Annie Rosean
DeFleur and Ball-Rokeachs Dependency Theory:
Timeless, Transcendent, and Applicable
Media Systems Dependency Theory, hereafter MSD Theory, was developed in 1976 by
Melvin DeFleur and Sandra Ball-Rokeach. As one that allows the potential to weigh, alternative
courses of action to achieve goals, (Foss & Littlejohn, 2011, p. 30) it is a practical theory. By
Robert Craigs standards, this theory fits into the sociopsychological tradition because it deals
with the impact of the media on individuals (Foss & Littlejohn, p. 348). The following will
explain the theorys origin, major assumptions, and central concepts to qualify why it is a useful,
applicable theory, one that has transcended nearly 40 years and is still in use today.
Knowing the origin of the MSD Theory helps to identify the ways it differs from previous
media theories. The development of the MSD Theory is indebted to Katz's Users and
Gratification's Theory, hereafter UGT (Ball-Rokeach, 1998). UGT focused specifically on the
perspective of the audience as opposed to the media. This emphasis on the audience empowered
a typically powerless group in the eyes of communication theory. In describing the development
of MSD Theory in her 1998 study on media power and use, Ball-Rokeach notes that the
difference between the UGT and MSD Theory was the role of the individual or audience. Ball-
Rokeach describes that while the UGT perspective developed around the "active individual" who
had the ability to "override the influence of creators of media texts," she saw unanimously
ambiguous behavior from individuals instead (p. 9). The change in the role and perception of the
the Power-Dependence Theory by Emerson. This theory posited dependence as the "flip side of
power . . . meaning power cannot be determined by observing only the relative distribution of
understanding dependencys counterpoint, power. The reversal of this principle is seen in the
audience and dependency, into consideration. However, their 1976 theory does much more than
address audience dependency on media as a bilinear relationship. Rather, the MSD Theory
addresses the interdependence of the mass media, the audience, and society; it seeks to predict
audience dependency on media based on certain needs or goals (Littlejohn & Foss, 2011). The
conceptualization of the three central parties, the audience, media system, and society, not only
highlights audience dependency on the media for information sources, but the ways in which this
dependency has the ability to affect personal and social processes (DeFleur & Ball-Rokeach,
1976). These three parties existing and acting in response to one another are what DeFleur and
all three parts of the tripartite design also differentiates DeFleur and Ball-Rokeachs theory from
others. Unlike theories that separated macro and micro systems, the MSD Theory determines a
way to connect these systems with their tripartite design, thereby exemplifying how each has a
ascribed to the theory even after its origination. One epistemological assumption is that
knowledge comes from media, and that this information is a power source (Ball-Rokeach, 1998).
DeFleur and Ball-Rokeach (1976) refer to the dissemination of knowledge and audience
dependency as a, ubiquitous condition and explain, One finds this condition in many settings,
ranging from the need to find the best buys at the supermarket to more general or pervasive
needs such as obtaining the kinds of information that will help to maintain a sense of
connectedness and familiarity with the social world outside ones neighborhood" (p. 6). Again,
here it is assumed that audiences are dependent on media for information. This theory also
qualifies information as what is produced as both news and entertainment. Audiences make use
in influencing the other players. This goal orientation is discussed at a micro level, "In particular,
the action and interaction orientation dependencies assume that people act purposefully in
deciding how they will behave to obtain goals" (Riffe, et. al, 2008, 2). At a macro level, goal
orientation exists as well. DeFleur and Ball-Rokeach (1976) explain the two objectives of the
mass media, saying they act as economic systems, engaged in deliberate attempts to persuade
and entertain, [and] also as information systems vitally involved in maintenance, change, and
conflict processes at the societal as well as the group and individual levels of social action" (p. 4-
5). The assumptions here pertain to the agenda of all moving parts of the relationship. Ball-
Rokeach (1998) refers to these assumptions as the nature of human beings, and the nature and
proactively. It fits in nicely with the macro-micro systems at play in the MSD Theory. The degree
to which media can affect a person's behavior depends on the strength of their pre-existing
realities are entirely adequate before and during message reception, media messages may
have little or no alteration effects. They may reinforce existing beliefs or behavior forms.
In contrast, when people do not have social realities that provide adequate frameworks
for understanding, acting, and escaping, and when audiences are dependent in these ways
on media information received, such messages may have a number of alteration effects.
dependency and their social realities. It is both a deterministic and pragmatic point of view.
This assumption develops another in MSD Theory that says the nature of human
motivation is need-based. A strong correlation is made between need and dependency. The
greater the need, the stronger the dependency on the media for information (DeFleur & Ball-
Rokeach, 1976). An audiences need might grow as society develops; consequently, as societies
grow, the media take on more unique functions (DeFleur & Ball-Rokeach, 1976, 6). This type of
functional growth is coined by DeFleur and Ball-Rokeach as, unique information functions.
These assumptions acknowledge the much broader one that this theory seeks to prove. The
inevitable change in dependency relations between the audience, media, and social system reflect
p. 15). The assumptions of human motivation and its effects on interdependence are vital to MSD
Theorys framework.
In their conceptual map of the Media Systems Dependency Theory DeFleur and Ball-
Rokeach (1976) identify four major concepts: societal systems, the media system, audiences, and
effects. As the name implies, dependency is their underlying concept measured on audiences. In
the context of this theory, dependency is a relationship in which the satisfaction of needs or the
attainment of goals by one party is contingent upon the resources of another party (p. 6). Ball-
Rokeach (1985) attests that structural dependency is the driver behind the tripartite design,
causing them all to interrelate (p. 489-90). In the subsequent years of this theory, some recent
scholars believe that dependency now evolves as a function of the interrelatedness of the media
communication, in other words, involves complex relationships between large sets of interacting
variables that are only crudely designated by the terms media, audiences, and society
(DeFleur & Ball-Rokeach, p. 5). The audience represents the micro level, the societal system the
meso level, and the media system the macro level. Referring back to the initial conception of
MSD Theory, the audience is not entirely passive, but heavily influenced by media. In turn it
influences the society in which it plays a part which can have an effect on the media system.
Each of these concepts can exchange with and influence another. However, much power is
attributed to the media system, it is the media system that controls information resources, and it
is the media system that has relations with other social systems that shape the dynamics and the
487-488). These types of influential media messages can have effects on the audience, which
messages on the audience. Here, the audience is synonymous with individuals, the micro level,
where effects are measured. Effects is the final major concept from MSD. The effects of media
messages can be broken down as cognitive, affective, and behavioral effects. Cognitive effects
are outlined as the creation and resolution of ambiguity, attitude formation, agenda setting,
expansion of peoples belief systems, and value clarification and conflict (DeFleur & Ball-
Rokeach, 1976). All of these effects respond nicely to the assumptions about human nature and
the nature of the media. The discourse between both parties is evident in these potential cognitive
effects.
The second type of effect is affective, which is arguably also one of the most difficult
effects to measure adequately. The most easily drawn example of the affective effect from a
media message is de-sensitization. DeFleur and Ball-Rokeach (1976) outline fear, anxiety, and
trigger-happiness as potentials for exploration. Their final examples of possible affective effects
are morale and alienation. Of course, as pointed out, almost all effects could be viewed with
affect in mind, since that's what drives a cognitive or behavioral effect from an individual
media systems perspective. Activation or de-activation can occur. An individual may consume a
media message and decode it as an affirmation that they should act a certain way or that they
shouldnt act as they normally would. Taken to the twenty-first century this might translate to an
individual getting a retailers e-newsletter about a boot sale and deciding that instead of
disregarding the e-newsletter as they normally would, they might follow the link about the boot
sale instead and see if there are any good deals. Issue formation and resolution is another
behavioral effect that could take place, particularly potent with regard to news media. A salient
example of this type of effect would be how a person decides to vote during the presidential
campaign after consuming media about the debates. The final behavioral effect is altruistic
economic behavior (DeFleur & Ball-Rokeach, 1976). This notion was initially born out of
telethons where audience members would spend an exorbitant amount of money compared to
their usual behavior. The consequence of behavioral effects from MSD Theory transcends to
today easily with so many digital services available via mobile devices and stationary computers
(Chen, 2013).
The MSD Theory is useful in illuminating the dependent relationship among audiences,
society, and the media system. Its scope is wide enough to extend to all types of media, evident
in its easy application to studies on new, digital media today versus those that existed in 1976.
Take for example the various media devices that audiences depend on. Not only are they printed
newspapers and televised newscasts, today media proliferates the audiences emails, web
searches, and apps via their mobile devices (Chen, 2013). In this same vein, there is high
heuristic value in that the MSD Theory is still applied. Again, this is proven by the seemingly
high dependence all demographics have on digital media. From an audience perspective, the
internet today outweighs the usefulness of traditional forms of media such as printed works
(Riffe, et. al, 2008, p. 9). Despite the change in media outlets, the audience is still dependent.
falsifiability should be considered. The assumptions of MSD Theory are appropriate. For
example, if the assumption is that audiences are dependent on and therefore changeable from the
media system, it is not inappropriate to assert that MSD Theory can predict certain effects
(DeFleur & Ball-Rokeach). The MSD Theory has value from various perspectives. Whether
someone wants to alter public opinion on a certain issue from a values standpoint, whether they
want to change audience behavior to benefit them financially, the theory has worth. Finally,
while MSD Theory is more complex than UGT, it does operate at a basic level: audiences can
affect society which can affect the media and any combination of the three. All of these concepts
have an effective power because they are all interdependent. Of course, arguing that any
members of the tripartite design are dependent is arbitrary, thereby making this theory falsifiable,
and open to reinterpretation. The MSD Theory is therefore, useful based on the standard
sociopsychological communication theory by which to understand the power of the media today.
For these reasons MSD Theory remains a useful theory from its inception. It is particularly
potent as the digital space becomes the forum where the audience, society, and the media system
communicate. Based on the theorys resilience over the last 40 years, it is reasonable to assume
that as communication spaces develop even further, MSD Theory will highlight the dependency
References
Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1998). A theory of media power and a theory of media use: Different stories,
questions, and ways of thinking. Mass Communication & Society, 1(1/2), 5-40.
Ball-Rokeach, S. (1985). The origins of individual media-system dependency: A sociological framework.
Communication Research, 12, 485-510. doi:10.1177/009365085012004003
Ball-Rokeach, S., & Defleur, M. (1976). A dependency model of mass-media effects. Communication
Research, 3(1), 3-21. doi:10.1177/009365027600300101
Chen, Y. (2013, May). Mobile media dependency: private consumption in public spaces. Paper presented
at the Media in Transition International Conference, Cambridge, Massachussetts, USA. Retrieved
from http://web.mit.edu/comm-forum/mit8/papers/yi-fan_chen.pdf
Fleming, K. (2014). Uses, dependency model remains useful framework. Newspaper Research Journal,
35(3), 22-37.
Littlejohn, S., & Foss, K. (2011). Theories of human communication (2nd ed.). Long Grove, IL:
Waveland Press.
Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Miron, V. (2008). Media system dependency theory and using the internet for in-
depth, specialized information. Web Journal of Mass Communication Research, 11, 1-1.
Retrieved October 15, 2015, from
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/265196963_Media_System_Dependency_Theory_and_
Using_the_Internet_for_In-depth_Specialized_Information