Page 92 - Communication Theory and Research

McQuail(EJC)-3281-06.qxd 8/16/2005 11:59 AM Page 78

78 Communication Theory & Research
TABLE 6.1 MEAN AND DISPERSION RATE FOR EACH CHARACTERISTIC OF THE SIX
CHARACTERS FOR BOTH SITCOMS
American Sitcom Domestic Sitcom
Characteristics s – x s – x
1. Looking for pleasure 1.019 3 0.905 3.13
2. Social sense 0.793 3.13 0.781 2.91
3. Modern 0.921 2.81 0.678 2.5
4. Organization talent 0.866 2.86 0.793 2.76
5. Piteous 0.964 2.28 0.953 2.51
6. Hard 0.842 2.63 0.83 2.61
7. Active 0.787 3.06 0.781 2.71
8. Comic, funny 1.044 2.95 0.871 3.06
9. Rational 0.905 2.81 0.866 2.8
10. Masculine 0.894 2.88 0.748 2.91
11. Feminine 0.848 2.33 0.793 2.06
12. Moral dignity 0.768 2.93 0.806 2.81
13. Family values 0.854 3.11 0.871 3.08
14. Warmth 0.888 3.25 0.728 3.05
15. Social ability 0.824 3 0.741 2.9
16. Mature 0.877 2.85 0.768 2.73
17. Dominant 0.894 2.78 0.8 2.75
18. Sexy 0.964 2.43 0.8 2.05
19. Intelligent 0.781 2.93 0.842 2.83
20. Rascal 1.034 2.5 1.086 2.65
21. Rough 0.964 2.31 0.877 2.3
–
Note: Dispersion rate in standard deviation (s); central tendency in mean ( x).

In Table 6.1 we present the mean dispersion rate (in standard deviation) for
each characteristic of the six characters in both sitcoms. As demonstrated by this
table, the study clearly confirmed our hypothesis that viewers more readily
recognized the characters in the domestic sitcom. The scores attributed to traits of
the characters were systematically more dispersed in the American fiction pro-
gramme (less unanimity). Only in four cases (characteristics 12, 13, 19 and 20) was
the dispersion rate higher in relation to the domestic drama. The values, attached
by the thirty-four respondents to different characters of the domestic programme,
were systematically less varied (higher unanimity). This part of the study thus
showed that the recipients had a better recognition of and command of the codes
used for the creation of the diegetical world in the indigenous programme – a
finding that also seemed to be confirmed in the interview phase, but which is
quite difficult to prove objectively. Respondents claimed on several occasions that
the specific situations and characters in the US sitcom were strange to them.

Interpretation

What are the consequences of this better recognition for the further decoding
and involvement of both sitcoms? In the first instance we were interested in the