Motivation and Emotion

, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 508–517 | Cite as

Motivated message processing: How motivational activation influences resource allocation, encoding, and storage of TV messages

  • Annie Lang
  • Ashley Sanders-Jackson
  • Zheng Wang
  • Bridget Rubenking
Original Paper


This paper investigates differences in overtime processing of television messages with three types of emotional trajectories—those which begin neutral and become negative, begin neutral and become positive and begin neutral and become equally positive and negative. The limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing is used to predict how the type of emotional content influences real-time activation of the appetitive and aversive motivational systems which then alter concurrent and subsequent message processing. Results show that during the first time period, when motivational activation is low, more resources are allocated to coactive and positive compared to negative messages supporting the positivity offset hypothesis. In the middle time period, when activation is moderate, more resources are allocated to negative than to positive messages, supporting the negativity bias hypothesis. Further, the different patterns of motivational activation do result in different patterns of messages processing. During positive messages, encoding increases and storage decreases over time. During negative messages, encoding decreases and storage increases overtime. During coactive messages initial encoding and storage are high though both decrease slightly over time.


Memory Attention Motivation Emotion Media 


  1. Basil, M. (1994). Secondary reaction-time measures. In A. Lang (Ed.), Measuring psychological responses to media messages (pp. 85–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Biocca, F., David, P., & West, M. (1994). Continuous response measurement (CRM): A computerized tool for research on the cognitive processing of communication messages. In A. Lang (Ed.), Measuring psychological response to media (pp. 15–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  3. Bolls, P. D., Lang, A., & Potter, R. F. (2001). The effects of message valence and listener arousal on attention, memory, and facial muscular responses to radio advertisements. Communication Research, 28, 627. doi:10.1177/009365001028005003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bradley, S. D. (2007). Examining the eyeblink startle reflex as a measure of emotion and motivation to television messages. Communication Methods & Measures, 1, 7–30. doi:10.1080/19312450709336658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradley, M. M., Codispoti, M., Cuthbert, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (2001). Emotion and motivation I: Defensive and appetitive reactions in picture processing. Emotion, 1, 276–298. doi:10.1037//1528-3542.1.3.276.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cacioppo, J. T., & Gardner, W. L. (1999). Emotion. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 191–214. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.191.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jarvis, B. G. (2006). MediaLab research software (Version 2006). New York, NY: Empirisoft.Google Scholar
  8. Lang, A. (1990). Involuntary attention and physiological arousal evoked by structural features and emotional content in TV commercials. Communication Research, 17(3), 275–299. doi:10.1177/009365090017003001.Google Scholar
  9. Lang, A. (2000). The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. Journal of Communication, 50, 46–70. doi:10.1093/joc/50.1.46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lang, A. (2006a). Motivated cognition (LC4MP): The influence of appetitive and aversive activation on the processing of video games. In P. Messarsis & L. Humphries (Eds.), Digital media: Transformation in human communication. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
  11. Lang, A. (2006b). Using the limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing to design effective cancer communication messages. Journal of Communication, 56, S57–S80. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00283.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lang, A. (2009). The limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing. In R. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), The sage handbook of mass media effects (pp. 193–204). Beverly Hills: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  13. Lang, A., & Basil, M. (1998). What do secondary task reaction times measure anyway? In M. Roloff (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 21, pp. 443–470). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1997). Motivated attention: Affect, activation, and action. Attention and orienting: Sensory and motivational processes (pp. 97–135).Google Scholar
  15. Lang, A., Bradley, S. D., Park, B., Shin, M., & Chung, Y. (2006). Parsing the resource pie: Using STRTs to measure attention to mediated messages. Media Psychology, 8, 369–394. doi:10.1207/s1532785xmep0804_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lang, A., Bradley, S. D., Sparks, J. V., Jr, & Lee, S. (2007a). The motivation activation measure (MAM): How well does it predict individual differences in physiological indicators of appetitive and aversive activation? Communication Methods & Measures, 1, 113–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lang, A., Bradley, S. D., Sparks, J. V., & Lee, S. (2007b). Measuring individual differences in motivation activation: Predicting physiological and behavioral indicators of appetitive and aversive activation. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 113–136. doi:10.1080/19312450701399370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lang, P. J., Greenwald, M. K., Bradley, M. M., & Hamm, A. O. (1993). Looking at pictures: Affective, facial, visceral, and behavioral reactions. Psychophysiology, 30, 261–273. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1993.tb03352.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lang, A., Park, B. H., Sanders, A., Wilson, B., & Wang, Z. (2007c). Cognition and emotion in TV message processing: How valence, arousing content, structural complexity, and information density affect the availability of cognitive resources. Media Psychology, 10, 317–338. doi:10.1080/15213260701532880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lang, A., Shin, M., & Lee, S. (2005). Sensation seeking, motivation, and substance use: A dual system approach. Media Psychology, 7, 1–29. doi:10.1207/S1532785XMEP0701_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lang, A., & Yegiyan, N. S. (2009). Motivated message processing: How media elicit motivation which influences how media are processed. In J. McCroskey, K. Floyd, & M. Beatty (Eds.), Biological dimensions of communication (pp. 135–159). Cresskill: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lang, A., Yegiyan, N. S., & Bradley, S. D. (2006b). Effects of motivational activation on processing of health messages. Psychophysiology, 43(S1), 56.Google Scholar
  23. Lang, A., Yegiyan, N., & Bradley, S. D. (2012). Motivated mediated message processing and individual differences in motivational activation. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  24. Larsen, J. T., McGraw, A. P., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2001). Can people feel happy and sad at the same time? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 684–696. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.81.4.684.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ohman, A. (1979). The orientations response, attention, and learning: An information processing perspective. In H. D. Kimmel, E. H. V. Olst, & J. F. Orlebeke (Eds.), The orienting reflex in humans (pp. 443–472). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. Ohman, A. (1997). As fast as the blink of an eye: Evolutionary preparedness for preattentive processing of threat. In P. J. Lang, R. F. Simons, & M. Balaban (Eds.), Attention and orienting: Sensory and motivational processes (pp. 165–184). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  27. Reeves, B., & Geiger, S. (1994). Designing experiments that assess psychological responses to media messages. In A. Lang (Ed.), Measuring psychological responses to media messages (pp. 165–180). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. Shin, M. (2006). Emotional message processing: A dual system approach. Unpublished Dissertation. Indiana University Bloomington.Google Scholar
  29. Sparks, J. V., & Lang, A. (2010). An initial examination of the post-auricular reflex as a physiological indicator of appetitive activation during television viewing. Communication Methods & Measures, 4(4), 311–330. doi:10.1080/19312458.2010.527872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang, Z., & Lang, A. (2012). Reconceptualizing excitation transfer as motivational activation changes and a test of the television program context effects. Media Psychology, 15, 68–92. doi:10(1080/15213269),2011,649604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wang, Z., Lang, A., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2011). Motivational processing and choice behavior during television viewing: An integrative dynamic approach. Journal of Communication, 61, 72–94. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01527.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wang, Z., Morey, A. C., & Srivastava, J. (2012). Motivated selective attention during political ad processing: The dynamic interplay between emotional ad content and candidate evaluation. Communication Research. doi: 10.1177/0093650212441793 [online first].
  33. Wang, Z., Tchernev, J., Solloway, T., & Barker, B. (in press). Dynamic motivational processing of anti-drug messages: Coactivation begets attention. Human Communication Research.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annie Lang
    • 1
  • Ashley Sanders-Jackson
    • 2
  • Zheng Wang
    • 3
  • Bridget Rubenking
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute for Communication Research, Department of Telecommunications, College of Arts and SciencesIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  2. 2.Center for Tobacco Control Research and EducationUniversity of CaliforniaSan FranciscoUSA
  3. 3.School of CommunicationThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  4. 4.Nicholson School of CommunicationUniversity of Central FloridaOrlandoUSA

Personalised recommendations