In search of catharsis
Trump and parasocial predictors of social media use integration
Keywords:Trump, parasocial relationships, PSRs, social media use integration, SMUI, Imagined Interaction, IIs, survey, regression
Research in social media usage is extending beyond analyses of various high-traffic platforms and the average time users spend online. Developments of newer research explore the functions and motivators of social media use integration (SMUI). SMUI assesses the adoption of social media usage into everyday life as well as the emotional components that accompany the integration process. Similarly, researchers are considering parasocial relationships (PSRs) from the viewpoint that PSRs are a means of integration of mediated content into everyday life. The present study explores PSRs with President Donald Trump as drivers of greater social media use integration. Results indicate that the catharsis function of PSRs with Trump is a significant predictor of SMUI with gender impacting both the variety and valence attributes of PSRs.
communication style: Grandiosity, informality, and dynamism. Personality and Individual Differences, 107(1), 49-53.
Auter, P.J. &Palmgreen, P. (2000) Development and validation of a parasocial interaction
measure: The audience-persona interaction scale. Communication and Research Reports 17(1), 79-89. doi: 10.1386/jammr.1.2.131/1
Bodie, G. D., Honeycutt, J. M., & Vickery, A. J. (2013). An analysis of the correspondence
between imagined interaction attributes and functions. Human Communication Research, 39(2), 157-183. doi:10.1111/hcre.12003
Caughey, J.L. (1984). Imaginary social worlds: A cultural approach. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Chandler, D. (2004). Television violence and children’s behaviour. Retrieved August 12, 2013
Cogburn, D. L., & Espinoza-Vasquez, F. K. (2011). From networked nominee to networked
nation: Examining the impact of Web 2.0 and social media on political participation and civic engagement in the 2008 Obama campaign. Journal of Political Marketing, 10(1-2), 189-213.
Cohen, J. (2003). Parasocial breakups: Measuring individual differences in responses to the
dissolution of parasocial relationships. Mass Communication and Society, 6, 191–202. doi: 10.1207/S15327825MCS0602_5
Comstock, J. &Strzyzewski, K. (1990). Interpersonal interaction on television: Family conflict
and jealousy on primetime. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 34(3), pp. 263-282. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838159009386742
Correa, T, Hinsley, A.W., & de Zúñiga H.G. (2010). Who interacts on the Web? The intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior, 26 (2), 247-253.
Criado, J. I., Sandoval-Almazan, R., &GilGarcia, R. (2013). Government innovation through
social media. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 319-326.
Cummins, R. G., & Cui, B. (2014). Reconceptualizing address in television programming: The
effect of address and affective empathy on viewer experience of parasocial interaction. Journal of Communication, 64, 723–742. doi:10.1111/jcom.12076
Dai, S., Yan, J., Wang, L., & Zhang, Z. (2016). Parasocial interaction, perceived celebrity
credibility, and attitudes towards gossip as predictor of audiences’ tendency to gossip (Outstanding Academic Papers by Students (OAPS)). Retrieved from City University of Hong Kong, CityU Institutional Repository.
Dibble, J.L., Hartmann, T. &Rosaen, S.F. (2016). Parasocialinteraction and parasocial
relationship: Conceptual clarification and a critical assessment of measures. Human Communication Research, 42(1), 21-44.
Gabriel, S., Paravati, E., Green, M. C., &Flomsbee, J. (2018). From Apprentice to president: The role of parasocial connection in the election of Donald Trump. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(3), 299-307.
Gleich, U. (1997). Parasocial interaction with people on the screen. In P. Winterhoff-Spurk& T.H. A. van der Voort (Eds.), New horizons in media psychology: Research cooperation and projects in Europe (pp. 35-55). Wiesbaden, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Hartmann, T., &Goldhoorn, C. (2011). Horton and Wohl revisited: Exploring viewers’
experience of parasocial interaction. Journal of Communication, 61, 1104–1121. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01595.x
Honeycutt, J.M. (2003). Imagined interactions: Daydreaming about communication. Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
Honeycutt, J. M. (2010). Imagine that: Studies in imagined interaction. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
Honeycutt, J.M., Edwards, R., &Zagacki, K.S. (1989-1990). Using imagined interaction features to predict measures of self-awareness: Loneliness, locus of control, self- dominance, and emotional intensity. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 9, 17-31.
Honeycutt, J. M., Vickery, A. J., & Hatcher, L. C. (2015). The daily use of imagined interaction features. Communication Monographs, 82(2), 201-223. doi:10.1080/03637751.2014.953965
Honeycutt, J. M., White, R. C., &Swirsky, L. (2016). Imagined interactions and LGBT identity. Journal of Bisexuality, 16, 410-426. doi: 10.1080/15299716.2016.1227017
Horton, D., & Wohl, R.R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry 19,215-229.
Jenkins-Guarnieri, M.A., Wright, S.L., & Johnson, B. (2013). Development and validation of a
social media use integration scale. Psychology of Popular Media Culture 2(1), pp. 38-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030277
Katz, J. E., Barris, M., & Jain, A. (2013). The social media president: Barack Obama
and the politics of digital engagement. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Klimmt, C., Hartmann, T., & Schramm, H. (2006). Parasocial interactions and relationships. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment (pp. S291–S313). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kreis, R. (2017). The “tweet politics” of President Trump. Journal of Language and Politics, 16(4), 607-618.
Madison, T.P., & Porter, L. (2016). Cognitive and imagery attributes of parasocial
relationships. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality 35(4). doi: 10.1177/0276236615599340
Madison, T.P., Porter, L., &Greule, A. (2016). Parasocial compensation hypothesis: Predictors
of using parasocial relationships to compensate for real-life interaction. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 35: 258-279. doi: 10.1177/0276236615595232
Madison, T.P. & Porter, L. (2015). The people we meet: Discriminating functions of parasocial
interaction. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality 35, pp. 47-71.doi: 10.1177/0276236615574490
Madison, T.P., Wright, K., & Gaspard, T. (2020). “My superpower is being honest:” Perceived credibility and functions of parasocial relationships with Alex Jones. Southwestern Journal of Mass Communication, 36(1). https://journals.tdl.org/swecjmc/index.php/swecjmc
McCann, R. M., & Honeycutt, J. M. (2006). A cross-cultural analysis of imagined interactions.
Human Communication Research, 32(3), 274-301.
Ott, B., L. (2016). The age of Twitter: Donald J. Trump and the politics of debasement. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 34(1). 59-68.
Perse, E. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1989). Attribution in social and parasocial relationships.
Communication Research, 16, 59–77.
Picazo-Vela, S., Gutiérrez-Martínez, I., & Luna-Reyes, L. F. (2012). Understanding risks,
benefits, and strategic alternatives of social media applications in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 504-511.
Rasmussen, L. (2018). Parasocial interaction in the digital age: An examination of relationship
building and the effectiveness of YouTube celebrities. The Journal of Social Media in Society, 7(1), 280-294.
Rubin, A. M., Perse, E. M., & Powell, R. A. (1985). Loneliness, parasocial interaction, and local television news viewing. Human Communication Research, 12, 155–180.doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1985.tb00071.x
Scacco, J. M., Coe, K., &Hearit, L. (2018). Presidential communication in tumultuous times:
Insights into key shifts, normative implications, and research opportunities. Annals of the International Communication Association, 42(1), 21-37.
Scacco, J. M., & Coe, K. (2017). Talk this way: The ubiquitous presidency and expectations of presidential communication. American Behavioral Scientist, 61(3), 298-314.
Schiappa, E., Gregg, P., & Hewes, D. (2005). The parasocial contact hypothesis. Communication Monographs, 72, 92-115.
Sheldon, P., Grey, S. H., Vickery, A. J. & Honeycutt, J. M. (2015). An analysis of imagined
interactions with pro-ana (Anoxeria): Implications for mental and physical health. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 35, 166-189. doi: 10.1177/0276236615587493
Sheldon, P., Rauschnabel, P., & Honeycutt, J. M. (2019). The darkside of social media:
Psychological, managerial, and societal perspectives. Amsterdam: The Netherlands: Elsevier Academic Press.
Stieglitz, S., & Dang-Xuan, L. (2013). Social media and political communication: A social
media analytics framework. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 3(4), 1277-1291.
Schutz, W. C. (1958). FIRO: A three dimensional theory of interpersonal behavior. New York:
Tukachinsky, R., &Stever, G. (2018). Theorizing Development of Parasocial Engagement.
Communication Theory. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qty032
Zagacki, K. S., Edwards, R., & Honeycutt, J. M. (1992). The role of mental imagery and
emotion in imagined interaction. Communication Quarterly, 40(1), 56-68.
LicenseAuthors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).