Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding television: An exploratory inquiry into the reconstruction of narrative content

  • Articles
  • Published:
ECTJ Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article examines the claim that television is a “passive” medium, one that does not actively involve the viewer cognitively in ways usually associated with mature information processing. Evidence is reported that suggests active and differential processing of television information by viewers and an increase in the level of sophistication in understanding the medium.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bandura, A. Self-efficacy mechanisms in human agency.American Psychologist, 1982,37, 122–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, F. C.Remembering. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlyne, D. B.Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D.Human cognition: Learning, understanding and remembering. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, H. H., & Clark, E. V.Psychology and language: An introduction to psycholinguistics. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, C. E., & Ebbesen, E. B. Observational goals and schema activation: A theoretical framework for behavior perception.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1979,15, 305–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A., Wellman, H., Keniston, A. H., & Westby, S. E. Age-related aspects of comprehension and inference from a televised dramatic narrative.Child Development, 1978,49, 389–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craik, F., & Lockhart, R. Levels of processing: A framework for memory research.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972,11, 671–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. A., & Bever, T. G. The psychological reality of linguistic segments.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1965,4, 414–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freedle, R. O.New directions in discourse processing. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, P. Public policy toward television: Mass media and education in American society.School Review, 1977, 481–512.

  • Kintsch, W. Memory for prose. In C. M. Cofer (Ed.),The structure of human memory. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandler, J M.Four arguments for the elimination of television. New York: Morrow, 1978

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandler, J. M., & Johnson, N. S. Remembrance of things passed: Story structure and recall.Cognitive Psychology, 1977,9, 111–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandler, J. M., Scribner, S., Cole, M., & DeForest, M. Cross-cultural invariance in story recall.Child Development, 1980,51, 19–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus, H. Self-schemata and processing information about self.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977,35, 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newcomb, H.Television: The most popular art. Garden City, N.J.: Anchor Books, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newtson, D., Engquist, G., & Bois, J. The objective basis of behavior units.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977,35, 847–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L.Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powers, W. T.Behavior: The control of perception. Chicago: Aldine, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G.Television is “easy” and print is “tough”: The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perception and attributions. Unpublished paper, 1981. (a)

  • Salomon, G.Television literacy and television vs. literacy. Paper presented at Conference on Literacy in the 80’s, Ann Arbor, 1981. (b)

  • Singer, J. L. The power and limitations of television: A cognitive affective analysis. In P. Tannenbaum (Ed.)The entertainment functions of television. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tannen, D. What’s in a frame? Surface evidence for underlying expectations. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.).New directions in discourse processing. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex, 1979, 137–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winn, M.The plug-in drug. New York: Bantum, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J. C. & Huston, A.C. The forms of television: Nature and development of television literacy in children. In H. Gardner & H. Kelly (Eds.),Children and the worlds of television. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departmentof Telecommunications, Radio-TV Center, IndianaUniversity, IN 47405, Bloomington

    Kathy A. Krendl (Assistant Professor)

  2. Department of Communication, University of Michigan, MI 48109, Ann Arbor

    Bruce Watkins (Assistant Professor)

Authors
  1. Kathy A. Krendl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bruce Watkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Appreciation is expressed to Janet Meyer and Bonnie Taub for their assistance with coding and to the staff and students of the Dexter Public Schools for their cooperation.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Krendl, K.A., Watkins, B. Understanding television: An exploratory inquiry into the reconstruction of narrative content. ECTJ 31, 201–212 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766633

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766633

Keywords

Search

Navigation