16

Tracing the Course of Reality TV Effects Research

Robin L. Nabi, Jiyeon So, and Theresa de los Santos

Development of the Genre

Although its history reaches back to the early days of television, reality-based programming, or “reality TV”, did not gain substantial popularity until the dawn of the twenty-first century. Over 100 new reality programs have aired since the summer of 2000, and the genre continues to dominate as the newest staple of the TV diet in the United States and beyond (Reality TV World, 2010). Its increasing popularity among viewers is matched by the increasing attention researchers have paid to understanding not only what constitutes reality TV but why it is so popular and what effects its viewing has on its audiences. In this chapter, we explore each of these issues, focusing on the documented as well as potential effects of reality TV viewing, with particular attention to the valuable outcomes that might emerge from consuming this form of programming.

Defining Reality TV

There is no clear industry standard or definition of reality TV. As a result, conceptualizations often err on the side of inclusiveness, capturing all programming claiming to present reality, including news programming, talk shows, and sporting events (e.g., Cavender & Fishman, 1998; Potter et al., 1997). Focusing solely on the programs that have emerged as part of the burgeoning reality TV phenomenon, like Survivor, The Bachelor, American Idol, and the like, Nabi, Biely, Morgan, and Stitt (2003, p. 304) defined reality TV programming as “programs that film real people as they live out events in their lives, contrived or otherwise, as they occur.” They further specify that reality programs are characterized by: “(a) people portraying themselves. . . (b) filmed at least in part in their living or working environment rather than on a set, (c) without a script, (d) with events placed in a narrative context, (e) for the primary purpose of viewer entertainment” (Nabi et al., 2003, p. 304). As their research indicated that most people find reality programming to be only somewhat real, the element of “unscripted”, rather than “reality”, is likely the more defining feature of the genre.

Despite the unifying elements that bridge the range of reality programs, there are substantial differences among such programs, suggesting several reality TV subgenres are likely to exist. Nabi, Stitt, Halford, and Finnerty (2006) identified five subtypes: romance (e.g., The Bachelor), drama (e.g., Real World), game show/competition (e.g., Survivor), talent (e.g., American Idol), crime (e.g., COPS), and informational (e.g., Trading Spaces), and this list is likely to expand and shift as new programs and formats emerge. For example, with the advent of personal makeover programs, like What Not to Wear and Dr. 90210, we imagine there may be a “personal transformation” subgenre. Similarly, programs such as Extreme Makeover-Home Edition, in which families facing extreme challenges are rewarded with a new home, The Biggest Loser, in which morbidly obese contestants compete to lose the most weight, or Who do You Think You Are? in which celebrities explore their ancestry, might be termed “inspirational” reality programming. Regardless of the number of subgenres of reality TV that may exist, we must point out that because any one program may contain qualities reflective of multiple subgenres, the boundaries among these categories are likely somewhat fluid. Thus, it is the qualities of the programs, not the categories per se, that are more interesting as the focus of research.

However, as we examine the course of reality TV research, it is evident that research has focused more on the genre in its entirety or, alternatively, on particular programs, rather than on the message characteristics that may cut across programming types. In the discussion below, we trace the evolution of reality TV research, beginning first with the fundamental issue of what attracts viewers to this type of programming before considering the possible effects such consumption may have on these audiences.

Why People Watch Reality TV

In light of the seemingly sudden onslaught of reality TV programming at the turn of this century, the questions at the forefront of researchers' minds were what sorts of people were attracted to reality TV and why did they watch. In the first investigation of these issues, Nabi et al. (2003) found that, demographically, viewers tended to be younger and have less formal education than non-viewers. Regarding traits of reality TV viewers, Reiss and Wiltz (2004a), in their examination of 16 basic human motives, concluded that the motivation for social status, or to feel self-important, most strongly related to reality TV consumption (perhaps as viewers can fantasize about achieving celebrity status), followed by the desire for vengeance (perhaps due to its association with enjoying competition). Further, Nabi et al. (2003) found that viewers high on impulsivity were more likely to view certain reality programs, like COPS and Survivor (probably due to their affinity for unscripted and thus less predictable action and outcomes) whereas viewers high on need for cognition were more attracted to other forms of reality programming, like A Wedding Story.

As to why viewers in general are drawn to reality TV, Nabi et al. (2003) found viewers were particularly drawn in by the suspenseful/unscripted nature of reality programs as well as the fascination of viewing others' interpersonal dynamics. However, the contrived elements and potentially manipulative editing were found to detract from its appeal. Of note, Nabi, Stitt, et al. (2006) found that people may enjoy reality programming for some of the same reasons they enjoy dramatic fictional programming. For example, they may experience positive emotions or be transported into the narrative (see also Hall, 2006). However, viewers seem to enjoy different subtypes of reality TV for different reasons. For instance, Nabi, Stitt, et al. found people enjoyed reality crime programs for what they learned, but reality-romance programs for the interpersonal insights gained. Given different underlying reasons for enjoyment, it is reasonable to imagine different program types might engender different types of effects, though there is, in fact, very little research on the actual influence of reality TV as discussed below.

Perhaps one of the most intriguing questions surrounding motivations for viewing reality TV involves the notion of voyeurism. That is, initial assumptions about reality TV included the idea that viewers received voyeuristic (i.e., illicit) gratification from its consumption. Nabi et al. (2003), however, found little evidence that viewers received salacious pleasure in viewing or that they enjoyed watching others' pain, but rather were more curious about others' lives. Subsequently, Nabi, Stitt et al. (2006) found that curiosity about others as a gratification did differentiate reality-based versus fictional television enjoyment, though it did not predict enjoyment of all subgenres of reality TV.

Most recently, Baruh (2010) explored the notion of voyeuristic appeal in greater depth, arguing that audience members are drawn to reality TV as they are waiting for moments when the program participants drop their guard and reveal their true selves. In a direct comparison of curiosity about others (i.e., social comparison and sensitivity to the expression of others) versus the psychological orientation of voyeurism (i.e., pleasure from accessing what is usually not accessible), Baruh found that both curiosity and voyeurism associated with reality TV consumption, and when both were considered in tandem, voyeurism had marginally stronger predictive value. However, recent evidence suggests that reality TV does not have significantly more voyeuristic content than other types of programming, like crime dramas and situation comedies (Bagdasarov, Greene, Banerjee, Krcmar, Yanovitsky, & Ruginyte, 2010). Further, Papacharissi and Mendelson (2007) found that reality TV viewers valued entertainment and habitual, “pass the time” motives over that of voyeurism. Further, only people with low levels of physical mobility and interpersonal interaction were more likely to watch reality TV to fulfill voyeuristic (as well as companionship) needs, presumably due to the limits of their own social opportunities. Thus, although voyeurism is present as a possible gratification obtained from watching reality TV, it does not appear to be the most important viewing motive nor is it unique to that genre.

Another viewing motivation arguably unique to reality TV involves the notion of fascination with fame. As Reiss and Wiltz (2004b) argue, reality TV shows may be so popular with such a wide range of viewers because US television audiences strongly identify with the desire to be famous. Indeed, their data suggested that of the 16 values assessed with the Reiss Profile, the desire for status and fame was the personal value that best distinguished devoted, regular viewers of competition-based reality programs from other viewers. The authors argue that the attention bestowed upon winners of competition-based programs taps into the need of devoted viewers to enhance their sense of self-importance. In other words, they explain that reality TV shows allow viewers to fantasize about gaining status and fame: watching people like themselves becoming a “celebrity” gives them a sense of satisfaction that they too could become celebrities some day.

In sum, viewers of reality TV watch for many of the same reasons people watch other forms of television programming. However, the unique elements of reality TV-real people engaged in largely unscripted activities – give rise to at least two motivations for viewing – voyeurism/curiosity about others and desire for fame – that may explain viewership beyond what more traditional typologies of viewing motivations may achieve. Further, though reality TV does evidence wide appeal, those with certain personality traits (desire for social status, interest in vengeance, impulsivity) may be especially drawn to the genre and/or receive more gratifications from their viewing.

Although viewing motivation is a key question addressed by scholars of reality TV (as is the case for other media forms, Chapter 6), a second critical area of research addresses the impact that viewing such programming has on audiences' thoughts and behaviors. It is to this set of research that we now turn.

The Effects of Reality TV Consumption

As we reflect on the relatively brief history of reality TV research, it is evident that despite some interesting forays into industry-based effects, like how the reality TV format has contributed to the organizational restructuring of the television industry (e.g., Collins, 2008; Yngvar, 2009), the vast majority of effects-based research focuses on the impact that viewing such programming might have on audiences' cognitive, emotional, and behavioral outcomes. In this vein, there are essentially two broad approaches to its study that mirror other orientations to the study of media influence: cultural studies and more empirical initiatives.

Cultural Perspectives on Reality TV

One major line of reality TV inquiry considers the construction of these programs from a cultural perspective, focusing on the ideological viewpoints conveyed about, for example, law and order, societal threats, and audience empowerment (Cavender, 1998; Fishman, 1999). For instance, Cavender and Bond-Maupin (1993) argued that law enforcement programs make use of storytelling conventions to encourage empathy with an unsuspecting victim who falls prey to evil, which, in turn, primes the notion that no place is safe. Cavender and Bond-Maupin further suggested that reality-based crime shows, like America's Most Wanted and Unsolved Mysteries, depict crime in ways similar to fictionalized crime shows, reinforcing existing cultural stereotypes about criminals and victims.

As the menu of reality TV offerings has expanded, so too has the research from this qualitative perspective, broadening to consider how such programs might impact audience views on class formation and management (McMurria, 2008; Shugart, 2006; Skeggs, 2009), consumerism (Dixon, 2008), confessional culture (Aslama & Pantti, 2006) and gender roles (Banet-Weiser & Portwood-Stacer, 2006). For example, Dixon (2008) argues that “extreme makeover” shows help to create and, in turn, are sustained by the impression that one can easily transform critical components of one's life – one's body, one's home, one's identity – if only one has enough resources.

Although these studies do a nice job of bringing to light the more subtle messages that may be conveyed by reality programming, their goals are not to illuminate the effects such programs have on audience cognitions and behaviors. Although they note the messages the content may convey, it is the empirical work that documents the actual influence reality TV has on the viewing audience.

Empirical Approaches to Reality TV Effects

The bulk of the empirical work assessing the relationship between program consumption and beliefs about the social world and the self draws largely from cultivation theory (e.g., Gerbner, 1969; Chapter 2, this volume). As such, this research examines how what is portrayed as reality in reality TV programs might differ from the real environment, and how such misrepresentations might, in turn, lead to audiences' misperceptions about the world at large. Crime-related programs, like COPS, served as the initial focus for this line of inquiry (see Fishman & Cavender, 1998), and in essence, extant research suggests that such programs overrepresented violent crime, crimes solved, non-Whites as offenders, and Whites as law enforcement officers. Research has also found that such misrepresentations can influence the way audiences think about crime in society. For example, Oliver and Armstrong (1998) found that Caucasians who were frequent viewers of reality crime programs were more likely to exaggerate crime prevalence estimates than those who watched less of this type of programming, suggesting they might be more likely to see the world as a dangerous and scary place. Relatedly, Eschholz, Blackwell, Gertz, and Chiricos (2002) found that viewing programs, like COPS, strengthened confidence in law enforcement agencies, especially for White viewers.

As the scope of reality TV programming expanded, so too did the queries regarding how such programs influenced personal and societal expectations. For example, as “dating” programs, such as The Bachelor, Temptation Island, and Joe Millionaire emerged, questions about their influence on viewers' perceptions of dating partners and appropriate behavior in the context of dating relationships also emerged. For instance, Ferris, Smith, Greenberg, and Smith (2007) found that exposure to reality dating programs and perceived realism of such programs was associated with viewers' adoption of the dominant themes portrayed in them, including “dating is a game” and “women are sex-objects.” Further, more frequent viewing of reality dating programs was associated with self-reports of behaviors typically found in such programming, including drinking alcohol and using hot tubs early in a dating relationship. Relatedly, Clark, Nabi, and Moyer-Gusé (2007) found that viewing “reality” dating programs, like their fictional counterparts, significantly associated with earlier expectations of sexual behavior – for oneself and one's peers – as well as earlier self-reported sexual behavior.

Most recently, the onslaught of personal makeover programs, especially those that involve cosmetic surgery, like I Want a Famous Face and Extreme Makeover, have raised the question of whether viewers are more likely to perceive plastic surgery as more common as well as a more desirable option for the self. Indeed, evidence suggests that more frequent exposure to such programming is associated with stronger desire to undergo cosmetic enhancement (Nabi, 2009).

In essence, despite their vast differences in the content of interest, the lines of research traced in this chapter share a common theme. That is, they all examine how consumption of subgenres, or even particular programs, under the label “reality TV” associates with societal perceptions and expectations. This is wholly consistent with the vast quantity of research from the cultivation perspective that exists in the extant media effects literature (see Morgan, 2009). However, the cultivation-based research within the domain of reality TV arguably distinguishes itself in that the content under study has at least some prima facie claim to representing reality. That is, it is tacitly assumed that such programs may have greater influence given their inclusion of real people experiencing real outcomes, even if circumstances are contrived to some degree.

To the extent that reality TV programs are both perceived as more realistic than other programming formats and also misrepresent reality, this is an important line of inquiry. Indeed, this was the case in Ferris et al.'s (2007) research in which those who perceived dating programs to be more realistic were also more influenced by their viewing. However, as Nabi et al. (2003) noted, reality programs, though perceived as more real than fiction, are not necessarily seen as particularly real. Specifically, in a multidimensional space configuration derived from a reality program-sorting task, one of the two key dimensions to emerge was “fiction-reality”. Reality shows fell closer to the “reality” end of the fiction-reality continuum than situation comedies, dramas, and soap operas, but still fell at only about the midpoint along that continuum. Further, given there are multiple ways to conceptualize realism (e.g., event similarity, factuality, probability, typicality; Shapiro & Chock, 2003), it is possible that fictional programming may, in some instances be seen as comparably real or even more real – not in terms of event factuality but in terms of event probability, or the likelihood of the depicted events occurring in real life. Indeed, Clark et al. (2007) found that “reality-based” depictions of dating relationships were not seen as any more or less real than the fictional depictions. Thus, although in some instances reality TV may be perceived as more real than fictional programming and thus may be more likely to cultivate perceptions about the world as a result, we must not assume that this is always, or even usually, the case (see Potter, 1986).

Although the contrived nature of reality TV program construction, coupled with the often realistic tone of fictional programming, renders the variable “perceived realism” less compelling in the context of reality TV than one might imagine at first, the construct of identification may be more promising given that no matter how contrived the programming, there is no escaping the fact that real people are experiencing the outcomes portrayed. As such, viewers' identification with those program participants may be of particular interest, and it is to this key issue that we now turn.

Identification and Involvement with Reality TV Personalities

Generally speaking, identification with media characters has proven to be an important variable in the study of the effects of entertainment media on audience perceptions and behaviors (Chapters 11, 13, this volume). In essence, identification refers to an imaginative process through which an audience member adopts the identity and perspective of a media character (Cohen, 2001). Specifically, Cohen argues that identification is a multidimensional construct with four major components: empathic (sharing the feelings of the character), cognitive (sharing the perspective of the character), motivational (sharing goals of the character), and absorption (the loss of self-awareness). He further asserts that identification may be triggered by a range of antecedents, including narrative message structure; similarity of the audience member to the character based on demographics, attitudes, personality traits, or life circumstances; perceived realism of the character; familiarity with the character; and certain personality traits, like self-esteem.

Identification may be particularly relevant in the context of reality TV as these programs cast real people – often ordinary folks with challenges in their jobs, families, relationships, careers, and health perhaps similar to the viewing audience. Given these reality TV personalities are in fact real people experiencing real events, audiences may become more involved in the program and relate to those individuals more readily than to media characters portrayed by actors and actresses, who are not actually experiencing the events portrayed (Hall, 2009). Further, the content of reality TV programs may be especially relatable to viewing audiences. Indeed, Hiltbrand (2004) argues that teenagers, who occupy a large proportion of the reality TV viewership, are strongly attracted to reality TV shows as they frequently address issues with which they can readily identify – relationships and rejection.

Despite its obvious relevance, only a few studies to date have examined the concept of identification in the context of reality TV. For example, identification has been cited as one of the reasons why adults choose to watch reality programming (Nabi et al., 2003). Identification has also been examined as a moderator of the effects of viewing reality TV on audiences' perceptions and behaviors. From a social cognitive theory perspective (Bandura, 1986), those who identify more with reality TV cast members would be expected to adopt their behaviors if the positive outcomes experienced by the program participants outweigh the negative ones. Nabi (2009) tested this prediction in the context of cosmetic surgery makeover programs and found that greater identification with the program participants did indeed predict greater expressed likelihood of undergoing invasive cosmetic enhancements when the program participants were perceived as having experienced positive outcomes. Further, those with lower body satisfaction who also identified with program participants expressed greater desire for invasive cosmetic procedures.

Thus, there is emerging evidence that identification with reality TV program participants may influence effects ranging from simple exposure to the programming to the emotional, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes that result from viewing. As noted with perceived realism, we do not suggest that these outcomes follow a different process as identification with fictional characters, but rather that this process is more likely to be engaged as a result of the types of people cast in reality TV programs and the situations in which they are placed. However, this still remains an open question awaiting empirical support.

We would perhaps be remiss were we not to mention in this discussion an audience activity related to identification – that of parasocial relationships (PSR). Parasocial relationships refer to the seeming face-to-face relationships that develop between an audience and mediated personalities. Audience members in a parasocial relationship respond to the media character as if he/she were a friend or a personal acquaintance (Giles, 2002; Horton & Wohl, 1956). PSR differs from identification in that the latter lacks the interactional element. With PSR, a perceived relationship with the character develops in which the viewer maintains her or her own identity. With identification, the viewer sees him or herself as that character and sees the story events through that character's eyes (Cohen, 2001).

As with identification, research has revealed that reality TV viewers report para-social relationships as a motivation for consuming the genre (Nabi et al., 2003). However, in their survey results, Nabi et al. found that viewers experienced greater parasocial gratification from watching fictional than reality-based programming (Nabi et al., 2006). Still evidence suggests that PSR may be a factor underlying the enjoyment of some forms of reality TV like competitive game shows (e.g., Survivor; Nabi et al., 2006).

In terms of effects, there is actually minimal investigation of PSR in the context of reality TV. An exception is Schiappa, Gregg, and Hewes' (2005) study of the effects of parasocial interaction (PSI) with gay cast members in Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, a reality-based makeover show with five gay professionals assisting a heterosexual male, on prejudice against homosexuals. Consistent with their parasocial contact hypothesis, increased parasocial contact with gay cast members led to a decrease in prejudicial attitudes against homosexuality. Moreover, the level of prejudice was negatively related to the degree of parasocial interaction with these characters. Thus, it is evident that PSI may play a role in influencing the beliefs of reality TV audiences. As we have seen with television's ability to influence gender roles especially when identification processes are triggered (Chapter 11), the process of relating to characters is an important concept for reality TV viewers, as well.

In light of the dearth of evidence in this area, there are several ways in which research might progress to elaborate how reality programming might stimulate PSR and related cognitive, emotional, or behavioral effects. For example, consistent with meta-analysis results regarding PSR (Schiappa, Allen, & Gregg, 2007), it is likely that the more a reality program includes cast members who generally seem like somebody the viewers can be friends with (or similar to their actual friends; e.g., Survivor vs. 16 and Pregnant) the more likely PSRs are to develop. As well, certain presentational techniques of reality TV may encourage PSR. Specifically, a hallmark of the reality TV genre is the inclusion of cast members' video diaries in which they disclose their thoughts and feelings about the events portrayed, and as Auter (1992) demonstrated empirically, a character's disclosure via talking to the camera/audience increases PSR. Further, to the extent reality TV shows are perceived as real, PSR may also increase (Schiappa et al., 2007). Thus, under certain circumstances, parasocial relationships may be enhanced by the reality TV format and consequently may be of particular importance when studying its effects.

It is clear that there is much room for future research on both identification and parasocial relationships in the context of reality TV. Most notably, understanding how aspects of reality TV programs, like self-disclosure, influence each of these two psychological states and to what effect would not simply enrich our understanding of this newer genre but also of the often conflated relationship between these two variables.

In summary, whereas perceived realism does not appear to be directly linked to the reality TV format, both identification and parasocial relationships may be enhanced by the type of people cast as well as the construction of reality TV programs in which familiar personality types in relatable situations disclose their thoughts and feelings directly to viewers. Of course, the research in this area is only in its infancy and future investigations would benefit from exploring these constructs further in terms of how frequently they occur, under what circumstances, and what their role in facilitating impact on audience attitudes and behaviors may be.

Exploring the Benefits of Reality TV Viewing

From its inception, the prevailing assumption has been that reality TV is a blight on the TV programming schedule, appealing to viewers' most base, voyeuristic compulsions and giving them the opportunity to delight in others' misfortune (Poniewozik, 2000). Not only have the motivations for viewing been cast in a rather unflattering light (as discussed above), but the effects of viewing in terms of distorting perceptions of reality in areas such as law enforcement and relationships have also been framed as overwhelmingly negative.

However, there are several ways in which reality programs might benefit viewing audiences. First, reality programs may serve as a source of useful information. Indeed, Nabi et al. (2003) and Nabi, Stitt, et al. (2006) found viewers often felt like they learned something about themselves and relevant life situations by watching reality TV. More specifically, Palmer (2004) found young adults learned about dating; relating to their families; and dealing with sensitive health issues, such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, and mental illness, by watching the way reality TV show participants dealt with these issues.

Second, reality programs may serve as a useful resource for coping with life experiences. For example, Nabi, Finnerty, Domschke, and Hull (2006) found that watching a composite episode of the MTV reality program The Real World, which chronicles the lives of seven young adults chosen to live and work together for several months, helped young adults cope with their lingering regret over past infidelities. Although research may not yet exist on the matter, it is also likely that other programs serve a similar function. For example, TLC's A Baby Story, which follows women through the final weeks of their pregnancies and into the initial weeks post-birth, may help expecting mothers and fathers as they cope with the stresses of pregnancy and impending parenthood. Similarly, ABC's Supernanny, in which an experienced nanny counsels parents of habitually unruly children, cannot only help viewers learn valuable parenting skills but also serve as a valuable source of reassurance and stress-reduction. To the extent that viewers learn from these and other such programs and apply positive lessons to their own life circumstances, their overall stress and uncertainty may be reduced.

Further, reality programming may promote positive virtues in viewing audiences. For example, Kiesewetter (2004) argues The Ship, a reality program in which 40 volunteers retraced Captain James Cook's 1770 voyage from Australia to Indonesia, depicts, and thus may inspire, cooperation, helpfulness, and selflessness (as opposed to competition, like many reality TV shows). More recently, programs like Extreme Makeover–Home Edition and Undercover Boss embody the ideals that goodness will be rewarded and that cooperation and teamwork are critical to success.

Reality TV and Viewers' Health

In keeping with the growing trend of interest in the role of the media in the health of viewing audiences, we would be remiss were we to omit consideration of the effects of reality TV viewing on physical health and well-being. As with research on media effects more broadly, this literature generally associates reality TV consumption with potentially unhealthy behaviors. For example, Blair, Yue, Singh, and Burnhardt (2005) analyzed depictions of alcohol, tobacco, and drug use in episodes of MTV's The Osbournes and found that 75% of the alcohol and tobacco messages implied endorsements for using these substances. Zurbriggen and Morgan (2006) found that for both men and women, viewing reality dating programs, like Elimidate, Blind Date, Dismissed, and Joe Millionaire, associated with adversarial sexual beliefs (e.g., men are only out for one thing, a lot of women seem to get pleasure in putting men down). Further, Manganello and McKenzie (2009) examined the presence or absence of child safety products as well as discussion of injury topics in reality TV programs including Extreme Makeover–Home Edition, Supernanny, Room by Room, Trading Spaces, and Bringing Baby Home, that focus on home renovation or family life and parenting. Although such programs may have the potential to help educate adults regarding safe practices, like checking the water temperature when bathing a child or having smoke alarms in the home, such safety behaviors were rarely shown or discussed in these programs.

More recently, several studies have considered how the spate of reality programs featuring cosmetic surgery, such as Extreme Makeover–I Want a Famous Face, and The Swan, influence viewer attitudes toward cosmetic surgery and decisions to undergo potentially risky surgery (Crockett, Pruzinsky, & Persing, 2007; Markey & Markey, 2010; Nabi, 2009) as well as their possible effect on disordered eating among women (Mazzeo, Trace, Mitchell, & Gow, 2007; Sperry, Thompson, Sarwer, & Cash, 2009, for a more general discussion of body image and media, see Chapter 15). In this vein, Nabi (2009) found that though there was little relationship between cosmetic surgery makeover program viewing and body satisfaction or perception of risk of undergoing cosmetic surgery, a small positive association with desire to undergo cosmetic surgical procedures emerged. This relationship persisted even after taking into account general TV consumption as well as other factors, like identification with the program participants or the nature of the outcomes depicted. Further, as noted earlier, the evidence supported the role of behavioral modeling in this relationship. That is, the more young people identified with program participants and the more positively they viewed the outcomes of the participant's cosmetic enhancements, the more likely the viewers were expecting to engage in similar (perhaps risky) behaviors.

Similarly, Markey and Markey (2010) found that individuals who had a positive impression of reality TV programs featuring plastic surgery transformations were more likely to want to alter their bodies and faces via cosmetic surgery. They further found in their experimental research that participants who watched Extreme Makeover were more likely to indicate a desire to obtain cosmetic surgery than participants who watched a home improvement program. Taken together, these results suggest that reality TV may promote unhealthy or potentially risky behaviors, in part due to the behavioral modeling that may occur when viewers identify with program participants.

The evidence to this point overwhelmingly focuses on the negative health implications of consuming reality TV. However, it is essential to emphasize that it is the content of the programs, and more specifically the content that has been the focus of researchers to this point, rather than anything inherent in the genre form itself, that has resulted in this perception that reality TV consumption is unhealthy. Yet a new wave of health-oriented reality programs suggests that positive effects are not only possible but likely.

In response to the obesity health crisis in the United States in which nearly 34% of adults in 2007–2008 could be classified as obese and the proportion of obese children reached 17% (Flegal, Carroll, Ogden, & Curtin, 2010; Chapter 15, this volume), a newer generation of reality programs has been designed not only to encourage contestants to lose weight, but to inspire healthier behaviors in home viewers as well. Premier among these is The Biggest Loser, in which morbidly obese contestants compete to see who can lose the most weight through a combination of supervised exercise and diet regimens. Each episode is also interspersed with trainer's tips on how home viewers can make simple changes to encourage a healthier lifestyle. Based on the argument above regarding identification with contestants as well as the educational information conveyed through the trainers' tips, one can imagine that viewing The Biggest Loser might encourage home viewers to make healthier choices with their own exercise and diet behaviors.

Although no published research speaks directly to this point, one unpublished study hints at the potential of reality TV to influence positive health behaviors. In their research, Thomas and Nabi (2009) randomly assigned participants to watch an episode of The Biggest Loser; an episode of another competition, but non-health related reality program (America's Toughest Jobs); or a health-oriented episode of a situation comedy (The Office) and explored the effects on self-efficacy regarding healthy eating and exercise. Although character identification effects were not detected in this study (which is unsurprising given the sample was comprised of generally healthy undergraduates of normal weight), results indicated that viewers of The Biggest Loser who perceived the program's events as more real also reported greater confidence in their ability to eat healthy and to exercise, and those who perceived both the events and people as real reported a greater motivation to exercise. Thus, there is evidence, albeit limited, that reality programming can be used to influence underlying motivations and efficacy, which may ultimately positively impact health-related behaviors.

Other television programs have also emerged to target the obesity crisis. For example, Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution revolves around the chef's mission to change the eating habits of the “unhealthiest city in America” – Huntington, West Virginia. As a result, viewers, along with citizens of Huntington, can learn about proper nutrition and how to make simple, healthy meals at home. Further, reality programs are beginning to address other health issues beyond obesity. For example, the A&E program Intervention profiles individuals whose dependencies on drugs and alcohol or other compulsive behaviors have reached a crisis point such that friends and family, with the help of trained professionals, stage an intervention to motivate the afflicted person to enact real behavioral change. VH1's Sex Rehab with Dr. Drew targets compulsive sexual behavior. A&E, recent offerings, like Hoarders and Obsessed, focus more on mental health, depicting the real-life struggles and treatment of people suffering from anxiety disorders and related compulsive behaviors. One might even argue that NBC's The Baby Borrowers, billed as a social experiment in which teenagers who think they are ready for parenthood “borrow” infants, toddlers, young children, and preteens for a few days each to see what the demands of parenthood entail, might impact family planning decisions. Indeed, the tag line to the program was “It's not TV, it's birth control.”

Despite the enthusiasm with which such programs may be greeted by those eager to see the power of the media harnessed for positive effect, we must note that there is always a risk that these health condition depictions may veer towards sensationalism, thus reinforcing and perpetuating stereotypes and paving the way towards further marginalization of afflicted populations. For example, Sender and Sullivan (2008) argue that The Biggest Loser, despite the beneficial tips audiences may glean for healthy living, continually associates the concepts of “fat” and “lazy”, thus reinforcing the view that those who are obese are so because of their own lack of will. Similarly, though Hoarders may be seen as a show that not only offers insight into a unique form of obsessive compulsive disorder, it may also sensationalize the illness thus further marginalizing victims of mental illness.

In summary, although most research on the effects of reality TV on viewer health tends to focus on negative effects, and indeed negative effects on viewers' health and well-being have been identified, emerging programs take advantage of this popular format to promote positive health outcomes for program participants. Consequently, through the processes of learning as well as behavioral modeling, it is reasonable to imagine that these programs have the potential to promote positive health outcomes in viewing audiences as well, though unintended negative consequences must not be overlooked.

Conclusion

Although reality TV has a history that arguably reaches back to the 1940s, it is only in the past 20 years – really the past 10 – that the genre has come into its own. As such, the research on its effects is still in its infancy. Issues regarding why people watch and the (generally negative) effects on viewers' cognitions and behaviors have been the focus of research. But recently, as the scope of reality programming has expanded to encompass positive social and health-related messages, threads of research on the positive effects of these programs are emerging.

At this point, it is critical to note that though reality TV tends to be explored separately from other forms of programming, the processes through which fictional versus reality TV programming culminate in effects are unlikely to be different from one another. In this sense, reality TV is not unique. To the extent that reality TV is perceived as more real, this may contribute to the likelihood and intensity of effects. However, given reality TV is often not seen as being particularly real, these outcomes must not be assumed. To the extent audiences identify more with reality program participants, the possibility of behavioral modeling may increase. However, again, we must be cautious as there is not yet sufficient evidence to support the claim that viewers identify more with reality program participants compared to television characters. Further, given the overwhelming majority of research on the genre's effects is based on correlational data, the claim of effects on attitudes and behaviors still awaits stronger empirical support.

Still, there are relatively unique elements of reality programming, including the inclusion of real people, the unscripted events, and its interactive nature, that make it worthy of closer scrutiny as we consider the influence its viewing may have on audiences. For example, scholars might consider exploring issues related to the suspense associated with the unscripted endings and the unsatisfying endings that sometimes occur as a result, which may lead to different emotional effects compared to fictional programming. In addition, greater exploration into the role of self-disclosure in promoting or impeding voyeurism as well as identification may be of value, especially given that these psychological states may predispose or limit effects on attitudes and behaviors.

A particularly unique element of reality TV involves its often interactive nature, in which audience members may affect program outcomes through voting. Interactivity is one of the reasons young people are attracted to reality TV (Hiltbrand, 2004), and the agency attached to the influence interactivity offers may have implications for viewing frequency, identification, involvement, and, in turn, the emotional, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes that may ensue (e.g., see Godlewski & Perse, 2010). Indeed, understanding the dynamic and likely reciprocal nature of the relationships among interactivity and these variables would be a very interesting direction for future research. Thus, though the process of effects may not be different for reality TV compared to other forms of programming, its unique features may influence the intensity and likelihood of effects, which would indeed be a valuable route for future exploration.

Future research should also continue to expand upon the nascent literature on the positive and health-related effects of reality TV – both physical and psychological, especially as compared to other television genres. To pursue this sort of research agenda would surely add a more interesting and nuanced understanding of this fascinating, though often maligned, genre of television programming.

REFERENCES

Aslama, M., & Pantti, M. (2006). Talking alone: Reality TV emotions and authenticity. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 9(2), 167–184.

Auter, P. J. (1992). TV that talks back: An experimental validation of a parasocial interaction scale. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 36, 173–181.

Bagdasarov, Z., Greene, K., Banerjee, S. C., Krcmar, M., Yanovitsky, I., & Ruginyte, D. (2010). I am what I watch: Voyeurism, sensation seeking, and television viewing patterns. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 54, 299–315.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Banet-Weiser, S., & Portwood-Stacer, L. (2006). “I just want to be me again!” Beauty pageants, reality television and post-feminism. Feminist Theory, 7(2), 255–272.

Baruh, L. (2010). Mediated voyeurism and the guilty pleasure of consuming reality television. Media Psychology, 13, 201–221.

Blair, N. A., Yue, S. K., Singh, R., & Bernhardt, J. M. (2005). Depictions of substance use in reality television: A content analysis of The Osbournes. British Medical Journal (International ed.), 331(7531), 1517–1519.

Cavender, G. (1998). In “the shadow of shadows”: Television reality crime programming. In M. Fishman & G. Cavender (Eds.), Entertaining crime: Television reality programs (pp. 79–94). New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Cavender, G., & Bond-Maupin, L. (1993). Fear and loathing on reality television: An analysis of America's Most Wanted and Unsolved Mysteries. Sociological Inquiry, 63, 305–317.

Cavender, G., & Fishman, M. (1998). Television reality crime programs: Context and history. In M. Fishman & G. Cavender (Eds.), Entertaining crime: Television reality programs (pp. 315). New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Clark, S., Nabi, R. L., & Moyer-Gusé, E. (2007). Television consumption and young women's expectations of sexual timing. Media Report to Women, 35, 4–12.

Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication and Society, 4, 245–264.

Collins, S. (2008). Making the most out of 15 minutes: Reality TV's dispensable celebrity. Television and New Media, 9(2), 87–110.

Crockett, R. J., Pruzinsky, T., & Persing, J. A. (2007). The influence of plastic surgery “reality TV” on cosmetic surgery patient expectations and decision making. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 120(1), 316–324.

Dixon, W. W. (2008). Hyperconsumption in reality television: The transformation of the self through televisual consumerism. Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 25(1), 52–63.

Eschholz, S., Blackwell, B. S., Gertz, M., & Chiricos, T. (2002). Race and attitudes toward the police: Assessing the effects of watching “reality” police programs. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 327–341.

Ferris, A. L., Smith, S. W., Greenberg, B. S., & Smith, S. L. (2007). The content of reality dating shows and viewer perceptions of dating. Journal of Communication, 57, 490–510.

Fishman, J. (1999). The populace and the police: Models of social control in reality crime television. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 16, 268–288.

Fishman, M., & Cavender, G. (1998). Entertaining crime: Television reality programs. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Flegal, K. M., Carroll, M. D., Ogden, C. L., & Curtin, L. R. (2010). Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999–2008. JAMA, 303(3), 235–241.

Gerbner, G. (1969). Toward “cultural indicators”: The analysis of mass mediated message systems. AV Communication Review, 17, 137–148.

Godlewski, L. R., & Perse, E. M. (2010). Audience activity and reality television: Identification, online activity, and satisfaction. Communication Quarterly, 58, 148–169.

Hall, A. (2006). Viewers' perceptions of reality programs. Communication Quarterly, 54(2), 191–214.

Hall, A. (2009) Perceptions of the authenticity of reality programs and their relationships to audience involvement, enjoyment, and perceived learning, Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 4, 515–531.

Hiltbrand, D. (2004). Teenagers identify with the issues presented in reality TV shows. In K. F. Balkin (Ed.), Reality TV (pp. 54–57). Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.

Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychology, 4, 279–304.

Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19, 215–229.

Kiesewetter, J. (2004). Some reality TV shows encourage cooperation. In K. F. Balkin (Ed.), Reality TV (pp. 37–39). Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.

Manganello, J. A., & McKenzie, L. B. (2009). Home and child safety on reality television. Health and Education Research, 24(1), 49–53.

Markey, C. N., & Markey, P. M. (2010). A correlational and experimental examination of reality television viewing and interest in cosmetic surgery. Body Image, 7, 165–171.

Mazzeo, S. E., Trace, S. E., Mitchell, K. S., & Gow, R. W. (2007). Effects of a reality TV cosmetic surgery makeover program on eating disordered attitudes and behaviors. Eating Behaviors, 8(3), 390–397.

McMurria, J. (2008). Desperate citizens and good Samaritans: Neoliberalism and makeover reality TV. Television and New Media, 9(4), 305–332.

Morgan, M. (2009). Cultivation analysis. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and effects (pp. 69–82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Nabi, R. L. (2009). Cosmetic surgery makeover programs and intentions to undergo cosmetic enhancements: A consideration of three models of media effects, Human Communication Research, 35, 1–27.

Nabi, R. L., Biely, E. N., Morgan, S.J., & Stitt, C. (2003). Reality-based television programming and the psychology of its appeal. Media Psychology, 5, 303–330.

Nabi, R. L., Finnerty, K., Domschke, T., & Hull, S. (2006). Does misery love company? Exploring the therapeutic effects of TV viewing on regretted experiences. Journal of Communication, 56, 689–706.

Nabi, R. L., Stitt, C. R., Halford, J., & Finnerty, K. L. (2006). Emotional and cognitive predictors of the enjoyment of reality-based and fictional television programming: An elaboration of the uses and gratifications perspective. Media Psychology, 8(4), 421–447.

Oliver, M. B., & Armstrong, B. (1998). The color of crime: Perceptions of Caucasians' and African-Americans' involvement in crime. In M. Fishman & G. Cavender (Eds.), Entertaining crime: Television reality programs (pp. 19–35). New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Palmer, K. S. (2004). Reality TV helps young people learn about life. In K. F. Balkin (Ed.), Reality TV (pp. 52–53). Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.

Papacharissi, Z., & Mendelson, A. L. (2007). An exploratory study of reality appeal: Uses and gratifications of reality TV shows. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 51(2), 355–370.

Poniewozik, J. (2000). We like to watch. Time, 155, 56–62.

Potter, W. J. (1986). Perceived realism and the cultivation effect. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 30, 159–174.

Potter, W. J., Warren, R., Vaughan, M., Howley, K., Land, A., & Hagemeyer, J. (1997). Antisocial acts in reality programming on television. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 41, 69–89.

Reality TV World. All shows listed alphabetically. Retrieved October 22, 2010, from http://realitytvworld.com/realitytvworld/allshows.shtml

Reiss, S., & Wiltz, J. (2004a). Why people watch reality TV. Media Psychology, 6, 363–378.

Reiss, S., & Wiltz, J. (2004b). Fascination with fame attracts reality TV viewers. In K. F. Balkin (Ed.), Reality TV (pp. 25–27). Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.

Schiappa, E., Allen, M., & Gregg, P. B. (2007). Parasocial relationships and television: A meta-analysis of the effects. In R. W. Preiss, B. M. Gayle, N. Burrell, M. Allen, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 301–314). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schiappa, E., Gregg, P. B., & Hewes, D. E. (2005). The parasocial contact hypothesis. Communication Monographs, 72, 92–115.

Sender, K., & Sullivan, M. (2008). Epidemics of will, failures of self-esteem: Responding to fat bodies in The Biggest Loser and What Not to Wear. Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, 22, 573–584.

Shapiro, M. A., & Chock, T. M. (2003). Psychological processes in perceiving reality. Media Psychology, 52, 163–198.

Shugart, H. A. (2006). Ruling class: Disciplining class, race, and ethnicity in television reality court shows. Howard Journal of Communication, 17, 79–100.

Skeggs, B. (2009). The moral economy of person production: The class relations of self-performance on reality television. Sociological Review, 57(4), 626–644.

Sperry, S., Thompson, K., Sarwer, D. B., & Cash, T. F. (2009). Cosmetic surgery reality TV viewership: Relations with cosmetic surgery attitudes, body image, and disordered eating. Annals of Plastic Surgery, 62(1), 7–11.

Thomas, J., & Nabi, R. (2009). The effects of reality-based television programming and advertising on nutrition and exercise efficacy and motivation in young adults. (Unpublished thesis.) University of California, Santa Barbara.

Yngvar, K. (2009). Everyone needs idols: Reality television and transformations in media structure, production and output. European Journal of Communication, 24(3), 287–304.

Zurbriggen, E. L., & Morgan, E. M. (2006). Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire? Reality dating television programs, attitudes toward sex, and sexual behaviors. Sex Roles, 54(1/2), 1–17.

FURTHER READING

Andrejevic, M. (2004). Reality TV: The work of being watched. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.

Balkin, K. F. (2004). Reality TV. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.

Barton, K. M. (2009). Reality television programming and diverging gratifications: The influence of content on gratifications obtained. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 53, 460–476.

Collins, K. (2009). CBQ review essay: Reality television: Scholarly treatments since 2000. Communication Booknotes Quarterly, 40, 2–12.

Hill, A. (2005). Reality TV: Audiences and popular factual television. New York, NY: Routledge.

Holmes, S., & Jermyn, D. (Eds.). (2004). Understanding reality television. London, UK: Routledge.

Jones, M. (2008). Media-bodies and screen-births: Cosmetic surgery reality television. Continuum, 22, 515–524.

Leone, R., Peek, W. C., & Bissell, K. L. (2006). Reality television and third-person perception. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 50, 253–269.

Murray, S., & Ouellette, L. (Eds.). (2004). Reality TV: Remaking television culture. New York, NY: New York University Press.

Oliver, M. B. (1994). Portrayals of crime, race, and aggression in “reality-based” police shows: A content analysis. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 38, 179–192.

Oliver, M. B. (1996). Influences of authoritarianism and portrayals of race on Caucasian viewers' responses to reality-based crime dramas. Communication Reports, 9, 141–150.

Ouellette, L., & Hay, J. (2008a). Better living through reality TV. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Ouellette, L., & Hay, J. (2008b). Makeover television, governmentality and the good citizen. Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, 22, 471–84.

Ouellette, L., & Murray, S. (Eds.). (2004). Reality TV: Remaking television culture. New York, NY: New York University Press.