Data from telemetric television audience panels are invaluable for commercial and scientific
television reseanch. For the study of most research questions, however, it is necessary to request
additional information from the panel participants. Such interventions can only be permitted if
they do not threaten the validity of the telemetric data. This study investigates whether a
questionnaire intervention disrupts the viewing behavior of a television audience panel. The
results indicate that, on the day they completed a questionnaire, experimental subjects watched
a small amount more television than controls who received no questionnaire. It is argued that
such a small effect on one day should not be accorded practical relevance. In addition, the article
introduces a combined time-series and control-group design with which intervention-effect
hypotheses can be investigated. It is suggested and illustrated that this design has a number of
important advantages over traditional approaches.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allport, G.W.1962. The general and the unique in psychological science . Journal of Personality30:405-22.
2.
Bakan, D.1954. A generalization of Sidman's results on group and individual functions and a criterion. Psychological Bulletin51:63-4.
3.
Bechtel, R.B., C. Achelpohl, and R. Akers.1972. Correlates between observed behavior and questionnaire responses on television viewing. In Television and social behavior, edited by E. A. Rubinstein , 274-344. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office .
4.
Beck, S.J.1953. The science of personality: Nomothetic or idiographic?Psychological Review60:353-59.
5.
Buß, M.R.1985. Die Vielseher: Fernseh-Zuschauerforshung in Deutschland (The heavy television viewer: Television viewer research in Germany. Frankfurt am Main: Metzner.
6.
Campbell, D.T., and J.C. Stanley.1966. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
7.
Cummings, G.1987. Invasion of the people meters. Washington Journalism Review9 (12): 17-21.
8.
Drake, S.D., M.R. Nash, and G.N. Cawood.1991. Imaginative involvement and hypnotic susceptibility: A re-examination of the relationship. Imagination, Cognition and Personality10:141-55.
Estes, W.K.1956. The problem of inference from curves based on group data . Psychological Bulletin53:134-40.
11.
Eysenck, H.J.1954. The science of personality: Nomothetic!Psychological Review61:339-42.
12.
Fazio, R.H.1990. Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: The mode model as an integrative framework. In Advances in experimental social psychology, edited by M. P. Zanna, 75-109. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
13.
Fazio, R.H., J.M. Chen, E.C. McDonel, and S.J. Sherman.1982. Attitude accessibility, attitude-behavior consistency, and the strength of the object-evaluation association. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology18:339-57.
14.
Feldman, J.M., and J.G. Lynch.1988. Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology73:421-35.
15.
Glass, G.V., B. McGaw, and M.L. Smith.1981. Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16.
Glass, G.V., V.L. Willson, and J.M. Gottman.1975. Design and analysis of time-series experiments . Boulder, CO: Associated University Press.
17.
Gottman, J.M.1981. Time series analysis. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press.
18.
Haynes, S.N., and W.F. Horn.1982. Reactivity in behavioral observation: A review. Behavioral Assessment4:369-85.
19.
Hiebert, B., and E.E. Fox.1981. Reactive effects of self-monitoring anxiety. Journal of Counseling Psychology28:187-93.
20.
Holt, R.R.1962. Individuality and generalization in the psychology of personality. Journal of Personality30:377-404.
21.
Hoogstraten, J.1979. Pretesting as determinant of attitude change in evaluation research. Applied Psychological Measurement3:25-30.
22.
—. 1980. The reactive effect of pretesting in attitude change research: General or specific? Applied Psychological Measurement4:39-42.
23.
Hunziker, P.1977. Fernsehen in der Familie: Eine Analyse der Gruppenstrukturen (Television viewing within the family: An analysis of group structures. Femsehen und Bildung11:269-85.
24.
Kanfer, F.H.1975. Self-management methods. In Helping people change: A textbook of methods, edited by F. H. Kanfer, and A. P. Goldstein, 309-55. New York: Pergamon.
25.
Kazdin, A.E.1974. Reactive self-monitoring: The effects of response desirability, goal setting, and feedback. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology5:704-16.
26.
King, A.C., R.R. Scott, and D.M. Prue.1983. The reactive effects of assessing reported rates and alveolar carbon monoxide levels on smoking behavior. Addictive Behaviors8:323-37.
27.
Lee, C.1984. Reactivity of measures of self-efficacy in tasks involving assertiveness. Behavioral Psychotherapy12:46-60.
28.
Lutz, B.1987. Die Zuverlässigkeit elektronisch gemessener Fernsehnutzungsdaten: Untersuchungen zur Reliabilität des GfK-Meters (The reliability of electronically measured television viewing data: Studies on the reliability of the GfK-meter . Jahrbuch der Absatzund Verbrauchsforshung33:226-41.
29.
Mahoney, M.J., B.S. Moore, T.C. Wade, and N.G.M. Moura.1973. Effects of continuous and intermittent self-monitoring on academic behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology41:65-9.
30.
McFall, R.M.1970. Effects of self-monitoring on normal smoking behavior . Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology35:135-42.
31.
Nebel, A., F. Strack, and N. Schwarz.1989. Test als Treatment: Wie die psychologische Messung ihren Gegenstand verändert (Test as treatment: How psychological measurement changes that which is measured. Diagnostika3:191-200.
32.
Nelson, R.O., R.A. Boykin, and S.C. Hayes.1982. Long-term effects of self-monitoring on reactivity and on accuracy. Behavior Research and Therapy20:357-63.
33.
Perlmutter, L.C., C.D. Noblin, and M. Hakami.1983. Reactive effects of tests for depression: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology2:128-39.
34.
Rossiter, J., and T. Robertson.1975. Children's television viewing: An examination of parent-child consensus. Sociometry38:308-26.
35.
Rubin, A.1983. Television uses and gratification: The interactions of viewing pattern motivations. Journal of Broadcasting27 (1):37-51.
36.
Sang, F., B. Schmitz, H.J. Bretz, P. Stanat, and K. Tasche.1994. Time-series analyses of longitudinal people-meter data. European Journal of Communication9:91-106.
37.
Sang, F., B. Schmitz, and K. Tasche.1992. Individuation and television coviewing in the family: Developmental trends in the viewing behavior of adolescents . Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media36:427-41.
38.
—. 1993. Developmental trends in television coviewing of parent-child dyads. Journal of Youth and Adolescence22:531-42.
39.
Schmitz, B.1989. Einführung in die Zeitreihenanalyse: Modelle, Softwarebeschreibungen, Anwendungen (Introduction to time series analysis: Model, software descriptions, applications. Toronto: Huber.
40.
—. 1990. Univariate and multivariate time-series models: The analysis of intraindividual variability and intraindividual relationships . In Statistical methods in longitudinal research: Vol. 2. Time series and categorical longitudinal data, edited by A. von Eye, 351-86. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
41.
Sidman, M.1952. A note on functional relations obtained from group data . Psychological Bulletin49:263-9.
42.
Sieck, W.A., and R.M. McFall.1976. Some determinants of self-monitoring effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology44:958-65.
43.
Soong, R.1988. The statistical reliability of people meter ratings . Journal of Advertising Research28:50-6.
44.
Steinmann, M.1986. Elektronische Zuschauerforschung in der Schweiz: Das SRG Telecontrol-System nach einem Jahr Praxis (One year of electronic television viewer research in Switzerland: Experiences with the SRG Telecontrol system . Rundfunk und Femsehen34:368-86.
45.
Stem, E.1986. Reaktivitätseffekte in Untersuchungen zur Selbstprotokollierung im Feld (Reactivity effects in field behavioral studies using self-monitoring techniques. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
46.
Strack, F., and L.L. Martin.1987. Thinking, judging, and communicating: A process account of context effects in attitude surveys. In Social information processing and survey methodology, edited by H.-J. Hippler, N. Schwarz , and S. Sudman, 123-48. New York: Springer.
47.
Tabachnik, B.G., and L.S. Fidell.1989. Using multivariate statistics. 2d ed. New York: Harper & Row.
48.
Watson, D.1988. Intraindividual and interindividual analyses of positive and negative affect: Their relation to health complaints, perceived stress, and daily activities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology54:1020-30.
49.
Watson, D., and A. Tellegen.1985. Toward a consensual structure of mood . Psychological Bulletin98:219-35.
50.
Webster, J.G., and L.W. Lichty.1991. Ratings analysis: Theory and practice . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .
51.
Webster, J.G., and J.J. Wakshlag.1985. Measuring exposure to television. In Selective exposure to communication, edited by D. Zillmann and J. Bryant , 35-62. Hillsdale, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum .
