EFFECTS OF RACIAL EXCLUSION FROM MEDIA

by Charisse Corsbie-Massay

A Thesis Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS (PSYCHOLOGY)

May 2009

Copyright 2008

Charisse Corsbie-Massay

ACKNOWELDGEMENTS

Charisse Corsbie-Massay would like to acknowledge the people that made this research possible including Ellen Seiter and Tara McPherson from the USC School of Cinematic Arts, Stephen J. Read from the Psychology Department at USC, Lynn C. Miller from Annenberg School for Communication at USC, and Henry Jenkins III from the Comparative Media Studies Department at MIT. Many thanks also to Greg Townsend and Jesse Eisenhardt who constructed the promotional videos used in this research.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgments List of Tables List of Figures Abstract Chapter 1: Introduction Social Exclusion Theory Symbolic Annihilation Current Research Chapter 2: Methods Chapter 3: Results Manipulation Check Missing Variables H1: Effect of condition H2: Effect of prior media representation H3: Effect of baseline group identification H4: Effect of baseline ethnic identification H5: Effect of gender Chapter 4: Discussion Chapter 5: Future Research References Appendix A: Measurement Scales

ii iv v vi 1 3 13 15 19 26 26 26 27 28 32 36 38 41 47 51 56

iii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Racial composition of test videos Table 2: Means Table Table 3: Correlation between word fragment subscales Table 4: Correlation with private judgments of subject's ethnic group

22 28 28 36

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Follow-up Community Belongingness (by Race) Figure 2: Follow-up Membership CSE (by Race) Figure 3: Follow-up Importance of USC to Personal Identity (by USC Groups) Figure 4: Follow-up Membership CSE (by USC Groups) Figure 5: Follow-up Identity CSE (Whites) Figure 6: Follow-up Private CSE (API/Latinos) Figure 7: Condition X Gender Interaction on Follow-up Importance of USC to Identity (Controlling for Baseline Identity CSE) Figure 8: Condition X Gender Interaction on Follow-up Private Assessments of USC (Controlling for Baseline Identity CSE) Figure 9: Condition X #USC-Affiliated Groups Interaction on Positive Affect

30 30 34 34 35 35 38 38 38

ABSTRACT

The effects of media exclusion are discussed in communications and critical studies, but the topic has received limited attention from social psychologists. This experiment investigates the effects of viewing a university promotional video that excludes individuals of a subjects race, integrating Social Exclusion Theory (exclusion from a social group causes deficits in self-esteem, belonging, and control) and Symbolic Annihilation (individuals not represented in media may suffer from low self-esteem and reduced feelings of belongingness). Racially excluded Caucasians reported greater belongingness to the university, while Asians and Latinos reported lower belongingness when excluded. Furthermore, replicating prior social exclusion research, racially excluded women experienced reported greater importance of the group to personal identity, while racially excluded men experienced a decrease. This research provides evidence that exclusion from media may induce similar processes to that of social exclusion and highlights the different reactions of racial groups to exclusion from a visual medium.

vi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

The effects of media exclusion, or the absence of a viewers social group (e.g., gender, race) in media, are discussed extensively among communications and critical studies scholars, but the topic has received limited attention from social psychologists. According to the theory of Symbolic Annihilation, if an individual is not represented in the media, then he or she may suffer from low self-esteem (Graves, 1999), reduced feelings of belongingness, and a poor self-image relative to the larger group (Tuchman, 1978). These effects of media exclusion parallel the effects of interpersonal exclusion, a phenomenon studied extensively by psychologists; social exclusion (or ostracism) can cause distinct psychological pain (Lieberman & Eisenberger, 2005) and lead to a decrease in self-esteem, belonging, control, and meaningful existence (Williams & Sommer, 1997). The similarity between these two theories emphasizes the importance of analyzing media exclusion as a special case of social exclusion. Television has permanently altered American society; since its inception and public distribution in the late 1940s, television has affected the way we construct and interpret our environment, our community and our selves. The statistics are impressive: over 98% of American homes have a television (Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2002), half of American homes have three or more units, and the average American watches an average of 4.5 hours of television per day (Associated Press, 2006). The content of television programming, although often claimed to be a reflection of society itself, presents a skewed reality wherein there are few elderly, overweight, or 1

generally social undesirable individuals (Gerbner et al., 2002). These statistically skewed images cultivate an idealistic impression of America, one that is often very different from reality, and these televisual norms can be employed by viewers to understand how the world works. We turn to television for much of our social information including cues regarding what we should look like and how we should behave. Television has been referred to as a frame, a window and a mirror (Spigel). As a frame, the television serves to highlight what is important (i.e., television content is important); as a window, it gives us insight it what is occurring outside of the home (i.e., television content is normal); and as a mirror, it informs us of how we should look and behave. Media cultivates a definition of American culture and Americans; therefore, televisions effect on the viewers norms demands attention as the ethnic composition of America changes. The most recent census states that Hispanics are the largest minority as well as the fastest growing (U. S. Census Bureau News, 2007) and it is believed that the face of America will change drastically from white to other within the next few decades. In the new, hyper-mediated millennium, the representation of a group is essential to the goal of a diverse community. The current research focuses on the effect of racial exclusion in media, i.e., how does not seeing a member of ones racial group on television affect the viewers self-esteem and relationship with the larger community?

Social Exclusion Theory The research pertaining to social exclusion extends back to the mid-twentieth century; studies conducted by Dittes and Snoek in the late fifties and early sixties successfully invoked exclusion and tested the subsequent behavior (Leary, 2001). Social exclusion induces psychological pain by activating the dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex (dACC), the same area of the brain associated with physical pain (Eisenberger, Lieberman & Williams, 2003). This correlation highlights the evolutionary role of social exclusion as a factor in the interpretations of, and subsequent interactions with, our environment. Humans are social animals that require companionship for survival, and the punishment for not being involved in survival activities can lead to very real pain, thus encouraging the target to return to the fold (Lieberman & Eisenberger, 2005). Social exclusion is present throughout many cultures, and may be the most pervasive form of social punishment in humans (Williams & Sommer, 1997). Many researchers have associated social exclusion or rejection with negative effects on the subjects self-esteem (Leary et al., 1995; Leary, 1990), as well as feelings of belongingness (Baumeister & Leary et al., 1995), control (Bruneau, 1973; Williams & Sommer, 1997), self-worth, and a meaningful existence (Williams & Sommer, 1997; Twenge & Baumesiter, 2002). These studies led Williams and Sommer to establish the Model of Ostracism: social ostracism prevents individuals from satisfying fundamental psychological needs, and may result in worsened mood, hurt feelings, and anger, behavior designed to repair and maintain the self in the short term (e.g., taking control, self affirmations, potential pro social behavior), or long-term distancing from the group 3

(e.g., self-imposed isolation, learned helplessness, low self-esteem) (Williams & Sommer, 1997). Self-esteem is a complex psychological process; it is largely based on the degree to which one feels included or accepted by others (Sommer, 2001) and is often defined as an individuals overall evaluation of the self (Rosenberg et al., 1995). Self-esteem is divided into trait and state conditions; trait self-esteem is considered a dimension of personality and refers to the individuals long-standing impression of the self (i.e., high or low selfesteem), while state self-esteem refers to an individuals current self-esteem, which is affected by daily events. However, it has been shown that constant levels of state selfesteem may affect trait self-esteem (Zadro, Boland, & Richardson, 2006). For example, the smallest child may get picked last for a game thus creating low state self-esteem; if this occurs regularly, it may lead to low trait self-esteem, especially as the anticipation of anxiety and unpleasant feelings are transferred to other activities and affect the childs future behavior (Leary et al., 1995; Zadro, Boland, & Richardson, 2006). Furthermore, individuals subjected to long-term ostracism can suffer from mental and physical illness including depression, self-destructive behavior, and stress-related ailments (Williams & Zadro, 2001). Exclusion is frequently associated with low self-esteem, either directly or moderated through other psychological traits. Exclusion targets (i.e., victims of exclusion) report higher negative concepts of self, including lower self-actualization, competence, intrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy or control (Aron & Aron, 1991). Selfesteem has been shown to increase with social acceptance and decrease with rejection 4

(Leary et al., 1995) thereby functioning as a sociometer; The self-esteem system monitors others reactions and alerts the individual to the possibility of social exclusion (Leary et al., 1995, p. 518). This situates self-esteem as both an outcome of the social environment and a motivator to interact with the environment, resulting in a circular process that highlights the ability of state self-esteem to affect trait self-esteem over time as the individual begins to anticipate rejection (Leary et al., 1995). Self-esteem can also act as a moderator for the interpretation of and reaction towards exclusion: high selfesteem subjects may avoid the negative implications of rejection by enhancing self concepts both internally (i.e., self-esteem) and externally (e.g., lashing out with hostility or violence), while low self-esteem subjects view the rejection as a confirmation of previously held beliefs (Sommer, 2001). Belongingness is a fundamental motivation; humans possess a need to belong, which drives much of our behavior. Baumeister and Leary (1995) provide a review of empirical findings in support of this theory including the ease with which we form social bonds, our difficulty in breaking those bonds, and the effect of belongingness on emotion. Exclusion can also motivate individuals to actively seek belonging through behaviors like working harder in groups and conforming to the majority. In addition, they explore the physical consequences of exclusion (i.e., depriving an individual of belonging) including increased stress, a poor immune system compared to married couples, eating disorders, criminal behavior, and suicide (Baumeister & Leary et al., 1995). A sense of control over ones environment is an essential component of mental well-being. Deci and Ryans self-determination theory claims that people want to feel 5

effective in their activities (competence), to feel that their activities are self-chosen and self-endorsed (autonomy), and to feel a sense of closeness with some others (relatedness) (Sheldon, 2001). When asked to isolate the most recent satisfying event and describe their emotions surrounding it, subjects consistently rated competence, autonomy and relatedness as important when defining events as satisfying (Sheldon, 2001). Humans are motivated to control their environment and experience themselves as capable and effective, and exclusion can rob an individual of this need (Bruneau, 1973) leading to disastrous results; in an interview, a woman claimed to have developed an eating disorder, after being ostracized by her mother for years, in order to maintain some control over my life (Williams & Sommer, 1997, p. 159). Social inclusion is essential to ensuring a meaningful existence as perceived by the individual. Social death refers to the point at which other people cease to socially interact with the dying person (Williams & Zadro, 2001, p. 23) by refusing to acknowledge the individuals presence and behaving as if the individual was deceased. Being ignored by others stimulates feelings of invisibility and can cause individuals to question their purpose in life. Social exclusion is correlated with a statistically significant increase in agreement with the phrase Life is meaningless, engagement in selfdefeating behavior (Twenge & Baumesiter, 2002), and increased rates of suicide (Sommer, 2001). Exclusion has also been associated with homicidal tendencies as evidenced in the recent school shootings in order to establish their importance and meaning in the world, thereby emphasizing the potential of the individuals self-worth to affect emotion and behavior. 6

Identity theory states that self-esteem is inherently tied into ones sense of self and the groups that the individual is a part of. Exclusion from groups can lead not only to troubled self-esteem and self-worth, but also a troubled identity, wherein the individual cannot feel an association with a particular group. According to Lickel (2000), identity needs are served by affiliation with social groups and this is essential to healthy development. If an individual cannot experience an affiliation with a desired social group, e.g. national identity, this may potentially lead to feelings of ostracism and reduced self worth. Furthermore, Cast and Burke (2002) claim that self-esteem plays a role in the selfverification process and the creation of identity. Self-verification occurs when the situational context matches or confirms an individuals expected identity. Media Exclusion offers another example for Cast and Burkes argument: a lack of verification in within groups is likely to leave the individual feeling inefficacious and unaccepted by the group (Cast & Burke, 2002, p. 1043). Non-representation in media can lead minority viewers to develop impressions of the self that are detached from mainstream society. Individual reactions to exclusion differ drastically based on a variety of moderators including personality traits, a desire to maintain relations with the group, and gender. Levels of narcissism and self-esteem moderate subsequent behavior; high narcissistic subjects will respond with greater anger and aggression towards the exclusion sources (Leary, Twenge, & Quinlivan, 2006). Furthermore, Zadro, Boland, and Richardson (2006) found that high socially anxious subjects returned to baseline measures of belonging, self-esteem, control, and meaningful existence slower than low socially anxious subjects after being excluded, thus demonstrating that resolving the 7

detrimental effects of ostracism depends on personality characteristics and interpretation of the events. In addition, post-exclusion behavior often depends on whether or not anti-social behavior will breed further exclusion (Williams & Zadro, 2001). Subjects ostracized by faceless sources with whom they may have little future interaction (e.g., an online chat room) were openly negative in their reactions to the exclusion (Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000), while subjects ostracized by a desired group or a group with whom future interaction is desired (e.g., work group, long term-companions) tempered their negative reactions, often choosing to disassociate from the conversation (Williams & Sommer, 1997). However, the role of prior group identity has yet to be fully explored on the effects of post exclusion behavior. Gender also emerges as a moderator of exclusion effects across several studies. Leary discovered that women rated themselves as less positive than men when ostracized, regardless of the reasons for exclusion (i.e., random or because of rejector preferences), suggesting that women may be more sensitive to rejection cues (1995). Furthermore, when ostracized from a work group prior to interaction, women exhibited social facilitation whereas men socially loafed. This difference was attributed to the desires of each gender; women worked harder in order to increase their group status, while men separated from the conversation and played with objects in the environment in order to maintain control (Williams & Sommer, 1997). The differences between men and women are often attributed to gender socialization and relates to several of the abovementioned moderators. Kelly suggests that men are more likely to attribute their rejection to external 8

factors (2001), thus taking actions to save their self-esteem that include withdrawing or disengaging from prior rejecting group members (Williams & Sommer, 1997). Multiple experimental paradigms are used to induce varying degrees of exclusion; the most popular methods include the conversation scenario, the ball-tossing scenario, and the selection scenario, all of which have been implemented in real space to great effect. Furthermore, new technology allows many of these experimental tactics to be conducted in virtual space, thus taking social exclusion into the new media frontier and demonstrating its effects independent of physical interpersonal interactions. In a comparative study by Williams et al., it was demonstrated that both modes of ostracism were aversive (2002). In the conversation scenario, targets are actively ignored during a conversation; this paradigm usually involves three individuals: two exclusion sources and one exclusion target. In real space, the exclusion sources conduct a conversation and ignore the targets attempts to participate; confederates are commonly serve as the exclusion sources in order to standardize the exclusion experience. Gardner, Pickett, and Brewer (2000) and Williams et al. (2002) successfully employed this paradigm in virtual space using online chat rooms; subjects were instructed to converse with other subjects elsewhere in the building via computer, but the conversation was generated by a computer program. After a brief period wherein all chat room participants were prompted for introductory information, the subject was either included in the conversation or excluded. The exclusion manipulation successfully elicited lower reports of control, belongingness, and self-esteem (Williams et al., 2002), and the research by Gardner, 9

Pickett, and Brewer (2000) demonstrated that ostracized individuals exhibited a selective memory recall for social events. This paradigm also includes a study of cell phone text messages; subjects were informed that they would be communicating with other participants in the building, however after a brief introductory period, they received no further text messages. Exclusion targets reported lower measures of control, belongingness, and self worth, and a content analysis of their text messages revealed that ostracized participants attempted to provoke responses more than included participants (Smith & Williams, 2004). According to Williams et al. (2002), online environments allow for virtual bravado wherein the subject actively responds to the exclusion; this is most likely related to issues of anonymity and a lack of potential future interaction. In the ball-tossing scenario, subjects play ball with two confederates. One of the earliest experimental paradigms to induce exclusion, the real space version of this game was first employed by Williams & Sommer (1997); a subject was placed in a room with two confederates and all were asked to remain silent for five minutes while the experimenter stepped away. One confederate would rummage through a box, discover a ball, and begin tossing it to the other confederate and the subject. After a few tosses, the confederates either continued to involve the subject (inclusion), or refused to throw the ball to the subject (exclusion). This manipulation successfully induced feelings of rejection and lower reports of control (Williams & Sommer, 1997). The online balltossing scenario replicates this paradigm by utilizing a simple interface wherein the subject controls an onscreen hand and can choose to throw the ball to player A or B, whom the subject believes to be real people elsewhere in the building. After a few tosses, 10

the subject is either included or excluded in the virtual game. This adaptation successfully elicited increased negative emotions, lower feelings of control, and a lower sense of belonging (Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000). Furthermore, subjects still reported feelings of ostracism and exhibited post-exclusion behavior even when they were informed that the ball would not be thrown to them due to a computer error (Zadro, Williams, & Richardson, 2004). In the selection scenario, excluded subjects are informed that a desirable group has rejected them; this often takes the form of a vote by a task group claiming that no one wants to work with the subject (Leary et al., 1995; Twenge, Cantanese, & Baumeister, 2003), or as a result of a bogus survey determining that the subject is destined for a future alone (Baumeister, Twenge, & Nuss, 2002; Baumeister, DeWall, Ciacorro, & Twenge, 2005). Other researchers have also effectively employed, within a controlled setting, the classic and familiar exclusion tactic of being chosen last for a team (Bourgeois & Leary, 2001). The online evolution of the selection paradigm utilizes virtual online chat rooms where a subject is rejected by a computer generated, opposite sex participant that he or she is conversing with; the subject is informed that their virtual partner either does or does not want to meet (Buckley, Winkle, & Leary, 2004). This finding takes social exclusion research into the world of online dating, a popular trend in recent years; despite the safeguards against actual interpersonal rejection, subjects still exhibit post exclusion behavior (e.g., reduced belongingness, reduced control, reduced meaningful existence) even when rejected by a faceless source.

11

These scenarios and measurements focus on the immediate threat to the self as well as the short-term repercussions of exclusion, and the experimental deficits of these experiments are well documented. It is almost impossible (and unethical) to replicate laboratory studies for long-term exclusion and the preexisting data on this subject is difficult to quantify and often depends on diaries and self-report measures. Structured interviews have been conducted with victims of ostracism and exclusion, but these selfreport measures are not reliable and subjects often demonstrate emotional breakdowns at the mere recollection of the incidents. Studies regarding the cognitive state of prisoners and social outcasts offer a glimpse into the psychological repercussions of long-term exclusion (Williams & Sommer, 1997), but these individuals are inherently multifaceted and exclusion cannot be assessed independently. The question remains whether or not the effects of interpersonal exclusion are replicated when a representation of an individual is eliminated from the media. Simply put, does exclusion from media have the same real life consequences as interpersonal, social exclusion? Mass media is the main outlet of our mainstream culture and norms; it is often accepted as the popular definition of what is acceptable and expected in American society. If a viewer does not see a representation of his or her subgroup on television, do they feel like they have been excluded from the larger group? The theory of Symbolic Annihilation begins to tackle this complex argument and address how media exclusion can affect an individual over time.

12

Symbolic Annihilation Media theorists have speculated about the psychological effects of absence in media. The term symbolic annihilation was coined by Gerbner and Gross in 1976 to identify the phenomenon of a groups absence in mainstream media; Representation in the fictional world signifies social existence; absence means symbolic annihilation (1976, p. 182). The origins of this theory lie in the reflection and cultivation hypotheses; the former states that mass media is designed to reflect dominant social values (Tuchman, 1978) and, in turn, cultivates norms that are internalized by its viewers (Gerbner et al., 2002). Symbolic annihilation describes the phenomenon wherein a group is not represented, or drastically misrepresented, in mass media. Gaye Tuchman provides an excellent example of this theory in the introduction to the 1978 compilation, Hearth and Home: Images of Women in Mass Media, that addresses the representation of women on television and its effect on young women and men who view television as reflecting the standard norms of American society. Content analyses from 1954 to 1975 revealed that male characters dominated the American television landscape, ranging between 68-80% of characters, a drastic difference from the 1:1 ratio of the nation. Furthermore, despite the fact that woman comprised nearly 40% of the workforce in 1970, most female characters were restricted to housewives, while workingwomen were either derogated as incompetent and inferior to male coworkers, or socially punished for their career choice (i.e., childless spinsters) (Tuchman). According to Tuchman, these messages teach viewers that women are not important in American society, except perhaps within the 13

home. And even within the home, men know best to be a woman is to have a limited life divorced from the economic productivity of the labor force (Tuchman, 1978, p. 17). In addition, this exclusion can cause workingwomen to question their social purpose and the worth of their life choices, and this lack of two fundamental needs may lead to low self-esteem and other psychological deficits. Tuchman divides Symbolic Annihilation into three aspects: omission, trivialization, and condemnation. This research will focus primarily on the first aspect, omission, specifically, the omission of racial groups. The presentation of racial groups in mass media is critical, especially when discussing the American national broadcast model. During the Network Era of television (1957-1975), the three major networks (CBS, NBC, ABC) purchased several local television stations around the country and distributed the majority of programming content, which was designed for a national audience, regardless of local demographics; television shows featured White protagonists, and characters of color were often stereotyped. This trend continued into the early seventies, when a paradigm shifts in civil rights and Nielsen distributions created a sudden explosion of urban programming. The question remains, what is the effect of viewing nationally broadcast television designed for a predominantly English-speaking White audience among communities of color? 47% of Los Angeles County identified as Hispanic or Latino in the 2000 Census, and 13% identified as Asian (U. S. Census Bureau, 2000); these statistics are quickly becoming the norm instead of the exception. According to Graves, In the case of same

14

race viewers whose group is rarely shown, it is hypothesized that invisibility might create feelings of low self-esteem (Graves, 1999, p. 712). It is important here to note the difference between race and ethnicity; while ethnicity refers to the ethnic and cultural heritage of an individual (e.g., Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese), race combines these subcategories into large groupings based on similar phenotypic features often attributed to a specific global region (e.g., Asian). Historically, race was originally referred to as clines, or the prevalence and correlation of phenotypic features indicative to a give geographic region. Much of the research surrounding media representation refers to race, or the visualization of ethnicity or ethnic groups, despite using the terms interchangeably. Subjects are identified by racial group (e.g., White, Black, Asian, Latino); is there a difference between the way American-born Whites identify with their nationality as compared to American-born Asians or Latinos, and is this difference related to their presentation in the media? This research will focus on the viewer psychology when racially excluded from the media, i.e., when individuals with similar phenotypic features are excluded from a visual representation of culture.

Current Research Symbolic Annihilation affects the individual by eliminating them from the representation of an essential social identity, nationality, in a manner similar to the selection scenario. If television reflects the dominant values and norms of a society (both described and prescribed), then individuals who do not fit into the representation are, by default, abnormal and subsequently may feel unwelcome or worthless in society. This is 15

particularly relevant for underrepresented minority viewers. Americans of all races view programming designed for a White majority audience despite the fact that their racecongruent characters may be minimized or misrepresented. Thus, they are symbolically excluded and symbolic annihilation theorizes that this will yield similar effect to that of social exclusion. The overall aim of this experiment is to offer quantitative evidence for the theory of Symbolic Annihilation by employing the methods of prior social exclusion studies to test the effect of media exclusion. For this study, I will be investigating the effects of racial exclusion from a USC promotional video on USC undergraduate students. I hope to provide evidence for five major hypotheses:

1.

Effect of condition: Subjects whose race is excluded from a video representing their social group (i.e., college promotional video) will experience the effects of exclusion including lower self-esteem, reduced sense of belonging and increase in anger.

2.

Effect of prior media representation: Subjects whose race is typically under represented onscreen in mainstream media will exhibit reduced effects of exclusion due to environmental habituation.

3.

Effect of baseline group identification: Subjects who are highly identified with the social group being portrayed will experience stronger effects (i.e., lower self-esteem, lower belongingness to university) than those that are not highly identified. 16

4.

Effect of baseline ethnic identification: Subjects who are highly identified with their ethnic group will experience stronger effects of exclusion than those that are not highly identified with their ethnic group.

5.

Effect of gender: Men and women will react differently to media exclusion in a pattern similar to the one found in social exclusion research. a. Men will exhibit reduced identification with the group. b. Women will exhibit increased identification with the group.

Hypothesis 2 addresses the issue of prolonged media exclusion; subjects who are racially underrepresented in mainstream American media will be habituated to the exclusion such that one video, or a single televisual instance of exclusion, will not create significant change. A report released by the Asian Pacific Media Coalition in 2006 noted that, although primetime television characters were becoming more ethnically diverse, the percentage of Asians and Latinos were disturbingly below the national average; Asian/Pacific Islanders composed 2.6% of characters (vs. 4.4% of the national population) and Latino characters composed 6.5% (vs. 14.8% of the national population) (U. S. Newswire, 2006). The discrepancy becomes even more pronounced in urban communities with large populations of Asians and Hispanics like New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. These individuals may be habituated to a reduced television presence, thus decreasing the effects of the manipulation. Hypotheses 3 and 4 address the interaction between the viewers identity and media exclusion. Subjects that are highly identified with the larger social group are more 17

likely to associate characteristics of the self to expected exemplars of the group (Coats et al., 2000) thus causing the viewer to expect some racial representation. The discrepancy between the expected presentation of the group, which includes members of the viewers racial group, and the actual presentation, which excludes members of the viewers racial group, should increase the effect of the exclusion. Furthermore, this should be most evident in White subjects, the majority of the student body. Similarly, individuals who are highly identified with their ethnic group may be hyper sensitive to the manipulation, thereby also increasing the manipulations effect. Hypothesis 5 focuses on the similarities between media exclusion and social exclusion. Prior literature has repeatedly addressed how the effects of social exclusion differ between genders; it is hypothesized that men may derogate the exclusion source (i.e., the university) thus maintaining their self-esteem, while women will elevate their ratings of the university, specifically regarding the importance of USC to their identity, thus replicating the social facilitation phenomenon present in the prior research.

18

CHAPTER 2: METHODS

Participants: Subjects were recruited from the university psychology subject pool and received extra credit for their participation. Data was collected over two semesters during the academic year 2007-2008 and was pooled. At the beginning of each semester, approximately 300 students completed a premeasure packet, resulting in an original pool of 600; eligibility items included ethnicity (both categorical and self-reported), primary language, and country of birth. Subjects who identified as primary English speakers, American born, and ethnically appropriate for the study (i.e., White, Asian/Pacific Islander (API), Latino) were selected. Racial identification was determined by the participants categorical selection (e.g., Caucasian/White, Hispanic/Latino) in combination with their open-ended self-identification (e.g., Irish, Mexican-American). The combination of these identification methods ensured that subjects exhibited the same phenotypic features as the actors in the promotional videos (e.g., subjects that identified as Indian were not considered eligible for API). Invitations to participate in the study were sent via email to 331 participants, of these, 110 visited the website and 23 dropped out before completing the study, resulting in a final N = 87 (83.9% female; 59.8% White, 20.7% API, 19.5% Latino). Participants age ranged from 16 to 26 (M = 20.06, SD = 1.38). Design: The experiment employed a 3 (race: White, API, Latino) x 2 (condition: included, excluded) factorial design and subjects were randomly assigned to one of two videos where their racial group is either included or excluded. 19

Procedure: The study was conducted using the website www.surveygizmo.com. Data was collected over seven months during the 2007-2008 school year. Survey Gizmo was used for construction and implementation of the survey, along with data collection. Students were approached in undergraduate psychology classes and asked to participate in the psychology subject pool. Interested students then visited the subject pool website, completed the premeasure survey and were contacted via email based on their eligibility. Participants then voluntarily visited the survey website, where they were greeted with a welcome page that informed them of the study, explained that it was approved by the university, emphasized that all data was confidential, and that they could leave the study at any time. The experiment led subjects to believe that the video would be broadcast on the USC website and that university administrators believed that this was an excellent representation of USC culture. Subjects were asked to complete a variety of demographic measures that included their place of residence (dormitory, fraternity/sorority, and off-campus, with or without parents), major, any USC- affiliated groups they were a member of, as well as media consumption habits relating to television, DVDs, video games, and internet usage. Subjects then viewed a USC promotional video wherein members of their race were either included or excluded; they had no control over the video, but were asked to click forward when the video was completed1. Subjects then completed a series of postmanipulation measures, and were prompted for their personal reaction to the video. Subjects were then debriefed in a funneled fashion to determine if and when they noticed
1

No measure of time spent on the video page was recorded. 20

the exclusion. Finally, subjects were informed of the actual purposes of the study and thanked for their participation. Independent Variables: USC Promotional Video: The USC promotional video was created with the assistance of two graduates from the School of Cinematic Arts at USC and lasted approximately three minutes. It included three major manipulation sections wherein the subjects race was either featured or excluded: an opening montage, student testimonials, and a closing montage. The video began with various shots of campus (i.e., B-roll) that lacked any racially identifiable students and featured a male voiceover describing the campus and music from the Trojan marching band (length = 30 sec). The script was adapted from USC admissions brochures and is available in the appendix. The opening montage featured students introducing themselves with their names and I go to the University of Southern California (approximate length = 15 sec). The video then alternated between the voiceover describing the university with B-roll and clips from interviews with three students. These student testimonials represented the second major manipulation. This section also featured shots of students on campus (e.g., talking, studying, walking), which were racially manipulated (total approximate length = 85 sec). Finally, the video ended with a closing montage wherein students repeated the phrases, I am a Trojan! and Fight On! and featured music from the Trojan marching band (approximate length = 50 sec). Once again, the subjects race was either included or excluded in the closing montage. A call for actors was placed on Craigslist Los Angeles and NowCasting.com; actors were selected based on their likeness to college students (i.e., approximate age, 21

youthful appearance) and their phenotypic representation of their racial group. A total of thirteen actors were selected: four were Black (two females, two males), four White (two females, two males), three API (two females, one male), and two Latino (two females). Each actor performed all three testimonials and was paid $50 for their time. Four videos were created, each with a different racial composition. The control video featured all four racial groups in the montages and testimonials by an API male, a White female, and a Latino female. In the experimental videos, the isolated racial group was replaced with a testimonial delivered by a Black actor (See Table 1 for racial composition of all four videos).

Table 1: Racial composition of test videos Video Control White Excluded API Excluded Latino Excluded Testimonial 1 API male API Male White male API male Testimonial 2 White female Black female Black female Black female Testimonial 3 Latino female Latino female Latino female White male

Baseline identification with university and ethnic group: The subjects relationship with these groups was determined using adaptations of the 16-item Collective Self-Esteem Scale (CSE; Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992). The CSE was designed to assess individual differences in collective rather than personal self-esteem, or how much of an individuals self-esteem is based on external entities, and consists of four subscales: (1) an individuals worth as a member of the group, or Membership CSE (e.g., 22

I am a worthy member of USC), (2) an individuals reporting of others impressions regarding the group, or Public CSE (e.g., Overall, USC is considered good by others), (3) an individuals private assessment of the group, or Private CSE (e.g., I feel good about USC), and (4) the groups importance to an individuals identity, or Identity CSE (e.g., USC is an important reflection of who I am). Subjects were asked to respond to each of these statements using a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) with 4 as neutral. Two dimensions of the CSE Scale were selected to test levels of identification with the university at baseline: Private CSE and Identity CSE. Only the Private dimension was used to assess the subjects relationship to their ethnic group (e.g., I feel good about my ethnic group). These measures were gathered before the individuals were contacted for the study. Dependent Variables: The post experimental questionnaire assessed all of the dependent variables. It was presented via web pages as designed by SurveyGizmo.com. Responses varied according to the measure and were assessed using Likert-type scales with radio buttons and open-ended text. Subjects were not forced to respond. Word fragment completion task: Implicit action, arousal, and affect were assessed using a word-fragment completion task (Pedersen et al., in press). Words could either be completed with an action word (e.g., SL_P could be completed as SLAP or SLIP), an arousal world (e.g., AL_ _ _ as ALERT), or an affect word (e.g., HA_E as HATE). Subjects were asked to complete this task as quickly as possible, but no time was recorded. Data was based on a percentage of completed words. 23

Mood: Mood was assessed using the 20-item Positive And Negative Affectivity Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988). Participants were asked to rate the extent to which they currently felt a number of emotions. Ratings were made on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (Very Slightly/Not At All) to 5 (Extremely). Positive affect items included interested, excited, strong, enthusiastic, proud, alert, inspired, determined, attentive, and active; negative affect items included distressed, upset, guilty, scared, hostile, irritable, ashamed, nervous, jittery, and afraid. Follow-up identification with the university: The subjects relationship with USC was determined using adaptations of the 16-item Collective Self-Esteem Scale (CSE; Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992). The CSE was designed to assess individual differences in collective rather than personal self-esteem, or how much of an individuals self-esteem is based on external entities, and consists of four subscales: (1) an individuals worth as a member of the group, or Membership CSE (e.g., I am a worthy member of USC), (2) an individuals reporting of others impressions regarding the group, or Public CSE (e.g., Overall, USC is considered good by others), (3) an individuals private assessment of the group, or Private CSE (e.g., I feel good about USC), and (4) the groups importance to an individuals identity, or Identity CSE (e.g., USC is an important reflection of who I am). Subjects were asked to respond to each of these statements using a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) with 4 as neutral. Community Belongingness: The Community Belongingness Scale (Fattore, Turnbull & Wilson, 2003) was designed to measure personal trust in neighbors in order to assess the extent of neighborhood attachment. Items were adjusted to be specific to the 24

university community (e.g., I am good friends with many people at USC, People at USC make it a difficult place to live in). Subjects were asked to respond to each of these statements using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) with 3 as neither agree nor disagree. Self-Esteem: Trait self-esteem was measured using the 10-item Rosenberg SelfEsteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965). Subjects were asked to rate their agreement with statements on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (disagree strongly) to 4 (agree strongly); there was no neutral midpoint. Items included I feel I have a number of good qualities and I feel I do not have much to be proud of. Video Reactions: Finally, subjects rated their agreement with statements about the video on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) with 3 as neutral; these included two statements regarding the quality of the overall video (e.g., I liked the video.), and two statements regarding the student testimonials (e.g., I thought the student testimonials were a good representation of USC.). An openended essay question asked them to reflect on the video and report anything that may have seemed unusual or strange as well as anything they particularly liked. Responses will be qualitatively coded in a following paper.

25

CHAPTER 3: RESULTS

Manipulation Check All subjects were asked if they remembered the context of the student testimonials and the race of the featured students. Subjects that were excluded were then asked, Did you notice that there were no (Caucasians/Asians/Hispanics) featured in the testimonials? and At what point did you notice the exclusion? Due to a programming error, only White and API experimental subjects were asked these follow-up questions. Overall, 60 subjects (69%) remembered the context in which the student testimonials were featured, and 77 (88.5%) reported that they remembered the race or ethnicity of the featured students; two subjects did not complete the manipulation check. Of the 28 excluded White subjects, 21 responded to the specific exclusion questions, and the vast majority (20) reported that they noticed that there were no Caucasians in the video; they became aware of the exclusion while watching the video. Of the 9 excluded API subjects, 7 responded to the specific exclusion questions and all noticed the exclusion: 6 recognized it during the video and one while responding to the questions. These numbers demonstrate that subjects were very aware that their race was not represented, often while watching the video.

Missing Variables There were very few missing variables throughout the dataset; they were not correlated with any of the variables of interest and therefore assumed to be Missing At 26

Random. The missing values were replaced with the ethnic-, gender-, and (when appropriate) condition-specific mean. One subject did not report his age but was confirmed as an undergraduate. One subject did not complete the Community Belongingness Scale, but was retained in the analyses that did not address community belongingness.

H1: Effect of condition A one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) did not reveal any significant differences between the two conditions (See Table 2). A review of the univariate analyses of variance (ANOVAs) revealed a difference between groups in the completion of arousal words, as a percentage of words completed during the word completion task (See Table 3) and the main effect of condition approached significance (p = .070). Subjects who watched a video where their racial group was included reported greater arousal than racially excluded subjects (Mincluded = .181; Mexcluded =.130, F(1,85) = 3.358). Furthermore, although not significant, racially excluded subjects reported greater levels of negative affect as determined by the word completion task, and this measure was highly negatively correlated with arousal (r = -.444, p = .000) such that individuals reporting high arousal also reported low negative affect; however, these results were not replicated using negative affect as measured by the PANAS. The word completion task focused on negative affect words including anger, hate, upset, irate, and bitter; conversely, arousal words were less biased and included words like aroused, alert, active, tense, and lively. Furthermore, affect words were also negatively correlated with action 27

words (r = -.483, p = .000) which included shoot, shout, provoke, kick, attack, fight, and injure. Table 2: Means Table Pooled Races Included Excluded .279 .283 .400 .181 15.512 27.829 32.146 26.125 19.049 23.756 25.073 24.317 .468 .130 15.413 27.196 32.478 26.500 20.196 23.348 24.174 23..348 Whites Included Excluded .295 .321 .387 .178 15.875 27.750 31.792 25.272 18.917 22.792 24.250 23.708 .473 .128 15.750 27.536 33.357 27.357 19.786 23.571 23.393 23.750 API/Latinos Included Excluded .259 .224 .419 .187 15.000 27.941 32.647 27.375 19.235 25.118 26.235 25.177 .461 .134 14.889 26.667 31.111 25.167 20.833 23.000 25.389 22.722

% Action Words % Affect Words % Arousal Words Negative Affect Positive Affect Self-Esteem Community Belongingness Identity CSE Membership CSE Private CSE Public CSE

Table 3: Correlation between word fragment subscales Action words Affect words -.483 Arousal words -.125 -.444 -

Action words Affect words Arousal words

H2: Effect of prior media representation It was hypothesized that the baseline representation of racial groups in mainstream American media would cause underrepresented subjects to become 28

habituated to a reduced onscreen presence; thus API and Latino subjects would react differently to media exclusion than white subjects. Prior to pooling API and Latino subjects, a series of one-way ANOVAs revealed only a significant difference between these groups in their follow-up measures of Public CSE, or their reporting of public perceptions regarding USC. Latinos have a significantly higher perception of public sentiment towards USC than APIs (MHL = 25.823, MAPI = 21.111; F(1,33) = 8.456, p = .006)2. All other baseline and follow-up measures were shown not to be significantly different, thus allowing these two ethnic groups to be pooled for subsequent analyses pertaining to prior media representation. A 2 (prior media representation: White vs. API/Latino) x 2 (Condition: racial inclusion vs. exclusion) MANOVA on the affect-based dependent variables (i.e., positive and negative affect, self-esteem, and implicit measures of arousal, negative affect, and action) did not reveal any main effects. However, the same MANOVA performed on the affiliation-based dependent variables (i.e., collective self-esteem and community belongningness) revealed a significant interaction between prior media representation and condition (F(7,76) = 2.095; p = .054). Further inspection of the ANOVAs revealed that the interaction was a significant for follow-up community belongingness (F(1,82) = 4.336; p = .040 (See Figure 1) and approached significance for follow-up Membership CSE (F(1,82) = 3.056; p = .084 (See Figure 2); White subjects who were racially excluded from the video expressed greater community belongingness and claimed to be
2

Latinos (M=25.824) were significantly different than APIs (M=21.111) and Caucasians (M=23.731) on public CSE (their report of how others evaluate USC) according to LSD Post-Hoc analyses (pHL/API=.003; pHL/C=.043). 29

better members of the USC community, while subjects of color reported lower values on both measures when racially excluded from the video. This data offers evidence that is counter to the original hypothesis; it was expected that subjects who were racially excluded from the video would report lower belongingness and identification with the university. Instead, it appears that subjects who are typically excluded (API and Latinos) demonstrate a tendency in line with the original hypothesis, whereas subjects who are not typically excluded (Whites) showed an opposite effect.

This trend in the means is replicated for self-esteem, although the difference is not significant; this is not surprising given that self-esteem and Membership CSE are highly correlated (r = .620, p = .000), a relationship that Luhtanen & Crocker found in their original scale construction (1992). It is also important to note that the interaction is different for Identity CSE and Public CSE: both racial groups report that USC is more important to their personal identity when racially excluded, although this is not significant. However, when subjects of color are excluded, they report that the public has a lower opinion of USC (Mincluded = 25.177, Mexcluded = 22.722, F(1,33) = 3.230, p = .081), but there is no difference between conditions for Whites.

30

It is evident that White subjects react to racial exclusion from the media very differently than the subjects of color; they exhibit increased self-esteem and identification with the university. There are two potential reasons for this drastic difference: (1) White subjects may experience joy, or a reprieve of negative emotions, when viewing a diverse video wherein no Whites are featured. The term White guilt refers to the individual or collective guilt some Whites feel over the racist treatment of people of color by Whites (Steele, 2006). If this were true, we would expect to see White subjects experience an increase in positive affect (or decrease in negative affect) when viewing an racially diverse video. Although positive affect and community belongingness were positively correlated (r = .498, p = .000), and positive affect exhibited a significant main effect on community belongingness (F(1,81) = 27.807, p = .000) that accounted for 23.9% of the variance, the interaction between condition and prior media representation remained significant, and became slightly stronger when controlling for positive affect (F(1,81) = 4.890, p = .030). These results demand a different theory. (2) As the majority racial group, Whites are habituated to seeing other Whites onscreen, and this confirms an ideological self-image as the exemplar (Coats et al., 2000). Therefore, when the members of the majority racial group are racially excluded from a media representation of an affiliated group, it is perceived as a threat to their exemplary status and may lead them to employ emotionally reparative tactics (i.e., increased community belongingness, increased self-esteem). Past research appears to support the notion of interplay between the two types of self-esteem [personal and collective]; for example, there is some evidence that in-group bias or inter-group 31

discrimination (presumably a behavior that has more direct implications for collective self-esteem) enhances personal self-esteem (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992, p. 304). Furthermore, prior research has shown that in-group favoritism is increased when selfesteem is threatened (Crocker, Major & Steele, 1998) as a self-enhancement defense strategy (Sommer, 2001).

H3: Effect of baseline group identification As mentioned above, there was three measures of baseline group affiliation: the subjects private judgments of the group (Private CSE), the importance of USC to a subjects personal identity (Identity CSE), and the number of USC-affiliated groups the subjects belonged to. Only Identity CSE (M = 19.40, SD = 4.67; maximum 28) demonstrated an approximately normal distribution; the other variables were either positively (Private CSE median = 26, maximum 28), or negatively (USC-affiliated groups median = 2, maximum 7) skewed. It may be noted that the invitation distributed to participate in the study may have selected for individuals with high personal judgments of the university. Identity CSE and number of USC-affiliated groups were dichotomized at 19 and 2 respectively, and the following analyses were conducting using these two dichotomized variables. With most subjects reporting almost at ceiling for Private CSE, this measure was eliminated from further analyses due to lack of variance. A paired-sample t-test revealed no significant differences between baseline and follow-up scores for Identity CSE or Private CSE in either condition, indicating that the

32

video did not significantly change subjects importance of USC to their personal identity or their private judgments of USC. Baseline Identity CSE: A two-way MANOVA utilizing dichotomized baseline Identity CSE and condition revealed a main effect of baseline Identity CSE (F(6,77) = 25.711; p = .000) such that subjects who reported that USC was important to their personal identity also reported greater identification with the university on all subscales. A review of the ANOVAs revealed that the baseline importance to condition x identity interaction approached significance for follow-up Public CSE, such that subjects who do not rate USC as important to their personal identity report less positive public sentiment for USC when they are racially excluded from the video (F(1,82) = 3.133; p = .080). The interaction was non-significant for all other variables. These measures indicate that the video did not have the expected effect for those who rated USC as important to personal identity. Considering that the interaction between condition and prior media representation was found to be a significant predictor of follow-up community belongingness, a twoway Univariate ANOVA replicating this analysis was conducted controlling for baseline measures of USCs importance to the subjects identity. There was a main effect of baseline Identity CSE (F(1,81) = 17.056; p = .000) that accounted for 15.5% of the variance in community belongingness; subjects who reported that USC was important to their personal identity reported greater community belongingness after the manipulation. However, the interaction between condition and prior media representation remained significant (F(1,81) = 4.444; p = .038). This main effect of identification was not 33

replicated using number of USC-affiliated groups, and the interaction between condition and prior media representation still approached significance (F(1,81) = 3.660; p = .059). These analyses indicate that although there is an effect of baseline identification on follow-up community belongingness, it does not account for the interaction between condition and prior media representation. Number of USC-affiliated groups: Once again, number of USC-affiliated groups was dichotomized at the median: subjects who belonged to 1 or no USC affiliated groups were considered low identified, while subjects that belonged to 2 or more USC affiliated groups were considered high identified. Subjects reported participating in an average of 2.383 USC-affiliated groups. A 2-way MANOVA revealed no main effects of condition, membership in USC-affiliated groups, or the subsequent interaction. A review of the ANOVAs revealed a significant interaction between condition and #USC-affiliated groups for follow-up measures of Identity CSE (F(1,82) = 5.443, p = .022); subjects who belonged to 1 or no USC-affiliated groups reported greater importance of USC to their identity when racially excluded from the video (See Figure 3). However this interaction was not significant and the interaction was no longer significant when controlling for baseline Identity CSE.

One outlier reported 14 groups; it was winsorized to 7, the next highest data point. 34

When the data was dichotomized into prior representation-based racial groups, the interaction between condition and #USC-affiliated groups was significant for White subjects only according to a MANOVA (F(5,44) = 2.917, p = .023) and a review of the ANOVAs revealed that Membership CSE accounted for most of the overall effect for this group; White subjects who belonged to one or no USC-affiliated groups reported lower worth as a member of USC when racially excluded, while subjects who belonged to two or more groups reported no change (F(1,48) = 4.130, p = .048) (see Figure 4). However, the effect of the interaction was reversed when predicting follow-up Identity CSE, such that White subjects who belonged to one or no USC-affiliated groups reported higher importance of USC to their personal identity when racially excluded, while subjects belonging to two or more USC-affiliated groups reported lower importance to identity when racially excluded; the interaction approached significance (F(1,48) = 3.433, p = .070) (see Figure 5), thus replicating the trends of the pooled analyses.

35

For underrepresented subjects of color, the MANOVA revealed no significant main effects of number of USC-affiliated groups, condition, nor was the subsequent interaction significant. However, a review of the ANOVAs revealed that the interaction between condition and #USC-affiliated groups was significant for follow-up Private CSE, such that subjects of color who belonged to one or no USC-affiliated groups reported better private assessments of USC when racially excluded, while subjects belonging to two or more USC-affiliated groups reported lower private judgments (F(1,30) = 6.734, p = .014) (see Figure 6).

H4: Effect of baseline ethnic identification Ethnic identification was determined using the private dimension of the CSE scale, which measured the subjects private assessments of their ethnic group. Once again, the sum variable was positively skewed (Median = 24, maximum 28), but the measure was highly correlated with several other follow-up variables in the study (see Table 4). It is important to note that baseline ethnic identity was not correlated with any of the other baseline measures of USC identification.

36

Table 4: Correlation with private judgments of subject's ethnic group. Measure Follow-up Community Belongingness Follow-up Identity CSE Follow-up Membership CSE Follow-up Private CSE Follow-up Public CSE Follow-up Positive Affect Follow-up Self-Esteem Action words Arousal words Total Enjoyment of Video Total Population .339 (p=.002) NS .343 (p=.001) .348 (p=.001) .385 (p=.000) .224 (p=.040) .345 (p=.001) NS NS NS Caucasian .402 (p=.003) .312 (p=.026) .302 (p=.033) .458 (p=.001) .404 (p=.003) .389 (p=.005) NS NS NS NS API/Latino NS NS .389 (p=.025) NS .370 (p=.34) NS .505 (p=.003) .381 (p=.031) -.371 (p=.034) .490 (p=.004)

Despite the correlations, a MANOVA revealed a main effect of private judgments of ones ethnic group (F(7,76) = 4.707; p =.000), but the main effect of condition and the interaction were not significant. Private Ethnic CSE was a significant predictor of all USC-based CSE measures such that subjects who held high private judgments of their ethnic group also reported greater scores on Membership CSE, Private CSE, and Public CSE, as well as community belongingness and self-esteem, regardless of condition. Furthermore, a review of the ANOVAs revealed that the interaction between condition and Private Ethnic CSE was significant for !Identity CSE (F(1,82) = 4.467; p = .038); subjects that reported lower private judgments of their ethnic group also reported a decrease in importance of USC to their identity when racially excluded, while subjects who reported high private judgments about their ethnic group demonstrated an increase in USCs importance to their personal identity when racially excluded. However, a

37

regression revealed that the interaction did not predict any additional variance above and beyond that predicted by condition and baseline ethnicity alone. When the data was split by prior representation-based racial groups, the main effect of ethnic identity as determined by the MANOVA was restricted to underrepresented subjects of color (F(7,24) = 2.932, p = .023). However, a review of the ANOVAs revealed a main effect of private judgments of ones ethnic group on all CSE measures and community belongingness for White subjects and Membership CSE, Private CSE, and Public CSE for underrepresented subjects of color. The validity of this 4-item scale as a functional measure of ethnic identity is questionable. A simple ANOVA revealed no significant differences between racial groups, despite prior research stating that, in the United States, people of color have a greater ethnic identification than Whites. This bias was not evident in this sample.

H5: Effect of gender A MANOVA investigating the effect of gender and condition on identification measures (i.e., collective self-esteem and community belongingness) revealed a main effect of gender (F(7,76) = 2.174, p = .046), a main effect of condition (F(7,76) = 2.471; p = .024), and the subsequent interaction was also significant (F(7,76) = 2.391; p =.029). It is interesting to note that condition appears as a significant predictor only when pooled with gender. However, a review of baseline identification measures reveals a significant difference between genders; females reported greater higher baseline private assessment of USC (Mfemale = 25.239, Mmale = 22.500, F(1,85) = 8.009, p = .006) and greater 38

importance of USC to individual identity (Mfemale = 20.118, Mmale = 15.357, F(1,85) = 14.505, p = .000). When controlling for baseline importance of USC to personal identity, the main effect of gender was no longer significant, although the effect of condition (F(7,75) = 2.422, p = .027) and the interaction between condition and gender (F(7,75) = 2.375, p = .030) remained approximately the same.

A review of the ANOVAs demonstrate that, when controlling for baseline importance of USC to personal identity, the main effect of the interaction was significant for follow-up Identity CSE (F(1,81) = 5.707, p = .019 (See Figure 7), Private CSE (F(1,81) = 5.894, p = .017, see Figure 8), and !Identity CSE (F(1,81) = 7.128, p = .009, 39

see Figure 9); female subjects consistently reported greater identification with the university (i.e., greater importance of USC to their personal identification and greater private assessments of USC). Men consistently report lower measures of USCs importance to their identity and lower private assessments of USC when they are racially excluded, while women report greater importance of USC to their personal identity (both follow-up and change scores) and exhibit no change regarding their private judgments. When the data file was split according to prior media representation-based racial groups, the aforementioned results were only significant for White subjects. This cornerstone of exclusion literature will be addressed in the discussion.

40

CHAPTER 4: DISCUSSION

Much of the theory to date investigates media exclusion from the perspective of underrepresented minority groups. However the results of this study demonstrate that the effect on White subjects is very different, but just as important, especially as the move to diverse programming seems to be the current norm. The interpretation of media messages and their racial composition differs drastically between individuals, which is commonly referred to as reception theory; the viewer plays an active role in giving meaning to the message, thus changing the experience of the media (Livingstone, 1990). This study sought to discover the effect of racial representation in the media on the psychological effects of viewing a video produced by the superordinate group (i.e., affiliated university). Results demonstrate that there is a significant effect of prior media exposure. This is demonstrated by the similarity between American-born APIs and Latinos on baseline and follow-up measures despite differences in parental culture and the difference between racial groups when aggregated according to prior media exposure. Subjects whose racial group is not commonly represented in the media reported differences in the direction postulated by the prior research; racially excluded API and Latino subjects demonstrated a decrease in community belongingness and a decrease in their reported worth as members of the community. Alternatively, subjects whose racial group was commonly represented in media reported opposite reactions; racially excluded White subjects demonstrated an increase in community belongingness and an increase in 41

reported worth as members of the community. Furthermore, despite the expectations of prior literature, the subjects of color did not exhibit any significant decline in self-esteem, identification with the university, or private assessment of the university; this is most likely due to habituation over time that lowers their expectation of media representation. This drastic difference in the reaction of White subjects raises the question: How does the majority ethnic group interpret media exclusion? I proposed two theories as to why Whites would increase their self-esteem: (1) White subjects were happy to see a diverse video, thereby removing issues of White guilt and eliciting a positive affective reaction among these viewers, or (2) White subjects viewed the exclusion as a threat to their in-group and reacted in a manner designed to repair or maintain their self-esteem and relationship with the university. The first hypothesis demands that racially excluded White subjects express higher positive affect, however, all racially excluded subjects reported lower positive affect compared to the racially included subjects, although not significantly. These results point towards the latter hypothesis; racially excluded White subjects experience the exclusion as a threat to their social group, thus decreasing positive affect while increasing community belongingness and worth as a member in the group. Baseline importance of USC to a subjects personal identity demonstrated a main effect on the results, but did not interact with condition to predict follow-up measures. However, a different measure of baseline identification, the number of USC-affiliated groups, interacted with the condition to predict follow-up importance of USC to identity such that subjects who were low identified reported higher follow-up measures on 42

Identity CSE. A review of the data on positive affect reveals that the subjects who belonged to one or no USC-affiliated groups reported the highest positive affect (see Figure 10) indicating that they may have been inspired by the video to increase their identification with the university, while subjects who belonged to two or more USCaffiliated groups were not as affected. Qualitative responses offer a glimpse into the psychology of the viewer; responses ranged from FIGHT ON! to fake and cheesy; this spectrum of responses demonstrates that there were a variety of reactions from inspiration to disgust. It is not unreasonable to hypothesize that subjects who were low identified with the university may have enjoyed the video more, however, this is not replicated in the final quantitative measures regarding video enjoyment. In addition, when analyzed separately, an interesting difference emerges: for White subjects, number of USC-affiliated groups was a significant moderator between condition and their worth as members of USC, while for subjects of color, number of USC-affiliated groups was a significant moderator between condition and their private assessments of USC. These split-file results demonstrate that media exclusion is interpreted differently by White viewers as compared to viewers of color; for White subjects, viewing their racial group on television is related to their worth as members of the university while for subjects of color, viewing their racial group in television is related to their personal perceptions of the community, but not their perceptions of worth as a community member. This difference offers evidence for the threat theory regarding Whites interpretation of media exclusion; when excluded, racial exclusion is related to their worth as members of the community. The reaction depends on the subjects 43

identification with the university; White subjects do not belong to many USC-affiliated groups behave in the expected direction, reducing their perceived worth as a member of the community, while White subjects who belong to two or more USC-affiliated groups employ self-enhancement strategies and boost their worth as members. The replication of gender effects demonstrates that media exclusion functions similarly (although not exactly) to interpersonal exclusion. Racially excluded women reported an increase in the importance of USC to their personal identity and maintain a high private assessment of USC while racially excluded men exhibit a decrease in importance of USC to their personal identity and a sharp decline in their private assessments of the university. These results are analogous to prior literature wherein excluded women socially facilitate, or work harder, to become a member of the group; in the current research, they increase the importance of USC to their personal identity, exhibiting a similar desire to become part of the excluding group. For men, the data is even more comparable; when racially excluded, men report significantly lower private assessments of the university and decrease the importance of USC to their personal identity, a tactic identified in the prior literature. Racially excluded males also exhibited an increase in negative affect and a decrease in positive affect (although not significant), emphasizing their emotional response to the exclusion. Finally, the lack of gender effects in the subjects of color prompts two questions: (1) Either subjects of color do not experience the same gender effects described in the prior literature, or (2) they do not interpret the media exclusion as actual exclusion and do not experience the subsequent psychological effects. Although much of the social 44

exclusion research that investigates gender is conducted on White college students, the latter question is more pertinent with respect to the other results in the study. Subjects of color repeatedly demonstrate minimal reactions to the exclusion, indicating that they may be habituated to media exclusion and do not experience it as a threat. Alternatively, they may be employing the same strategies ascribed to men in the social exclusion literature wherein they attribute the exclusion of their racial group to external reasons (e.g., racism, media trends) and derogate the source of the exclusion, as mentioned in the split file analysis of baseline identification and condition. These findings add to the study of media effects from a social psychological perspective; however, there are several points that must be addressed including a small sample size, potential inadequacy of certain measures, and its relation to changes in the national population. The N of 87 is lacking sufficient power for many of the abovementioned analyses. Furthermore, in an attempt to gain as many subjects as possible, care was not taken to ensure an even distribution across all racial groups and by gender, thus causing imbalances in the cells. Furthermore, some of the analyses may be explained by this lack of power, specifically with measures that lacked significant variance including Private Ethnic CSE. Additional iterations of this study utilize measures that seek to increase the reliability of ethnic identity and perceived typicality as an in-group member. The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM: Phinney 1992) is a more precise measurement of ethnic identification and should achieve greater variance across subjects. The self-typicality and group identification scale (Kashima, Kashima & Hardie, 2000) 45

seeks to discover the subjects perceived typicality as an in-group member. Identification with the larger social group only implies perceived similarity with the group, and Kashima, Kashima & Hardie have noted that group identification and typicality, although related, are two factors of self-categorization (2000). In addition, the differences between racial groups may be explained by concepts of typicality; White subjects may consider themselves a typical example of a USC student, thus resulting in the defensive, threatresponse behavior. In addition, the purpose of this study was to create a microcosm seeking to replicate the effects of racial exclusion in American television; however the racial dynamics of the target campus may be different from that of the United States. The national percentages are different from those at USC; the undergraduate population contains approximately 47% White (vs. the national representation of 65%), 13.1% Latino (vs. 15%), and 21.7% API (vs. 4.5%) (USC Factbook, 2008). Although these numbers both demonstrate a White majority, the USC demographics are different from the national representation. It may be necessary to measure the subjects perception of racial representation on campus (i.e., What percentage of USC undergraduates are of Asian descent?) in order to further assess their interpretation of the video.

46

CHAPTER 5: FUTURE RESEARCH

The difference between White subjects and subjects of color in their reactions to exclusion, media or interpersonal, is has not been addressed prior to this study. Individuals who are not experienced in being racially excluded may interpret the exclusion as a threat to their individual and in-group, thus employing reparative increases in identification with the larger group. Once again, this is similar to the threat literature wherein subjects that are high identified with an in-group will increase their in-group favoritism (Crocker, Major & Steele, 1998) and increase their self-stereotyping, thus ascribing more of the in-groups characteristics to themselves (Kashima, Kashima & Hardie, 2000). It is important to note that African-American or Black subjects were not tested in this study due to their current status in American media. Black characters comprise 16% of all television characters, much higher than their 12.8% representation in the national population (Children Now, 2004). This group suffers from misrepresentation as compared to an underrepresentation, the purpose of this study. The majority of Black characters on television are either musicians, athletes, or criminals, thus creating a hostile media environment for Black viewers. Prior research has addressed the effects of this misrepresentation; the most interesting of which is a study on the interpretation of television news stories conducted by Gilliam & Iyengar (2000). Subjects were shown television news stories about a recent crime; the story ether mentioned a White suspect, a Black suspect, or the suspects race was not mentioned. In the no race condition, 44% 47

of subjects recalled the suspect as Black, more than the amount of subjects recalling the suspect as White (19%) and the same amount unable to recall a suspect (37%), the correct answer. These effects place Black Americans outside the scope of this study, but demand additional studies to investigate the effect of media misrepresentation on viewer psychology. In addition, the subject pool lacked sufficient numbers Black undergraduate student in psychology classes to reach an appropriate N. The lack of gender differences among subjects of color demands further analysis; much of the exclusion research has been conducted on White college students thus disregarding the potential cultural component of reactions to exclusion. The results of this study demand a deeper investigation into the effect of cultural differences exclusion behavior: the female reaction to social exclusion may be related to a conditioned manner of behavior within the White community, or a repercussion of majority culture. Alternatively, as a minority culture, excluded subjects of color may attribute the exclusion to other external factors, or may demonstrate a habituation to nonrepresentation (or media exclusion), such that they do not interpret the exclusion as exclusion.. Further research must be conducted wherein the majority community is not White. Furthermore, this study, along with most media-related laboratory research, suffers from testing a one-time viewing. Media is much more pervasive than a single exposure and the actual experience is often difficult to quantify in a controlled experimental study. However, the results of laboratory research offer some context for the immersive media we currently experience. Television has the power to reflect, 48

modify, and regurgitate social norms, and a long-term lack of representation in media can be potentially damaging; excluded subjects may be led to believe that they are on the fringes or outskirts of society. This is particularly important for children who utilize television programming to construct schemas of the world. While the influence of television images may not be immediately apparent, effects from media use are like the steady drip, drip, drip of a faucet; measurable effects at any moment may be small, but they accumulate over time (Jeffers in Children Now, 2004, p. 1). Over 40% of American youth under 19 are of color, drastically higher than the 27% of primetime characters (Children Now, 2004), but the effects of this exclusion may not yet be evident. The 2005 riots in the suburbs of Paris may offer a glimpse into the correlation between long-term media exclusion and the psyche. A regular criticism of French media is its exclusion of brown faces, despite an influx of North African Muslims in the seventies and eighties. The best estimates put Frances Muslim population at approximately four million, half of which are French citizens (Caldwell, 2000). Many have argued that there are more practicing Muslims in France than Catholics. However, this minority population is not represented in the media. Consigned to the ghetto suburbs outside Paris, this lack of representation aids in the ostracizing the group. In November 2005, after two Muslim teens were accidentally electrocuted while running from the police in Clichy-sous-Bois, second-generation Muslim youth rioted through the suburbs of France, burning cars and buildings for two weeks. These youth had only known a nation that excluded them financially, academically, and physically, and this was mirrored in their exclusion from the media. 49

The power of the media is undeniable, and the research regarding its influence on the viewer is extensive and far-reaching. This research adds to this research, but begins to quantify the psychological effects of media exclusion. As media becomes more intimate and pervasive, these effects may become even more exaggerated; alternatively, an awareness of media effects and the advancement of media literacy may encourage viewers to become more active and aware of simple entertainment. Furthermore, the effect upon White Americans is rarely addressed in the theoretical discussion but is clearly deserving of attention. As America becomes a more diverse community, so will our media, highlighting the importance of its effect on concepts of self for all viewers.

50

REFERENCES

Aron, A., Aron, E. N., Tudor, M., & Nelson, G. (1991). Close relationships as including other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 60, 241-253. Associated Press (2006). Average home has more TVs than people. USA TODAY. September 21, 2006. Retrieved September 15, 2008 from http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2006-09-21-homes-tv_x.htm. Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciacorro, N. J. (2005). Social Exclusion Impairs SelfRegulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 88(4), 589-604. Baumeister, R. F., Leary, M. R. (1995). The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation. Psychological Bulletin. 17(3), 497-529. Baumeister, R. F., Twenge, J. M., Nuss, C. K. (2002). Effects of Social Exclusion on Cognitive Processes: Anticipated Aloneness Reduces Intelligent Thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 83(4), 817-827. Bourgeois, K. S., Leary, M. R. (2001). Coping with Rejection: Derogating those who choose us last. Motivation and Emotion. 25(2), 101-111. Bruneau, T.J. (1973). Communicative silences: Forms and functions. Journal of Communication, 23, 17-46. Buckley, K. E., Winkle, R. E., Leary M. R. (2004). Reactions to acceptance and rejection: Effects of level and sequence of relational evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 40, 14-28. Caldwell, C. (2000). The Crescent and the Tricolor. TheAtlantic, November 2000. Retrieved September 15, 2008 from http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200011/france-muslims Cast, A. D., Burke, P. J. (2002). A Theory of Self-Esteem. Social Forces. 80(3), 10411068. Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2002. Tech Policy Notes. June. Retrieved September 15, 2008 from http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/020601_broadbnd_govt_support.pdf. 51

Children Now (2004). 2003-2004 Fall Colors: Primetime Diversity Report. Retrieved September 15, 2008 from http://publications.childrennow.org/publications/media/fallcolors_2003.cfm Children Now (2004). Fall Colors 2003-2004; Prime Time Diversity Report. http://publications.childrennow.org/assets/pdf/cmp/fc03/fall-colors-03-v5.pdf Coats, S. Smith, E. R., Claypool, H. M., Banner, M. J. (2000). Overlapping Mental Representations of Self and In-Group: Reaction Time Evidence and Its Relationship with Explicit Measures of Group Identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 36, 304-325. Crocker, Major & Steele (1998). Social stigma. In D. gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (eds). Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 504-53). Boston: McGrawHill. Eisenberger, N. I., Lieberman, M. D., Williams, K. D. (2003). Does Rejection Hurt? An fMRI Study of Social Exclusion. Science. 301(5643), 290-292. Fattore, T., Turnbull, N., Wilson, S. (2003). More Community! Does the Social Capital Hypothesis Offer Hope for Untrusting Societies?. The Drawing Board: An Australian Review of Public Affairs. 3(3), 165-179. Gardner, W. L., Pickett, C. L., Brewer, M. B. (2000). Social Exclusion and Selective Memory: How the Need to belong Influences Memory for Social Events. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 26, 486-496. Gerbner, G., Gross, G., Morgan, M., Signorielli, N., Shanahan, J. (2002). Growing Up with Television: Cultivation Processes. In Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. Ed. Bryant & Zillman, 43-67. Gerbner, G., Gross, L. (1976). Living with Television: The Violence Profile. Journal of Communication. 26, 172, 173-199. Graves, S. B. (1999). Television and Prejudice Reduction: when Does Television as a Vicarious Experience Make a Difference?. Journal of Social Issues. 55(4), 707725. Kashima, E. S., Kashima Y. Hardie, E. A. (2000). Self-typicality and Group Identification: Evidence for their Separateness. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 3(1), 97-110.

52

Kelly, K. M. (2001). Individual differences in reactions to rejection. In M. R. Leary (ed.) Interpersonal Rejection. New York: Oxford University Press. Leary, M. R. (1990). Responses to social exclusion: social anxiety, jealousy, loneliness, depression and low self-esteem. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology: 9, 221-229. Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., Downs, D. L. (1995). Self-Esteem as an Interpersonal Monitor: The Sociometer Hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 68(3), 518-530. Leary, M. R. (2001). Toward a Conceptualization of Interpersonal Rejection. In Leary, M. R. (Ed.). Interpersonal Rejection. Oxford Univesrity Press, New York, NY. 3-20. Leary, M. R., Twenge, J. M., Quinlivan, E. (2006). Interpersonal Rejection as a Determinant of Anger and Aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 10(2), 111-132. Lickel, B. et al (2000). Vareities of Groups and the Perception of Group Entitavity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 78(2), 223-246. Lieberman, M. D., Eisenberger, N. I. (2005). A Pain by any other Name (Rejection, Exclusion, Ostracism) still Hurts the Same: The Role of Dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex in Social and Physical Pain. 167-187. Livingstone, S. (1990). Making Sense of Television: The Psychology of Audience Interpretation. Pergamon Publishers. Luhtanen, R., Crocker, J. (1992). A Collective Self-Esteem Scale: Self-Evaluation of Ones Social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 18(3), 302318. Newswire (2006). The Asian Pacific Media Coalition Releases 2006 Report Card on Television Diversity. December 7, 2006. Retrieved December 12, 2007 from http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=77239 Pedersen, W. C., Denson, T. F., Goss, R. J., Vasquez, E. A., & Miller, N. (in press). The impact of rumination on aggressive thoughts, feelings, behavior, and arousal. Phinney, J. S. (1992). The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure; a New Scale for Use with Diverse Groups. Journal of Adolescent Research. 7, 156-176. 53

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Rosenberg, M. Schooler, C., Schoenbach, C., Rosenberg, F. (1995). Global Self-Esteem and Specific Self-Esteem: Different Concepts, Different Outcomes. American Sociological Review. 60(1), 141-156. Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A. J., Kim, Y. (2001). What is Satisfying About Satisfying Events? Testing 10 Candidate Psychological Needs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 30(2), 325-339. Sommer, K. (2001). Coping with rejection: Ego-Defensive Strategies, Self-Esteem, and Interpersonal Relationships. In Leary, M. R. (ed.). Interpersonal Rejection. Oxford University Press, New York, NY. 167-188. Smith, A., Williams, K. D. (2004). R U There? Ostracism by Cell Phone Test Messages. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice. 8(4), 291-301. Spigel, L. The Suburban Home Companion: Television and the neighborhood Ideal in PostWar America. In Television Studies Reader. Steele, S. (2006). White Guilt: How Blacks and Whites Together Destroyed the Promise of the Civil Rights Era. HarperCollins Tuchman, G. (1978). Symbolic Annihilation. In Tuchman, G., Kapan, D., Benet, J. (Eds). Hearth and Home: Images of Women in the Mass Media. Oxford University Press. New York, NY. 3-38. Twenge, J. M., Cantanese, K. R., Baumeister, R. F. (2002) Social Exclusion Causes SelfDefeating Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 83(3), 606615. Twenge. J. M., Cantanese, K. R., Baumeister, R. F. (2003). Social Exclusion and the Deconstructed State: Time Perception, Meaningless, Lethargy, Lack of Emotion, and Self-Awareness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 85(5). 409423. U. S. Census Bureau News (2007). Minority Population Tops 100 Milion. May 17, 2007. Retrieved September 15, 2008 from http://www.census.gov/PressRelease/www/releases/archives/population/010048.html U. S. Census Bureau (2000). State & County Quickfacts: Los Angeles County. Retrieved September 15, 2008 from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06037.html. 54

USC Factbook (2008). Retrieved September 15, 2008 from http://www.usc.edu/private/factbook/2008. Watson, D., Clark L. A., Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and Validation of Brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: the PANAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 54(6), 1063-1070. Williams, K. D., Govan, C. L., Crocker, V., Tynan, D., Cruichshank, M., Lam, A. (2002). Investigations into differences between Social- and Cyberostracism. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice. 6(1), 65-77. Williams, K. D., Cheung, C. K. T., Choi, W. (2000). Cyberostracism: Effects of Being Ignored Over the Internet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 79(5), 748-763. Williams, K. D., Sommer, K. L. (1997). Social Ostracism by Coworkers: Does Rejection Lead to Loafing or Compensation?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 23(7), 693-714. Williams, K. D., Zadro. (2001). Ostracism: On Being Ignored, Excluded, and Rejected. In Interpersonal Rejection, Leary, M. R. (Ed.). Oxford University Press, New York, NY. 21-54. Zadro, L., Boland, C., Richardson, R. (2006). How long does it last? The persistence of the effects of ostracism in the socially anxious. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 42, 692-297. Zadro, L., Williams, K.D., Richardson, R. (2005), Riding the O Train: Comparing the Effects of Ostracism and Verbal Dispute on Targets and Sources. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 8(2), 125-143.

55

APPENDIX A: MEASUREMENT SCALES

Word Completion Task (Pederson et al. in press) Directions: Below is a list of words with missing letters. Please fill in the missing letters to form a word. All of the items can be made into several possible words so please just make the first word that comes to mind. Please complete this task as fast as you can. (1) d (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) sho_t u__e_ _r__sed ha_e prov__e __ttery al___ out___e ins___ ki__ ex___ed __ming ang__ h_r_ ac_ _ _ _ (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) (26) (27) (28) (29) (30) m_d att_c_ j___y sl_p __ate te_s_ a____ed l__ely fi__t in_en_e off___ _ee_ed h_t __tter in__re 56 (31) (32) (33) (34) (35) disg___e s__b _ell _rate ___age

Positive and Negative Affect Scale (Watson, Clark. & Tellegen, 1988) This scale consists of a number of words that describe different feelings and emotions. Read each item and then select the appropriate answer to that word. Indicate to what extent you currently feel. 1. Interested 2. Distressed 3. Excited 4. Upset 5. Strong 6. Guilty 7. Scared 8. Hostile 9. Enthusiastic 10. Proud 11. Irritable 12. Alert 13. Ashamed 14. Inspired 15. Nervous 16. Determined 17. Attentive 18. Jittery 19. Active 20. Afraid

Adapted Collective Self-Esteem Scale (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992) We would like you to consider your membership with the group "USC," and respond to the following statements on the basis of how you feel about USC and your membership with the university There are no right or wrong answers to any of these statements; we are interested in your honest reactions and opinions. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. I am a worthy member of USC. I often regret that I belong to USC. Overall, USC is considered good by others. Overall, my USC membership has very little to do with how I feel about myself. I feel I dont have much to offer USC. In general, Im glad to be a member of USC. Most people consider USC, on average, to be more ineffective than other universities. 8. USC is an important reflection of who I am. 9. I am a cooperative participant at USC. 10. Overall, I often feel that USC is not worthwhile. 11. In general, others respect USC. 12. USC is unimportant to my sense of what kind of person I am. 13. I often feel Im a useless student at USC. 14. I feel good about USC. 15. In general, others think that USC is unworthy. 16. In general, belonging to USC is an important part of my self-image. 57

State Self-Esteem (Rosenberg, 1965) Below is a list of statements dealing with your general feelings about yourself. Please indicate if you Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, or Strongly Agree with the following: 1. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself. 2. At times, I think I am no good at all. 3. I feel that I have a number of good qualities. 4. I am able to do things as well as most other people. 5. I feel I do not have much to be proud of. 6. I certainly feel useless at times. 7. I feel that I am a person of worth, at least on an equal plane with others. 8. I wish I could have more respect for myself. 9. All in all, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure. 10. I take a positive attitude toward myself. Community Belongingness Scale (Fattore, Turnbull, & Wilson, 2003) Please respond... 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. I would be really sorry if I had to move away from the USC community. I have a lot in common with the USC community. People in the USC community make it a difficult place to live in. I am good friends with many people in the USC community. I have little to do with people in the USC community People in the USC community are very willing to help each other out. If I no longer lived here, hardly anyone around here would even notice.

58