Lull draws on studies by S H Chaffee and J M McLeod outlining two styles of family communication.
Socio-oriented
Concept-oriented
Lull studied 85 families (327 individuals, after those younger than 7 were ruled out as unable to respond to the questionnaire with validity). An interview schedule was used. The items used to ascertain socio- and concept-orientation were:
Trained observers lived with the families from mid-afternoon until bedtime for two consecutive days (in 1978). The interviews were conducted the next day. It was hoped that by then a degree of trust had been established.
Socio- and concept-oriented individuals differed significantly in their reported social uses of television. In general, socio-oriented individuals were far more likely to report that they used television for social purposes. Socio-oriented individuals used television:
Environmental
Regulative
Communication facilitation
Affiliation/avoidance
Social learning
Competence/dominance
Socio-oriented individuals differed dramatically from concept-oriented individuals in finding television useful for facilitating communication within the family in all of the various ways categorized by Lull.
Socio-oriented individuals were found to model social behaviour and to use television as a social learning tool. They also used television as a resource for conversational topics and for providing a desirable social activity. Television was regarded as an important part of the communication environment at home and as a resource to further interpersonal goals.
In contrast to concept-oriented individuals, socio-oriented parents reported that television was not used by them in order to regulate the experiences of their children through gatekeeping or to transmit values (p<0.01). Socio-oriented parents also reported that television was not useful for exercising authority, or for providing substitute role-portrayals in single-parent families (p<0.05).
Despite earlier studies showing that socio-oriented families engage in parental control and punishment, the socio-oriented parents in this study did not regulate viewing or use television to exercise authority.The amount of television viewing correlated positively with socio-orientation scores, particularly for fathers and mothers. Socio-oriented individuals watched more television than concept-oriented individuals. Lull suggests that this parental heavy viewing may help to explain why these parents were reluctant to restrict their children's use of the medium.
Correlations between concept-orientation and the social uses of television were generally negative and low.
Concept-oriented individuals reported that they did not use television for companionship, to illustrate experiences, to give them something to say, to reduce interpersonal anxiety, to make consumer decisions, or to gain conversational entrance (p<0.01). They also reported that they did not use television to plan their activities, to model their behaviour, or as a role reinforcer (p<0.05).
Concept-oriented individuals rejected nearly all of the social uses of television. However, there were a few positive correlations between concept-orientation and the social uses of television. Concept-oriented parents reported that they did use television:
This was a dramatic contrast to the stance of socio-oriented individuals who claimed not to find television useful in these ways.
Concept-oriented parents also regarded television as useful for:
Apart from these exceptions, concept-oriented individuals reported that television was not useful to them as a social resource. Concept-oriented individuals strongly rejected the use of television as a means for facilitating communication in the various ways listed by Lull, in strong contrast to the stance of socio-oriented individuals, who valued television for this function.
The amount of television viewing was uncorrelated with concept-orientation scores except for children from 12- to 15-years-old, where there was a significant negative correlation. Concept-oriented individuals watched less television than socio-oriented individuals.
Source: James Lull (1990): 'Family Communication Patterns and the Social Uses of Television'. In Inside Family Viewing: Ethnographic Research on Television's Audiences. London: Routledge, pp. 49-61
Daniel Chandler
April 1997