18 Examining Research on the Effects of Political Comedy – Lindsay Osborn

Lindsay Osborn is a senior from La Porte, Indiana. She is pursuing her Bachelor of Science in Communication Studies with a minor in Technical and Professional Writing. “Examining Research on the Effects of Political Comedy” was written as a final presentation for Dr. Aldrich’s class, Communication Research Methods. This piece analyzes and critiques a research article that explores the educational and persuasive nature of the political comedy series, Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. Professor Rosalie Aldrich would like to celebrate this piece and said, “Lindsay demonstrated exceptional writing throughout the semester in one of the more challenging courses, Communication Research Methods. Not only did she grasp the difficult concepts but she was able to clearly and correctly apply them to the article she analyzed in her final presentation. Overall, her intellectual curiosity was a breath of fresh air!”

Examining Research on the Effects of Political Comedy

Lindsay’s PowerPoint Presentation

Article Information

• Author(s): Jennings, F.J., Bramlett, J.C., & Warner, B. R.
• Year Published: (2019).
• Article Title: Comedic cognition: The impact of elaboration on political comedy effects
• Journal Name: Western Journal of Communication

Study Overview

The overall purpose of the study was to explore how people process political issues presented in a long-form, political comedy program (Last Week Tonight). Researchers wanted to expand the understanding of political humor by studying how much information is retained; the persuasiveness of the comedy program; the participants’ affinity for political humor; and whether the framing of a video makes any difference to how participants critically think about the information given in the video.

Concepts/Variables Examined in Article

• Affinity for Political Humor: a scale that is used to measure the level of an individual’s preference for political humor (Holbert et al., 2013)
• Elaboration: the extent to which an individual thinks consciously about a message (Loman et al., 2019)
• Information Acquisition: the recall and recognition of information presented (Jennings et al., 2019)
• Attitude Congruence: “a measure of the extent to which participants expressed attitudes similar to those presented…” (2019)
• Framing: the way information is presented to participants; for example, how a video is described on social media before viewing (2019)
• Priming: “the process through which an initial message influences the processing of subsequent stimuli” (2019)
• Telic motivation: “‘Serious’ motivation that implies that a person is engaging in a given activity (i.e., viewing a humorous video) to achieve a specific goal (i.e., learning about the news of the day).” (2019)
• Paratelic motivation: “‘Playful’ motivation [that] implies an activity is undertaken for the value of the activity itself (i.e., to enjoy the video, to be amused).” (2019).

Framework

The researchers acknowledged that much of the current political humor research focuses on comedy shows such as The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. These previous studies found that political comedy segments influenced numerous human behaviors (political learning, attitude formation, cynicism, and participation) (Jennings et al., 2019). Additionally, the authors referenced results from research that covered an award-winning, longer-form political comedy segment that generated more thoughtful engagement and learning than previous political comedy research. Thus, the article’s authors chose to expand the research on political comedy by focusing on HBO’s Last Week Tonight, citing that the long-form program handles more information-rich, deep dives into low-salience political topics. Furthermore, because of the hybrid media environment of social media, researchers wished to explore whether the framing of the video on social media (serious, playful, neutral) would have an impact on those with differing affinities for political comedy. To explore this notion, researchers referenced “reversal theory,” which argues that “an individual’s motivations and emotion when presented with new information influences the manner in which they process and react to a message” (2019).

Research Hypotheses

• H1: Higher elaboration on messages in long-form political comedy will be associated with greater a) information acquisition (both recognition and recall) and b) attitude/message congruence.
• H2: Affinity for political humor will be positively associated with a) information acquisition and b) attitude/message congruence.
• H3: Telic (serious) framing will increase message elaboration.
• H4: Paratelic framing will decrease message elaboration among those low in affinity for political humor.

Participant Information

• Participants were taken from a convenience sample of midwestern university students (N = 179) recruited from basic Communication and Journalism courses.
• The average age of the participants was 19.8.
• Out of the sample, 102 participants were female and 77 were male.
• The majority of participants were white (n = 137; 76.5%). No data was given for other races/ethnic backgrounds.
• 39.1% (n = 70) identified as Democrats; 40.6% (n = 73) identified as Republicans. No data was given for participants who identified as Independent.
• The study did not report on IRB approval or informed consent, nor did it mention whether the students were incentivized to participate via extra credit or as a class requirement.

Methods Used

Researchers conducted a randomized experiment using a convenience sample of Communication and Journalism students in a media lab at a large midwestern university. The participants were first given a pretest to collect demographic information and their affinity for political humor. Researchers used Hmielowski et al.’s (2011) 11-item scale to measure affinity for political humor. The items were presented on a 7-point Likert-type scale which included statements such as “I appreciate political humor because it can make me feel more knowledgeable about politics” (Jennings et al., 2019).

Participants were then randomly assigned to view the video on a mock social media page under one of three framing conditions—telic, paratelic, and control (neutral). Researchers did not mention how the participants were randomly assigned to the conditions.

The Last Week Tonight video used in the study focused on issues concerning the U.S. territories and their residents. The video was 13:11 minutes long.

Researchers measured elaboration using the Message Elaboration Measure, a Likert-type scale of 12 statements that encouraged participants to reflect on their thought processes while watching the video (Reynolds, 1997).

Information acquisition was tested by assessing participants’ recall and recognition of the information provided in the video (Jennings et al., 2019). Researchers measured recall with four fill-in-the-blank items with six possible correct responses; they measured recognition with five multiple-choice items. Recall and recognition were analyzed separately.

Researchers measured attitude congruence by having participants respond to six items presented on a 7-point Likert-type scale (Jennings et al., 2019).

Finally, the results were analyzed using Cronbach’s alpha with a hybrid path model using Maximum Likelihood (ML) estimation in the program Lavaan (Jennings et al., 2019).

Results Overview

The results of the study were mixed. Results showed that those who elaborated more on messages were also more likely to recall the information presented in the video (consistent with H1) (Jennings et al., 2019).

People who had a greater affinity for political humor were more likely to recall and recognize factual information from the video (H2), but participants were not more likely to express attitudes consistent to those in the video.

The results were contrary to H3; that is, participants who viewed the video with a telic prime vs. control were not more likely to elaborate on messages. Additionally, participants who viewed the video with a paratelic prime did not see a reduction in elaboration. Researchers concluded that there were no apparent differences in elaboration or persuasive effects between telic, paratelic, and neutral framing methods.

However, the study did find that their results were consistent with H4 (2019). Paratelic framing was conditioned by affinity for political humor; that is, those with a lower affinity for political humor elaborated less on the message if they were primed to watch a video that was framed as entertainment.

Critique

In the discussion section, the researchers noted that their work contributed to a body of research on political comedy that suggests that long-form political comedy has different effects on consumers compared to short-form political humor segments. They also suggested that their findings help explain the role of elaboration in information acquisition and persuasion.

Researchers also acknowledged a few notable limitations. First, the authors said that their study’s priming statement was direct but modest (Jennings et al., 2019). They suggested that a stronger priming statement about the video may have produced stronger results. Additionally, researchers admitted that their crafted statements were not as natural as the ones found in actual social media.

Second, researchers also acknowledged that their study did not observe or assess the mindset of the participants, so their exploration of the reversal theory could not be verified. The article suggested that they could not be sure that the reversal theory was the best mechanism to explain their findings.

Third, the video used in the study was not naturally shared by any members of the participants’ social media circle.

Fourth, the researchers acknowledged their use of a convenience sample. The article notes that the lack of diversity could alter the results of their study.

Fifth, the authors suggested that their focus on low-salience political issues, while by design, may produce weaker results than a study that focuses on videos that address hot-button issues.

While small, the study does have some merit. The researchers’ hypotheses were based on existing research and theories, and they used reputable, peer-reviewed scales to measure their data. The study also utilized R analysis software and Cronbach’s alpha. These elements strengthened the reliability and validity of the results.

However, despite the researcher’s transparency on their limitations, there are a few additional issues that concern how the study was conducted. First, the study did not explain what method was used to randomize the experiment, which may call into question how random the experiment truly was.

While the article noted that their small convenience sample of young, mostly white Communication and Journalism students may weaken their results, the study did not mention whether or not there was an incentive for the students to participate in the study. It is important for researchers to be transparent about working with college students because there could be a concern of power over the students. Did the students get extra credit? Was participation a grade requirement? Furthermore, the study limited themselves even further by only studying Communication and Journalism students. Students in the field of communication may have a greater bias on communication research because they are likely to be studying similar topics throughout their college career.

Additionally, the study discusses long-form political comedy segments versus short-form segments; however, the segment of Last Week Tonight used for the study was not the typical episode length. If the breadth and depth of the long-form segment was valuable to the study’s purpose, the study should have considered having participants watch a full-length segment.

Finally, the most overlooked concern of the study revolves around the study’s pretest. By having participants complete a pretest over their affinity for political humor before engaging with the video, researchers may have weakened their results over telic, paratelic, and neutral framing. Participants would have inadvertently been primed to expect a political comedy segment, even though their hypothesis on framing might have benefited from participants going into the video segment blind.

Conclusion

The exploration of the perceptions, persuasiveness, and retention and recall of political comedy segments is important because it is a heavily consumed media format (Jennings et al., 2019). Moreover, political entertainment that educates viewers requires finesse; it is valuable to study what types of entertainment/education works and what does not. Research into political comedy also furthers our understanding of how people react to humor, whether it is a beneficial teaching tool, and whether it is a useful form of persuasion. Further research into political comedy segments should put more emphasis on including diverse demographics. Other considerations include researching the mindset of participants and whether the comedian’s appearance, personality, and comedic style promote any significant differences in retention and persuasion between groups.

References

Hmielowski, J. D., Holbert, R. L., & Lee, J. (2011). Predicting the consumption of political TV satire: Affinity for political humor, The Daily Show, and The Colbert Report. Communication Monographs, 78(1), 96–114. doi:10.1080/03637751.2010.542579

Holbert, R. L., Lee, J., Esralew, S., Walther, W. O., Hmielowski, J. D., & Landreville, K. D. (2013). Affinity for political humor: An assessment of internal factor structure, reliability, and validity. Humor, 26(4), 551–572. doi:10.1515/humor-2013-0034

Jennings, F. J., Bramlett, J. C., & Warner, B. R. (2019). Comedic cognition: The impact of elaboration on political comedy effects. Western Journal of Communication, 83(3), 365–382. https://doi-org.proxyeast.uits.iu.edu/10.1080/10570314.2018.1541476

Loman, J., de Vries, S. A., Kukken, N., van Baaren, R. B., Buijzen, M., & Müller, B. (2019). Quick question or intensive inquiry: The role of message elaboration in the effectiveness of self-persuasive anti-alcohol posters. PloS one, 14(1), e0211030. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211030

Reynolds, R. A. (1997). A validation test of a message elaboration measure. Communication Research Reports, 14(3), 269–278. doi:10.1080/08824099709388670