinciding with other forms of nonfiction production… Being patterned after the television journalistic style, Real World borrows on the confidence that genre provokes in its audience, and manages in the process to evoke its own mystique of authenticity that, in the final analysis, furnishes viewers with the rationale to successfully negotiate the show's authorial ambiguity (Bagley, 2004, p. 61-62). Other scholars (Murray, 2006; Bagley, 2001) have argued that the Shaky, camera being moved about, the normal day light, natural environmental sounds, the cheap production values, the surveillance as well as the interview sections by way of confessions help to further boost the claim that Real World reality programme actually depict reality.

Some or all of these presentation tactics can be seen in various other reality television programmes such as Big Brother (CBS) and The Bachelor (ABC). At best, reality television, according to Bagley (2004) is a mixture of fiction and non-fiction. Bagley (ibid) notes specifically that most people, when placed before a camera, perform in one way or another, rather than behaving as they would in their natural settings. Again, the long period of editing which is required to reduce long hours of daily footage down into a 30 minute storyline is done with little objectivity in the mind of the produce. The production process is not influenced by the desire to accurately present situations as they are in their traditional forms of non-fiction media, but rather by a desire to entertain and sell. Bagley (2001) notes that this fact alone discredits the genre as a subjective representation of reality because its purpose goes beyond capturing unmediated human relations and events but has veered into the commercial realm.

2.4.1 Third person-perception

Other criticisms of reality television have emerged indirectly from studies of third-person perception, and have indicated that reality programmes may be "socially undesirable" in the minds of audience members. Materials that are not socially desirable have been the focus of some studies conducted on third-person perception (Paul, Salwen, and Dupagne, 2000). As noted by Bissell, Peek, and Leone (2006), numerous studies have supported the idea that people perceive others to be more affected by media messages than themselves, particularly the negative contents.

The phenomenon of negative contents has been shown in studies of political campaign messages, political advertising, commercials, rap music, and public service announcements, among other types of media (Bissell et al., 2006). In their 2006 study, Bissell, Peek, and Leone (2006),in a study which examined the perceptions of 640 college students' concerning reality television (Real World, Fear Factor and Joe Millionaire) found that the students believed that reality programmes negatively impacted others more than themselves, which the researchers suggested indicated their perceptions of reality television as "socially undesirable."

2.4.2 Drama

Although it has not been extensively documented, the content of reality television tends to be hyper-dramatized - turning seeming unimportant events into crises. This is not surprising, given that its purpose is to entertain audiences. Real World producers carefully select cast members to produce the maximum amount of drama (Stern, 2007).

Furthermore, producers of reality programmes frequently manipulate situations in order to cause conflict (Bagley, 2001; Hyde-Clark, 2004). The result of these manipulations and casting practices is repeatedly volatile. On more than one occasion in the fall 2007 season of Real World, Brooke 1, on, expressed her frustration with her housemates by indulging in screaming rants. This highly volatile behaviour is not limited to Real World alone, but can also be observed in a good number of reality programmes which includes The Apprentice and America's Next Top Model hosted by Tyra Banks. Accordingly Real World co-executive producer Joyce Corrington notes that conflicts of this sort are intentionally introduced as they bring out the best component of the programme (Stern, 2007).

Creation of cliques also seems to be common on many reality programmes. Programmes such as Gulder Ultimate Search, Big Brother and Survivor among others seem to thrive on the concept of back-biting and the creation of alliances and cliques. Participants can be seen frequently talking negatively about other cast members or working to oust those who they perceive to be a threat. All this display of drama and negative behaviour may have interesting implications for the impacts that it may have on viewers.

2.5 Review of studies

This section deals with review of studies on reality television, programming, perception and influence on audience. The reason for the review of studies is to examine similar studies in detail so as to offer insight into the concept of reality television programming and how it influences the audience. The objectives, methodologies as well as major findings shall be highlighted with a view to determining points or similarity or difference with this proposed work.

Reiss, S. and Wiltz, J. (2004). Why People Watch Reality TV. Media Psychology. Vol. No. 6: pp. 363-378

Reiss and Wiltz (2004) assessed the appeal of reality television by asking 239 adults to rate themselves on each of 16 basic motives using the Reiss Profile standardized instrument and to rate how much they watched and enjoyed various reality television programmes.

The study was a survey involving 239 adults (167 women and 72 men) participants who were recruited from one of two sources-seminars for 121 persons working in human service fields such as 4 youth groups and developmental disabilities programmes-and 117 college students enrolled in courses at a large Midwestern university. They asked the two groups to participate in the study because they had access to them rather than because of any specific characteristic that they might show. The participants agreed to volunteer with the understanding that they would be asked to complete anonymously a questionnaire about what they like and dislike but were not told the purposes of the investigation until the study was completed.

Questionnaires were used in the study and were presented in booklets entitled "Free Time Activity." The questionnaire contained 159 questions organized into three sections. The first section asked for demographic information, including age, sex, and residential state of the participants. Part B required the participants to rate how much they participated in travelling, different types of travels as well as sports and how much gratification they derived. The participants endorsed statements about how much they watched and enjoyed five different reality television programmes-Survivor (Burnett, 2001), Big Brother (Eligdoloff, 2001), Temptation Island (Couan, 2001), The Mole (Gunzo Productions, 2001), and The Real World (Bunim/Murray Productions, 2001). The purpose of imbedding the questions about reality television into a more general survey of leisure activities was to disguise the investigators' interest in reality television programme and minimize any bias or demand effects such as the participants' desire to please the experimenter by producing the results the experimenter is hoping to obtain.

Part C of the questionnaire consisted of the 128 items on the Reiss Profile of Fundamental Motives and Motivational Sensitivities (Reiss and Havercamp, 1998). This is a standardized test of 16 "intrinsic" or "end" trait motives.

The results of this study showed a statistically significant, motivational profile for people who view reality television. The results of the study on reality television supported the theoretical perspective that Reiss's 16 basic desires and values are associated with viewing and enjoying reality television programmes. The results showed that status is the main motivational force that drives interest in reality television. Again, the study reveals that those who are status conscious are likely to watch reality television programmes with pleasure and enjoyment. There are two ways in which reality television may gratify this psychological need. One is the possibility that viewers will begin to attach more importance to themselves than the ordinary people who are portrayed in reality television programmes. The idea that these are "real" people gives psychological significance to the viewers' perceptions of superiority which may not matter much if the storyline is real and as long as the participants characters are everyday people. The claim of reality television producers that millions of people are interested in watching real life experiences of ordinary people implies that ordinary people are also important in life. Ordinary people can watch the programmes, see people like themselves, and fantasize that they could gain celebrity status by being on television. Because reality television is widely watched, it is often a topic of discussion at the office. It is therefore not surprising that people who are sociable are significantly more likely than non-sociable people to watch reality televisions, even though the differences are small.

There was also the finding that that viewing reality television programmes is negatively associated with the extent to which a person embraces morality (honour). This is not surprising because many reality televisions programmes champion expedience over ethics. These differences, although statistically significant, were small. Small, significant effects also were obtained for the value of order. This finding suggests that people who dislike rules may react negatively to the many rules that must be followed by the participants of reality television programmes. The finding concerning romance suggests that the sexual aspects of some programmes attract viewers but not very many because the effect is small in magnitude. Some have questioned the intellectualism of reality television viewers, and others have questioned the physical laziness of people who like to watch television.

Although reality television viewing is generally about status, specific programmes may appeal to different psychological needs. Temptation Island, for example, portrays infidelity, which may appeal to people who value expedience (low honour) more than decency. In contrast, Survivor has more of a competitive theme which perhaps appeals to people who value vengeance.

In conclusion, the results of the study supported the general hypothesis that cultural events such as reality television programmes arouse specific combinations of 16 intrinsic feelings or happiness. This appeal of reality events is influenced by the degree of match between (a) the pattern of intensities of 16 intrinsic joys the show arouses and (b) the individual's valuations of the 16 basic joys (called a Reiss Desire Profile). Future researchers can study the relevance of this model for a much wider range of television programmes and events concerning culture. It is unlikely to work every time, of course, but it may produce reliable empirical results much more frequently than was the case with alternative methods.

This above study supports the fact that gratification is a motivating factor that drives students to watching reality television programmes. This is one of the focuses of my study. Also, the respondents of this study are youths just like the proposed respondents of my study being youths (students in Nigerian Universities).

Cherry, K. L. (2008). Reality tv and interpersonal relationship perceptions. an unpublished Ph.D. dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate school at the University of Missouri-Columbia

This research was carried out to understand the relationship between viewer motives for watching reality television, reality television exposure, and interpersonal relationship perceptions. The study examined some of the following interpersonal relationship perceptions; attachment, love and Machiavellianism.

The research used both quantitative surveys and focus group interviews as data. For the Quantitative Method, the data was collected from a pool of participants recruited from several sections of an introductory public speaking course. The participants were awarded extra credit for their participation in the study. The participants were made to complete a cross-sectional survey. Using a power convention of .80, and an alpha of .05, 300 participants were chosen as the target goal. The participants were given the questionnaire in their class. Those participating in the study were asked to return the completed questionnaire to the researcher within one week. Three focus group interviews were also conducted to help interpret the results of the study. The data were collected from a pool of participants recruited from an upper level communication course. The participants were offered extra credit for their participation.

The quantitative sample included 406 participants, and was 37% male, and 63% female. Only 17% of the sample sees themselves as feminist, because of a single item bothering on demographic. The sample comprised of 85% whites. The mean year in school was sophomore which had the mean age of 20.1. However, ages in the sample ranged from between 17 to 60 years while 16.8 was calculated as the average age of the first romantic relationship.

The questionnaire consisted of five main measures which included love/attachment style, Machiavellianism, media use, perceived realism, and viewer motives. Additionally, variables of demographic control were included. First, the study included a measure of attachment style. There are 12 items on the scale with 4 of them meant to measure each attachment style: secure, avoidant, and anxious. Respondents were asked to rate each of the statements on a scale of 1 to 5 as to how much they agreed with them,

After the data was collected and analysed, focus group interviews were conducted to help explain the results of the survey. The methodological stance under which the research took place was from an interpretive perspective and the method of generating this discourse is focus group interviewing. Fifteen participants were selected via recruitment from an upper level communication class. To be included as a participant in this study, the researcher required that the individuals consider themselves regular viewers of some currently airing reality television show. The researcher assessed individuals who watch a variety of reality programmes, as to utilize a variety of perspectives about reality television. Participants ranged in age from 20 to 26 with a mean age of 21, with nine females and six males. The fifteen participants were divided up into three separate focus group sessions. The first focus group had 4 participants, the second had 5 participants, and the third had 6 participants. The interviews lasted approximately forty-five minutes each.

Findings from the study show that positive outcomes significantly predicted reality television viewing. Watching reality television because it is entertaining, stimulating, enjoyable, exciting, or amusing was a significant predictor of watching reality television. Therefore, having a desire to watch for positive outcomes significantly predicted reality television viewing. Also, Interpersonal outcomes negatively predicted reality television viewing. Watching to avoid being alone, or when there is no one else to talk with negatively predicts reality television viewing. Relaxation outcomes and passing the time outcomes were not found to be associated with reality television viewing.

The researcher therefore believes that viewers who watch for positive outcomes are more likely to watch reality television because they are getting a positive reward from the reality show. Since they receive a positive outcome from the experience they are more likely to participate for a longer time. Therefore, if individuals are leaving the reality television experience feeling happy, cheered up, or entertained, this may increase the likelihood that they will watch more reality television.

On the other hand, watching reality television for interpersonal outcomes was negatively related to reality television exposure. It is like a quick fix for a need to socialize. Since interpersonal outcomes were a negative predictor of reality television, watching reality television programmes to keep oneself company, negatively related to watching reality television programmes. Perhaps this genre of television programming does not gratify the need for interpersonal relationships.

Finally, the researcher speculates that viewers might be driven to watch other forms of television programming for interpersonal motives because other genres of programming more easily allow for relationships to develop between viewers and television characters, especially because viewers are not likely to worry about their favourite character being 'eliminated' from a primetime drama.

Reality television programming can easily blur the concept of reality in the minds of the viewers. In many cases, the audience simply takes the perceived or portrayed reality in reality television as the same in life. Thus they expect that things will be in the real world, the same way they watch it on reality television programmes. One of the thrust of my study is to examine how reality television obstructs the idea of reality of the world in the eyes of reality television audience. This is the relationship between this study and mine.

Potratz, R. M. (2007). When is reality real? Youth perceptions of MTV reality programs. An unpublished Master's thesis presented to the faculty of the Scripps College of Communication of Ohio University, USA

This study examined how college freshmen relate to the personalities and content on MTV reality programmes. Drawing from current theories about how viewers relate to television such as identification, perceptions of realism, wishful identification and para-social interaction. The research takes a qualitative approach to understanding the particular relationships that exist between young viewers and the content and young casts of MTV reality programmes.

This research adopted survey method and in-depth interview. The first step was a survey to determine how frequently college freshmen view MTV reality programmes, and how they perceive and relate to the program content and casts. Its secondary purpose was to recruit students who watched reality programmes on MTV for the interview portion of this study. The survey was conducted in a freshman foundational course in telecommunications at a mid-sized, Midwestern university. It involved 78 students who were asked to indicate the number of hours per week that they watch television, and of those, how many hours were spent watching MTV.

The students were then asked to rate the realism of events and cast members on the MTV reality programmes on a Likert-type scale, and were given open-ended questions to explain their answers. Some students reported watching as many as 40 hours of television per week and others reported no television viewing or a preference for YouTube. The median number of television hours watched was 6 and the mode was 2. Thirty-five students reported watching MTV, or approximately 48% of the sample.. Those who did watch MTV watched an average of 2.62 hours per week. Real World was the most popular reality television show on MTV, with 24 students reporting that they watched it on a regular basis. 18 students reported watching The Hills and 16 indicated that they watched the Real World/Road Rules Challenge.

In general, students' responses indicated a high level of scepticism about the "reality" of reality-based programming on MTV. The overall reality seemed to be compromised in the minds of nearly all the respondents by what they perceived to be manipulative production processes (i.e. scripting or editing) or unrealistic situations. It is notable that a large number of students cited the production and editing processes as reasons that what they saw on the screen was not real.

In respect to individual cast members, students gave few indications that they related to the people who appeared on MTV reality programmes. There seemed to be little dispute that the cast of the reality programmes were real people, but most students indicated that the behaviour and relationships portrayed on these programmes were not representative of anything they had experienced in their own lives, and that much of it was either scripted, manipulated or provoked. It seems that, although the most common reason for watching MTV reality programmes was to watch the drama unfold, few students could relate to the situations and many felt that the characters' actions were not genuine. It seems, in this case that the appeal of the drama in these reality programmes has little relation to the people on the show or the actual outcomes of the problems, but, rather, seems to be connected to the "exaggerated" or "extreme" ways that cast members behave. The "reality" of the program seems to have little bearing on the entertainment value in watching others deal with relationships and problems. It may be concluded from these students' comments that much of the realism, or lack thereof, of reality-based programmes is derived from how well the behaviour and situations coincide with each individual viewers perceptions of what is "normal."

Furthermore, comparisons against one's own personal experience seem to largely override any knowledge about how "real" a cast member is; students judged characters to be "exaggerated" and likely "scripted" because their behaviour was outlandish, not because they had doubts that the member was who they were said to be. It was unclear whether or not the drama that many students found to be entertaining was also perceived to be born out of genuine problems and relationships, or whether it, too, was believed to be fabricated. This begs the question of how drama on these reality programmes differs from drama present on other program formats.

Relating to personalities and contents of reality television programmes is one influence of reality television programmes on its audience as espoused in the above study. Suffice to say that this is also one of the focus of my study and also the point of relation between my study and that of Potratz, R. M. (2007).

Barton, K. M. (2007). The mean world effects of reality television: perceptions of antisocial behaviours resulting from exposure to competition-based reality programming. A PhD Dissertation, submitted to the Department of Communication, College of Communication, The Florida State University, USA

This study examined the effects of competition-based reality programmes (such as Survivor and Big Brother) on viewers' perceptions of society through the application of cultivation effects research methodology. It examined whether or not increased consumption of competition-based reality programming would lead to increased perceptions of antisocial behaviours in everyday life such as lying, manipulation, and ruthlessness (those behaviours commonly depicted on competition-based reality programmes). The study was divided into two. Study I looked at competition-based reality television programmes in general and how they effected perceptions of society. Study II looked more specifically at competition-based reality dating programmes and the effects they have on viewers' perceptions of dating and relationships.

Survey method of research was adopted in study 1. Participants were recruited from undergraduate communication courses at Florida State University using convenience sampling methods. These classes represent a diversity of disciplines across campus since subjects were recruited from large lecture classes for non-majors such as public speaking (SPC 2600) and introductory communication classes (e.g., MMC 2000). Some students received extra credit for completing the study, while others received research participation credit.

A total of 607 participants completed surveys for Study I. Students were informed that their participation in the survey was voluntary, but that research participation credit or extra credit toward the class would be allocated to those who participated. Students agreeing to participate in the survey were first asked to read and sign an IRB-approved informed consent form. Surveys were administered to the students either by the researcher or by the lead instructor for the course.

The objective of the survey for Study I was to measure subjects' attitudes about the world as a mean place and their levels of television consumption. Attitudes about the world as a mean place were divided into sub-categories including untrustworthiness, the prevalence of lying, ruthlessness and competitiveness in society, general cynicism, and general mean world items. Items measuring subjects' consumption of television included overall television consumption, consumption of reality-based programming, and enjoyment of television genres and specific reality-based programmes.

For study II, Participants were also recruited from undergraduate communication courses at Florida State University using convenience sampling methods. A total of 557 participants completed surveys for Study II.

The objective of Study II was to measure participants' attitudes towards dating as a result of exposure to reality-based dating programmes. To assess participants' consumption of television in general and of reality-based dating programmes specifically, participants were asked to indicate levels of televisions consumption per day, levels of reality-based programming consumption per week, levels of reality-based dating programming per week, as well as enjoyment of certain television genres and specific reality-based dating programmes.

Findings indicated that increased consumption of competition-based reality programming was positively correlated with increased perceptions of lying and manipulation in the society. There was no significant relationships found between these programmes and increased perceptions of ruthlessness or increased perceptions of antisocial behaviours and television consumption in general. Ultimately, findings did not show any significant relationships between consumption of competition-based reality dating programmes and increased the perceptions of manipulations, ruthlessness or lying in dating, or dating as a competition.

This study examined the reasons why individuals watch reality programmes and considered how factors such as social and psychological antecedents influences reality television viewing from a uses and gratifications perspective. It is an exploratory research on reality television and uses and gratifications. It involved survey administered to reality television viewers and revealed that the most salient motives for watching reality television were habitual pass time and reality entertainment.

Papacharissi, Z and Mendelson, A. L (2007). An exploratory study of reality appeal: uses and gratifications of reality tv shows. In Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media - June, 2007

This study examine reality television effects using the using the Uses and Gratifications Model. Is uses the model to examine the nature of audience involvement in reality television and the gratifications obtained from viewing them, with an emphasis on motives for medium, psychological, and social traits that influence this use, and behaviours or attitudes that develop as a result of the combined influence of motives and traits.

Survey method of research was adopted in this study. A total of 157 students who enrolled in an introductory communication class within an urban university were surveyed about their viewing of reality television. The study also involved some graduate students who also participated to expand the sample. The sample breakdown was 70.7% female (n = 109) and 29.3% male (n = 48); 57.3% of the students were first-year (n =144), 14.6% sophomore (n = 23), 8.9% junior (n = 14), 7.0% senior (n = 11), and 7.6% graduate (n = 12). Age ranged from 18 to 34 years (M = 19.99), with a modal value of 19 years; 65.6% of the sample was White, 22.4% African American, 4.4% Asian American, 2.4% Hispanic, and 5.2% of multi-ethnic origin.

The Participants watched an average of 74 minutes of reality television (SD = 77.53) per week. Although participants received extra credit in the introductory course, participation in the study was voluntary. While the use of a college sample in communication research is frequently perceived as convenient and non-representative, in this particular case it was appropriate, since college students view reality television programming on a regular basis.

Results from this study revealed that for population involved in the study, the mode of engagement with reality television was rather inactive, and meant to serve as pastime when no other activities are available. This however, suggests that this pass time activity was integrated into the daily routine of the individual to the point where it became a ritual. The correlational and regression findings demonstrated significant and striking relationships between the motive of habitual pass time and affinity with reality television. The second most salient motive, reality entertainment, captured the appeal of reality content and reality characters.

Viewers valued the entertainment and habitual pass time motives over that of voyeurism, which was fairly surprising, considering that popular folklore frequently describes vicarious living through reality characters as one of the top appeals of reality television. Still, this does not imply that voyeurism is not present as a motive and possible gratification obtained from watching reality television; it is present, but not the most important motive.

The first significant root produced indicated that those who perceived reality television content as more realistic and primarily developed greater affinity for them were more likely to watch to fulfil entertainment and relaxation needs, and on a secondary level fulfil social interaction and companionship needs. This implied that in order for people to enjoy reality television as an entertaining and relaxing medium, they need to first accept the realism of its content as well as liking it. Contrariwise, viewers who enjoyed reality television the most for its entertainment and relaxing value also tended to perceive the meticulously edited and frequently pre-planned content of reality interaction as realistic. The second root correlations further suggested that those externally controlled, with low mobility and low levels of interpersonal interaction, were more likely to watch reality television programming to fulfil voyeuristic and companionship needs.

These results point to uses of reality television as a functional alternative to interpersonal communication channels and experiences or viewers who used the medium for its voyeuristic appeal and companion value, reality television substituted for other activities that could not be experienced due to lower mobility and lower interpersonal interaction levels. Moreover, voyeuristic and companionship motives ranked highly for viewers who found that events in their lives were controlled by others. This further supports the functional alternative uses of participatory media.

Finally, the regression findings investigated the possibility of identifying predictors of amount of reality television watching, perceived realism, and affinity with reality television. Affinity with reality television was related with all the motives except that of voyeurism, which challenges the popular notion that reality television possesses voyeuristic appeal. This result indicates that the more people watched television and reality television for entertainment, relaxation, companionship, for social interaction and as a habitual pass time with others, the more likely they were to develop greater levels of affinity for reality television programming. Amount of reality viewing, in this particular model, was predicted by days per week of watching reality, total amount of television watching, and the reality entertainment television motive. Therefore, among fans of television and reality television as an entertainment television medium, amount of reality television viewing was high. Interpreted further, this could indicate that unless people watch a lot of television for its entertainment value to begin with, reality television will not have any additional appeal. In other words, the reality genre is not likely to attract new audiences or lead to high consumption of television, unless those tendencies are already pronounced.

One of the focuses of my study is to find out the gratification which students in Nigerian Universities derive from watching reality television programmes. Just like the study of Papacharissi and Mendelson (2007), my study intends to find out the kind of gratification which students in Nigerian Universities derive from the various reality television programmes which they are exposed to.

2.6 Theoretical framework

2.6.1 Perception/Reception Theory

Perception has been defined as 'the process by which we utilize external sensory information in combination with other internal conscious and unconscious workings of the brain to make sense of the world' (Barry, 2002). This is specifically the hunting ground of media/communication theorists; and the contact point of the cognitive dissonance theory, the selective exposure theory as well as the reception theory.

According to Klapper (1960), Mass Communication, as a mediator in persuasive communication, does not influence the individual directly but it does reinforce the individual's predisposition - and the five mediating factors here are:

Predispositions and the related processes of selective exposure, perception, and retention.

The groups, group norms, to which the audience members belong.

Dissemination of the content of communication interpersonally.

The exercise of opinion leadership.

The nature of mass media in a free enterprise society (Klapper, 1960)

These mediating factors directly or in directly relate to the context of the media/mass communication and it is here that the relationship between perception and reception theories exists.

Three names are recurrent in the abundant literature on reception theories:

Hans-Robert Jauss (1982) who developed the theory for the interrogation of the literary text.

Stuart Hall (1982) who applied it to media and communication studies; and

Sussan Bennett (1990) who carried the discourse into theatre/performance.

Reception theories interface the text/performance with the reader/audience; and meaning is seen as residing less in the text and more in the context: it is from the context that the reader/audience negotiates the meaning of the text/performance. Context, in this regard, is seen primarily as a function of:

the individual's cultural background

the individual's life experien