uses and gratifications of the internet
TRANSCRIPT
USES AND GRATIFICATIONS OF THE INTERNET
by
BLYTHE SUEZANN HARRELL, B.A.
A THESIS
IN
MASS COMMUNICATIONS
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in
Partial FulfiUment of the Requirements for
the Degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
Approved
Accepted
August, 2000
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to thank Dr. Jerry Hudson for his continued guidance throughout my
undergraduate and graduate careers. Aiso, I wish to thank Dr. Liz Watts and Dr. Sabrina
Neeley for their support tlîroughout the thesis process. In addition, I would lilíe to
acknowledge Dr. Judy Oskam for her help in generating my topic.
Also, I wish to thank my family for their support and prayers, my friends for
listening and Fred for his patience and always being there for me. Most of all I wish to
thank God, for without Him, I cannot accomplish anything.
n
IV
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii
LIST OF TABLES
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Purpose of the Study 5
Statement of the Problem 5
n. LITERATURE REVIEW 7
History of the Intemet and Electronic Mail 7
Deveiopment of the Intemet 7
Packet Switching 9
Usenet 12
NSFNET 13
BITNET 14
FIDONET 15
WorldWideWeb 17
History of E-mail 19
How Does the Intemet Work? 21
Grow1:h of the Intemet 21
Importance of the Intemet 22
Development of the Uses and Gratifications Theory 23
Uses and Gratifîcations Assumptions 26
Motivations for Choosing Mass Media 27
Demographic Factors 27
Uses and Gratif cations Critics 28
ni
Importance ofUses andGratifications 30
Purpose of this Study 30
m. METHODOLOGY 36
Measuring Uses and Gratif cations 36
Methodology of this Study 38
Limitations 40
Sampling 40
Execution/Design 41
Pretest/Program Limitations 43
Data Treatment 43
IV. FINDINGS 45
V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 65
Uses and Gratifications of the Intemet 65
Uses and Gratifications of Electronic Mail 66
Demographic Profiles 68
Limitations of the Study 71
Future Research 73
REFERENCES 74
APPENDDC 78
QUESTIONNAIRE 79
IV
LIST OF TABLES
1 Respondents' Lengths and Sources of Intemet Use 56
2 Respondents'LengthofElectronic MailUse 57
3 Mean Ratings of Respondents' Intemet Uses and Gratifications 58
4 Mean Ratings of Respondents' E-mail Uses and Gratifications 59
5 Respondents' Demographic Profîles 60
6 Respondents'Computer Ownership 61
7 Respondents' Computer Experience 62
8 Mean Ratings ofUses and Gratifications for Intemet andE-mailby Respondents' Age 63
9 Mean Ratings of Uses and Gratifications for Intemet and E-mail by Respondents' Income 64
CHAPTERI
INTRODUCTION
The Intemet is known to many as the "information superhighway." Individuals
and businesses have jumped on the bandwagon and joined the communication system of
the present and future through Intemet connections and e-commerce. The Intemet is said
to be "the first truly democratic medium," and those with access to e-mail and the World
Wide Web are connected to an "unprecedented amount of information at one location"
(Santa Clara University, 1997).
The Intemet and electronic mail have played a significant role in the development
and popularization of computer networking and the advancement of teclmology. The
Intemet has had considerable growth from its inception in the early 1960s, from a single
system to the millions of network links across the world (Abbate, 1999, p. 1). Intemet
growth has spurred not only from the founding scientists and researchers of the Intemet
and electronic mail system, but also by the Intemet users who have shaped the Intemet
and electronic mail to meet their own needs and objectives (Abbate, 1999, p. 5).
The Intemet is defined by CNET Coverage as "a loose association of thousands of
networks and miUions of computers across the world that all work together to share
information." As the networks connect, they create a lightning speed channel that travels
across the United States through Europe, Asia and the remainder of the world (cnet.com,
2000). Electronic Mail, or e-mail, is a message or attached file that is a broken down
packet, which passes from computer server to the next until it reaches the intended
recipient (cnet.com, 2000). The Intemet and electronic mail together have surpassed their
founders initial hopes and dreams, as they have become the primary communication tool
and information source of the world in the 21st century.
The Intemet was first established in the late 1950s during the Cold War. Rand
Corporation, one of America's military think tanks, was investigating ways for U.S.
authorities to communicate with one another in the aftermath of a nuclear attack (PBS
Online, 1999). Rand Corporation was a non profit govemment agency primarily
functioning as a research corporation on military strategy and technology growth (Abbate,
1999, p. 10).
Although the use of the Intemet and electronic mail as an information and
communication source is ever-increasing, scholars and media personnel have questioned
the acknowledgment of the Intemet as a mass medium. As new media emerge,
researchers have had difficulty distinguishing between interpersonal and mass
communications. For instance, when electronic buUetin board systems emerged in the
early 1980s, numerous discussions led DeFleur and Dennis to the following five elements
to distinguish mass media from interpersonal communication (Swift, 1989, pp. 4-8). First,
mass media must include "a message formulated by professional communicators."
However, with Intemet and electronic mail, senders and receivers need not be
professionals or experts in the fîeld of communications. Second, mass media involves
"rapid and continuous dissemination of a message, usually mediated by a technology such
as print, film or broadcasting." With Intemet and electronic mail, information can be
disseminated "at the speed of light" through a wire. "At the same time, it may be stored,
searched and retrieved indefmiteiy." Third, "mass media involve a large and diverse
audience." With the World Wide Web, there is no limit to audiences of the Intemet and
electronic mail. Fourth, the message sent by the mass media, must be understood by the
receiver. This is another unique attribute of Intemet and electronic mail, when in fact the
receiver and the sender may interact to further message understanding. Fifth, mass media
must influence the audience (Swift, 1989, pp. 4-8).
Effects of the Intemet and electronic mail on their audience are evident by
reviewing the following Intemet growth statistics. The Intemet has acquired an
ever-increasing worldwide audience and continues to grow. In 1995, the best estimate for
the number of Intemet users was 20 to 30 million (Treese, 1995). In 1996, the number of
people more than 16 years of age in the United States and Canada with access to the
Intemet measured 37 million (Treese, 1996). A 1998 assessment of Intemet use in the
United States was approximately 57 million (Treese, 1998). By the end of 1998, there
was an estimated 147.8 million Intemet users worldwide (Treese, 1999). As of October
1999, it was estimated that about 101 million people were online in the U.S.
(http://www.nua.ie/surveys). In May of 1999, the number of U.S. households joining the
Intemet per hour equaled 760 (Treese, 1999).
By the end of the year 2000, Intemet growth worldwide is expected to be near 150
million (Stafford & Stafford, 1998, p. 174). In addition, the number of households with
home computers is expected to surpass the number of households subscribing to cable
television. An increasing number of these home computers wiU be equipped with
modems, enabling home computers to coimect with other computers, including the
Intemet. Most of these households will also subscribe to online services such as America
On-Line, Compuserve or Microsoft Network (www. fas.org/cp/netstats.htm,1997).
Today, audiences may choose from magazines, television, radio, books,
magazines and the Intemet. There are simply more informational mass media options
with electronic mail and the Intemet. Users may now access all these mass media options
and more online. It is important to note that users of the Intemet and electronic mail use
these sources for different reasons. They may choose mass media to satisfy their
commimication, information, escapism, companionship or entertainment needs.
In addition, consumers are now in more control of their information sources and,
therefore, it is necessary to assess who, why and for what reasons the Intemet is used.
This information is vital to marketers and advertisers attempting to reach a specific
market, for news media personnel informing mass audiences about current events, and for
businesses identifying and reaching their target markets (Stafford & Stafford, 1998, p.
174).
Mass communications researchers and theorists have been interested in
determining why audiences choose to use a particular medium and how they use this
mediimi to gratify his or her needs for decades. Researchers have linked mass media and
their audiences' media uses to the Uses and Gratifications Theory. For example, in 1944,
Herzog determined that radio soap opera audiences were seeking emotional release,
wishful thinking and to obtain advice in their own relationships (Dixon, 1993, p. 25).
Berleson in 1949 surveyed audiences after a New York newspaper strike. Reader
gratifications were determined as information seeking, social prestige, escapism and daily
routine (Berleson, 1949). In 1976, Becker determined that audiences used political media
content to gratify their excitement needs and for informational needs in order to choose
their candidate (Becker, 1976, pp. 28-33). In 1982, Bleise found that the elderly use mass
media for discussion topics, for entertainment, to pass time, to keep themselves company
and to supplement conversations (Dixon, 1993, p. 11). In 1989, Clinton Swift, in his
dissertation at Indiana University, studied audience activity in computer-mediated
communication. Swift found that respondents in his study used electronic bulletin board
systems mainly to keep in touch with friends and family and to gain information (Swift,
1989, p. 148). Janet Dixon in her study on the uses and gratifications of seniors' use of an
online nonprofit program, known as SeniorNet, found that of 335 respondents, the
senior's online program was typically used for communication, to fiil time, escapism,
diversion and to gain advice. (Dixon, 1993, p. 67).
.^ The Uses and Gratifications approach assumes that audiences actively choose
their mass media and expect to receive specific gratifications as a result of their selection
(Swift, 1989, p. 33). With the Intemet and electronic mail, the audience chooses to
contact businesses, web sites of interest and specific people or organizations (Stafford &
Stafford, 1998, p. 174). The communication flow is, in fact, reversed with the Intemet
and electronic mail. The audience, in most cases, is in control of messages received and
sent. Web sites and electronic mail are typically designed for interactive purposes
(Stafford & Stafford, 1998, p. 176).
Purpose of the Study
With the ever-increasing use of the Intemet, researchers are curious how the
Intemet is used, who is using the Net and the gratifications users gain while using the
Intemet. People across the world use the Intemet for different reasons: shopping,
commimication with fi:iends and families through electronic mail, business transactions
and communication, and entertainment are among the many opportunities of the Net.
The purpose of this exploratory study is to determine the uses and gratifícations
derived fi-om Intemet use of browsers and users of Lubbock Intemet Service Providers:
The Door and WindmiU. Two Lubbock Intemet Service Providers were selected based on
their wiUingness to post a uses and gratifications questionnaire on their web site. Findings
of this study wiU identify (1) respondents' uses of the Intemet, (2) respondents' uses of
electronic-mail, (3) respondents' gratifications from using the Intemet, (4) respondents'
gratifications from using electronic-mail and (5) the respondents' demographic profile.
Statement of the Problem
With the Intemet industry booming in growth, researchers are attempting to keep
track of the number of Intemet users, users' demographic profiles and for what specific
reasons they use the Net. In order to analyze and gather information on the users and to
reach those particular users, an electronic questionnaire was utilized in several studies.
Intemet and electronic mail users' use of the Intemet can be linked to theoretical
studies through the Uses and Gratifications TheoryJThe Uses and Gratifications Theory
originated in the 1940s and began as descriptive research used to interpret mass media
audiences' uses and gratifications of the particular medium in review. The theory assumes
that audiences are active and aware of their choices in mass media and media content, and
employ it to serve their own interests (Baran & Davis, 1995, p. 217). \
The following study of browsers of two Lubbock Intemet Service Providers
attempts to determine who uses the Intemet and electronic mail and why they use it. In
addition, it attempts to reveal how the Intemet and electronic mail gratify respondents.
CHAPTER n
LITERATURE REVIEW
Before developing this exploratory study, it was necessary to understand the
Intemet and electronic mail and how and why each were developed. Chapter n is divided
into two main sections. The first section of Chapter n will trace the history and
development of the Intemet and electronic mail. Section two will describe the
development of the Uses and Gratifications Theory and several uses and gratifications
studies involving various mass media.
History of the Intemet and Electronic Mail
Development of the Intemet
The development of the Intemet has been tracked by historians to the U.S.
Department of Defense's Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). ARPA was
created by the Eisenhower administration in the late 1950s to promote advanced science
research and development (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 34). ARPA was created as a result of
the Soviet's 1957 laimch of Sputnik. Eisenhower's administration was fearftil of a Soviet
lead in technology (Hunter, 1997). In fact, a series of Cold War events kept U.S. citizens
in fear of Soviet takeover. In addition to Sputnik's launch, an American U-2 spy plane
was shot down in 1960 over the USSR, the Berlin Wall was constructed in 1961 and the
Cuban Missile Crisis occurred (Abbate, 1999, p. 9).
ARPA's mission was to keep the U.S. ahead of military rivals by engaging in
research projects that secured notable advances in defense-related issues (Abbate, 1999,
p. 36). The U.S. wanted to ensure that if any one central communications system was
bombed and shut down, the U.S. military would still be able to communicate with troops
(December & Randall, 1994, p. 12). In order to compete and remain ahead of any
technological advancing countries, the U.S. gathered Americans with the most technical
minds to study rockets and the developing computer industry under the ARPA
department (Hunter, 1997).
Among these scientific and technical minds was researcher J.C.R. Licklider.
Licklider realized the limitations with computers in the early 1960s. Computers used
batch mode, which means a computer could use all of its resources to do large-scale
calculations and allowed only one user to execute programs at a time. Licldider was
interested in "time sharing," where several users could access their computers and run
their ovm programs. Time sharing had been introduced in the late 1950s for MIT students
and researchers in order to alleviate "bottlenecking" fi-om waiting to use one computer
simultaneously (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 48). Licklider's interests led to the Information
Processing Techniques Office, which he founded to fund the best computer scientists
working with time sharing. Licklider's new group and ideas led ARPA away from
defense-oriented research and closer to advanced research in computer time sharing ~ a
focus that has led us to the intercormection of computer networks, or the Intemet (Hunter,
1997).
In 1969, Lawrence Roberts, a former MIT program manager became IPTO
director and led IPTO networks to extend throughout the U.S. Roberts envisioned
ARPANET as a vehicle to draw researchers together and as an advancement opportunity
in the computer science field. He was mainly responsible for the success and management
of ARPANET. Roberts succeeded in forming a "packet switching" network that would
connect computer systems across the nation (Abbate, 1999, p. 46).
8
Packet Switching
In 1960, researchers Paul Baran of Rand Corporation and Donald Davies of the
British National Physical Laboratory developed "packet switching." Packet switching was
a system in which data were sent over a network in small imits and reassembled into one
message for the recipient (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 45). Packet switching was considered a
more effîcient means of transferring data over a high speed communications network.
Packetizing information had several benefits over older computer networks. Packet
switching networks allowed several users to share the same coimection by breaking up
the data into separate "packets" which were routed individually (Hardy, 1993). Packet
switching "increased the effíciency, reliability and speed of data communications. The
successftil use of packet switching in the ARPANET and in other early networks paved
the way for the technique's widespread adoption" (Abbate, 1999, p. 7).
Baran developed packet switching out of his interest in the U.S.'s current
commimications system in the possibility of a nuclear attack. Baran loiew military
officers would be unable to get orders out to troops under such an attack. He wanted a
system that the military could issue orders via facsimile, computers or voice
communications imder a war setting (Abbate, 1999, p. 11). Baran's resolufion was to
build a distributed network where nodes were connected to neighboring nodes and were
given equal value. Data would, therefore, be able to travel across several paths to reach
their destmations. Baran determined that computers were the best vessels for this type of
network (Hunter, 1997). His method mcreased the "survivability" of the system under a
military attack, because nodes could reroute data around inoperative sections of the
network (Abbate, 1999, p. 13). Several additional benefits of packet switching include a
more simplified design of switching nodes that kept enemy spies from eavesdropping,
had the flexibility of data delivery and the allowance of communication lines to carry
numerous message blocks simultaneously (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 47). Baran's work
quickly became the foundation of ARPANET (Abbate, 1999, p. 19).
As the United States military personnel were attempting to lessen the technology
gap between the U.S. and the USSR, the United Kingdom faced a similar fear. The U.K.
felt they were falling behind the U.S. in technology advancement. Many of the brightest
researchers and scientists had left England for research in other countries. As a result, the
National Physical Laboratory in England wanted to make staying ahead of other nations'
technology a priority. Donald Davies, a British scientist of the NPL, made brealcthrough
discoveries simultaneously with Baran; however, his findings focused more on
"interactive computing, " rather than military communications (Abbate, 1999, p. 23).
Davies' research centered on how to break up and transmit data. Davies' findings
resulted in what he called "time sharing." Time sharing was a more effícient and quicker
method of computer programming. It allowed multiple users to access one computer
through individual computer stations (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 37). Time sharing was a
process that instead of rurming single programs, before proceeding with the following
program, "would cycle between a number of programs, devoting a fraction of a second of
processing time to each one before going on to the next." Time sharing created a much
faster, feasible and economical system for processing data (Abbate, 1999, pp. 23-24).
Both Davies' and Baran's research fmdings went unnoticed for several years.
Although in 1967, their work began to receive widespread attention when ARPA
discovered their studies and created A O^ANET. ARPANET researchers were aware of
the efficiency benefits of packet switching and time sharing; however, there was high risk
involved with attempting to implement both. Neither had been tested on such a large
scale as ARPANET (Abbate, 1999, pp. 23-24).
Several of the initial technical challenges with the development of ARPANET
were as follows: packets would have to be reordered and reassembled into complete
10
messages; excessive computer memory was needed; different computer formats would
have to connect and new hardware and software would need to be developed. ARPANET
officials were willing to take the risk, considering the strides in communications research
discovered by both Baran and Davies (Abbate, 1999, p. 47).
By 1968, Roberts developed an initial design of the network, known as
ARPANET. His design would rely heavily on IMPs, or Interface Message Processors,
which connected the sites together to form the network (Moschovitis, 1999, p.61). With
this network, ARPANET was bom by proving that computer networking was possible.
ARPANET's goals were:
to develop techniques and obtain experience on interconnecting computers in such a way that a very broad class of interactions were possible and to improve and mcrease computer research and productivity through research sharing. (Hunter, 1997)
Members of the ARPANET computer science team overcame risks involved and
pressed forward by layering, or dividing networking tasks into smaller building blocks,
and by informal and decentralized management (Abbate, 1999, p. 51). By December
1969, ARPANET connected four host sites, actualizing the birth of the Intemet and
proving that networking different types of computers was in fact possible (Hunter, 1997).
In 1973, ARPA researchers Robert Kahn and Vincent Cerf examined how to
interconnect dissimilar networks (Abbate, 1999, p. 113). Cerf organized a seminar, hosted
at Stanford University, to discuss the design of the Intemet, interconnections between
networks and the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), or host protocol. Through
seminar attendee's feedback, Cerf concluded that TCP provided a methodical and
error-free approach for data flow from host to host (Abbate, 1999, p. 127). The TCP
would be used as ARPANET's host protocol and would be the "standard host protocol on
every subsequent network built by ARPA for that poinf' (Abbate, 1999, p. 128).
11
In 1974, TELENET, the first public packet switching service was established in
an effort to provide commercial data-packet service. TELENET linked users in seven
cities and marked what many call the first effort to network consumers (Moschovitis,
1999, p. 80).
In 1977, the first message was sent successfuUy across three networks with the
TCP. The message was intended to "simulate a mobile battlefield unit sending and
receiving messages from across the Atlanfic" (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 90). Many historians
believe this to be the point when the Intemet was truly bom (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 65).
From 1974 to 1981, the public received their first vague idea of how computers
could be used daily. The communication network had publicly moved from a military-use
to an academic and business-based use (PBS Online, 1999). Businesses and academians
aclmowledged the benefits of using packet switching networks. Several benefits included
data processing, point-of-sale transactions and database queries (Abbate, 1999, p. 29).
These allowed users to share a communication link more efficiently, more effectively and
simpler. Computer access would be "maximized to a scarce resource in order to provide
affordable interactive computing" and enabling the user to "be able to ignore the
complexities" (Abbate, 1999, p. 27).
Usenet
The popularity of the new found Intemet and electronic mail among academians
and professionals grew. They were wanting access as well. ARPANET was only
connected to sites that conducted budgeted research for the U.S. Department of Defense.
The desires for Intemet access for academians and professionals led to the development
of Usenet, also known as the "Poor Man's Intemet" (Hunter, 1997). Usenet provided
inexpensive network communications for many universities that had no other access to
national networks (Abbate, 1999, p. 201).
12
Usenet was structured as a client-host system. The client or user connected to a
computer which then connected to another computer that stored user postings for several
days. Users typically searched for topics of interest to them under Usenet headings. The
user then commanded the flill text under the heading. Once the user retrieved an article,
he or she stored the article, replied via e-mail or posted a response or foUow-up article
(Hardy, 1993).
Usenet was formed in 1979 by computer science graduate students, who set up
computer connections between Duke and University of North Carolina (Moschovitis,
1999, p. 99). Usenet began as an electronic discussion bulletin board and distribution
center for electronic newsletters using dial-up connections (Abbate, 1999, p. 201).
Discussion groups were known as "newsgroups," where participants discussed specific
topics. Messages were posted on bulletin boards and saved on host computers for others
to read. Participants flocked to Usenet because it provided new possibilities for social
interaction and allowed participants to remain anonymous. Users designed and managed
Usenet, which was said to be even less regulated than the Intemet. (Abbate, 1999, p. 201).
In 1997, Usenet served as a discussion center for thousands of newsgroups and discussion
groups worldwide (Hunter, 1997).
A series of self-generated software was developed in addition to Usenet in an
effort to fmd a public altemative to ARPANET. Among several of the developments were
NSFNET, BITNET and FEDONET.
NSFNET
In 1984, the National Science Foundation created a rapid network that could
connect supercomputers and university computer centers (December & Randall, 1994, p.
12). Networks were able to connect to the Intemet through the NSFNET. This system
allowed researchers who were not working on defense-related projects to connect
13
networks (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 125). NSFNET officials saw the importance of planning
for a high speed network, interconnecting supercomputers and universities for access
(Abbate, 1999, p. 191). NSF severely constrained commercial activity for some time
through their "Acceptable Use Policy," preventing businesses from using NSFNET for
any for-profit activities (December & Randall, 1994, p. 12).
In 1986, NSFNET began operation with 170 local area connected networks
(Hunter, 1997). In 1988, NSF and Merit, a non-profit group of 11 Michigan universities,
linked to create a more swift national network. This network linked 16 cities across the
United States, which served one or more supercomputer centers, national laboratories or
regional networks (Abbate, 1999, p. 192). Hundreds of universities were then able to
connect to NSFNET and overshadowed ARPANET. NSFNET was designed to receive
higher-speed lines and faster switches than ARPANET, in order to handle more traffic
(Abbate, 1999, p. 194). In comparison, in 1969, ARPANET had only four computers
coimected. Between 1988 and 1989, ARPA-contracted sites transferred all host
connections from ARPANET to NSFNET (Abbate, 1999, p. 195). In 1989, NSFNET had
more than 10,000 hosts (Hunter, 1997). In 1990, ARPANET was removed due to
NSFNET's higher traffic (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 144).
In February of 1990, ARPANET was officially disconnected and decommissioned
(Abbate, 1999, p. 195). NSFNET's contributions expanded the scope of the Lntemet,
opened access to interested universities and eventually brought the Intemet to public
control (Abbate, 1999, p. 191).
BITNET
In 1981, other universities began to follow the lead of Duke and UNC
(Moschovitis, 1999, p. 99). BITNET, "Because It's There NETwork" was created by
students at the City University of New York and Yale University, as another store and
14
forward network. BITNET primarily used electronic mail systems and "listservs" to
distribute information. In 1993, there were more than 4,000 discussion topics provided by
BITNET or BITNET-type listservs. Sending messages through BITNET lists allowed the
message to be replicated and sent to all intended persons on the listserv or list (Hardy,
1993).
BITNET addressing and mail delivery differ from Intemet and Usenet addressing
and delivery. For example, some BITNET lists are open and unmediated, while others are
controUed by moderators who approve postings before they are sent out. Usenet also has
moderated and immediated newsgroups; however, Usenet is typically less conservative in
allowing specific topics for discussion groups. Usenet, for instance, is ordinarily an open
and free-speech forum. Touchy subjects are often the topic or discussion of the day.
Administrators view Usenet as a democratic and free-speech zone and do not discourage
these types of discussions. BITNET, however, highly discourages these types of
discussions (Hardy, 1993).
BITNET was developed in an effort to provide universities with network
opportunities. Initially, ARPANET was limited to only institutions performing
defense-related research (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 105). BITNET was available to anyone
who had e-mail capability and who subscribed to the Intemet. BITNET differs from
Usenet in that capacity. Usenet subscribers required access to a specific server and special
software (Hardy, 1993). BITNET and Usenet were both key examples of how users could
adapt computation tools for personal communications (Abbate, 1999, p. 202).
FIDONET
A Bulletin Board System, another store and forward network, was developed at
approximately the same time as USENET. Electronic Bulletin Board Systems are defmed
as hardware and software systems that enable computers to accept telephone messages
15
from other computers and then, send and receive them as text messages. Electronic
bulletin boards enable users to leave messages and message recipients to pick up their
messages at their own convenience (Swift, 1989, p. 2). Personal coinputers were
becoming popular because they did not have access to institution-based networks. Users
began to set up their own computers to serve as bulletin boards by adding modems and
software for others to dial-up and post messages (Abbate, 1999, p. 202). In 1977-1978,
Ward Christensen, author of the File Transfer Protocol, was credited for inventing the
first BBS (Hardy, 1993). In February of 1978, Christensen's CBBS or Computerized
Bulletin Board System was completed. CBBS was the first "civilian experiment to create
a virtual community (apart from time-sharing systems)" (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 93).
Many say the technology for Bulletin Board Systems existed for several decades,
since the development of automatic telegraphy. However, its potentials were not realized
until ARPANET existed and personal computer availability in the 1970s increased
(Hardy, 1993).
A key BBS, FIDONET, was created by Tom Jennings in 1983 as a dedication to
free speech (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 99). In 1984, Jennings released FIDONET software,
which implemented a packet-based store and forward system and allowed FIDOBBS
users to send e-mail and participate in discussion groups such as BITNET or Usenet.
FIDONET allowed anyone with an IBM-compatible computer system to be operator of
his or her own system (Hardy, 1993). Typical BBS users have been hobbyists,
universities, research entities, political groups, joumalists, federal govemment agents,
magazine joumalists and editors, hardware and soítware manufacturers, computer user
groups and dating services (Swift, 1989, p. 23).
In 1986, thousands of FIDONET systems were running worldwide. In 1989, a
study done by Swift on Free-Net, a community computer BBS system in Cleveland,
16
portrayed the average user as male, 25 to 50 years of age, white and an education level of
coUege completion (Swift, 1989, p. 51).
In 1991, the FIDONET system was connected to the Intemet (Moschovitis, 1999,
p. 114). As of June 1993, there were an estimated 1.56 million FIDONET users (Hardy,
1993). Usenet, BITNET and FEDONET helped less privileged groups to benefit from
network technology as an exchange of mail or communication with one another (Abbate,
1999, p. 203).
World Wide Weh
In March of 1989, a distributed hypermedia system, currently known as the World
Wide Web, was created by Tim Bemers-Lee of the European Particle Physics Laboratory
or CERN. These initials represented the Laboratory's French name (December & Randall,
1994, p. 45). The system was developed out of need for a system that would save
information and would not limit the Intemet to text, but would allow images (Abbate,
1999, p.214). Bemers-Lee proposed that a network be created which would combine a
variety of systems, in a way to allow users to guide links from one piece of information to
another. These links would form "webs," hence the name for the World Wide Web. The
intention of the Web is to use a single port to allow users to follow sets of information
imtil they reach the desired destination. In order to form these "webs," Hypertext Transfer
Protocol (HTTP), was developed in 1990 (Hunter, 1997). The World Wide Web uses a
combination of "hypertexf' to search and organize information (Pantura, 1995, p.l6).
December and Randall defme "hypertext" as:
Text that is accessed or stored, in part or in whole, in a non-hierarchical stmcture. Each piece of hypertext (node) is connected to one or more other pieces by "links." As more nodes and subsequently more links are added to the stmcture, these links create a web, in many ways similar to a spider's web: one can get from node to node following many different paths. In contrast, directories (menus) are
17
branching, hierarchical storage systems. However, both systems have strengths and weaknesses: while hierarchical systems suit better to information that is static and easily classified, for dynamic, multidiscipiinary, difficult to classify, flill of references, or imrelated information, nonhierarchical systems seem more appropriate. (December & Randall, 1994, p. 46)
Researchers faced several technical challenges when creating the Web. First,
researchers needed to create a shared hypertext format, which they named hypertext
markup language (HTML). HTML allowed dissimilar computer network systems to
"agree" on a format when exchanging information. Also, in order for users to locate
information on the Web, the URL, or Uniform Resource Locator, was developed in 1991
(Moschovitis, 1999, p. 150). Information pieces must be uniform and compatible with
most systems in order for networks to identify information that the user wishes to access
Moschovitis, 1999, p. 164). Each URL must be constructed with an identified computer
address and application type (Abbate, 1999, p. 215).
In 1992, the HTTP protocol was available by CERN via FTP to the public
(December and Randall, 1994, p. 45). In January of 1993, 50 web servers were in
existence (December & Randall, 1994, p. 45). By the end of 1993, over 500 web servers
worldwide were administered (Hunter, 1997). In May of 1994, there were 1,248 web
servers worldwide (Abbate, 1999, p. 217).
Also, in 1994, new advancements with security measures were addressed with the
Web. Researchers worked on "secure" Web access for corporate and individual security
issues (December & Randall, 1994, p. 46).
The Web changed the Intemet by providing an application that attracted millions
of new users. The Intemet was no longer only seen as a research or communications tool,
it now created and could link to sites for entertainment purposes (Abbate, 1999, p. 214).
The Web induced growth and new progressions of features such as color images, and
18
video. These progressions placed the Web in the public eye. In the late 1990s, "the
Intemet and the Web became synonymous to the general public" (Abbate, 1999, p. 218).
HistoryofK-mail
Electronic mail is defined as "the entry, storage, processing, distribution and
reception from one account to one or more accounts, of digitized text by means of a
central computer and remote terminals connected by a telecommunications network"
(Rice, Grant, Schmitz & Torobin, 1990, p. 28). It also transcends space and time. It is a
text-based message, requires a rapid delivery and reply and may include one to one, one
to many and many to many connections (Pantura, 1995, p.l 1). Pantura's research found
that the characteristics of electronic mail systems are as foUows:
An electronic mail system has to include at least: (1) the entry of a text file (message) using a computer or terminal, (2) the distribution of the file on one or more user accounts for storage, and (3) the subsequent display of file contents by recipients at their convenience (Meyer, 1980). Most systems offer additional features such as editing during message entry, sending mail to a distribution list, and filing of messages. (Smith, 1984)
Electronic mail was first used in the 1960s, when the sharing systems were first
installed on mainframe computers. By 1971, several ARPANET sites had begun
experimenting with programs to transfer messages from one computer to another and
placing it in "mailboxes" (Abbate, 1999, p. 106). An early limitation of e-mail was that
mail could only be sent to others who used the same machine (Hunter, 1997).
The first working network mail program was created in 1971. Ray Tomlinson, a
programmer engineer, developed a mail program to send mail or messages between
different ARPANET users (Moschovitis, 1999, p. 68). The program was named
CPYNET, pronounced "copynet," and allowed the transfer of files between computers.
Tomlinson determined in his program that user's addresses would include a personal
19
name, the "(g" symbol and the identification of the user's host machine (Moschovitis,
1999, p. 74). The mail program specified host and user names in the mail addresses and
created commands to transfer mail files between machines (Abbate, 1999, p. 106). In
1973, ARPANET users began to use e-mail for day to day activities. Administrators
found that over half the traffic on ARPANET was electronic mail (Hunter, 1997). In
1978, e-mail was predicted to "sweep the country" with its successful communications
benefits over postal mail and the telephone. E-mail is immediate and does not require the
recipient to be available at the time of receipt. In addition, programs are fairly simple for
users and the same message can be sent to multiple recipients simultaneously (Abbate,
1999, p. 107).
According to CyberAtlas, in 1999, The Yankee Group researchers found there
were 263 million e-mail boxes in the world. Also, in 1998 eMarketer researchers
concluded that there were 3.4 triUion e-mail messages delivered that year. That figure
computes to approximately 9.4 billion messages everyday in the U.S. For comparison,
107 biUion pieces of first class mail were delivered in the U.S. in 1998 (intemet.com,
1999).
Additional statistics reveal that in 1999, the average American sent or received
approximately 26.4 e-mail messages per day. In addition, eMarketer researchers found
that 84 percent of Intemet users used e-mail, while Pew Research Center found that 85
percent used e-mail mainly to communicate with friends and family. Pew Research also
concluded that 88 percent of e-mail users used e-mail for personal reasons such as
communication between family and friends (www.intemet.com, 1999).
20
How Does the Intemet Wnrk?
CNET Coverage describes the Intemet as a "network protocol called TCP/IP - that
is, a kind of coding system that lets computers electronically describe data to each other
over the network." TCP/IP refers to two separate parts which are the Transmission
Control Protocol and the Intemet Protocol. Each computer connecting to the Intemet
"understands" these protocols and utilizes them to send and receive data from that
computer through the network (cnet.com, 1999).
The protocols then create a packet-switched network, a network intended to
minimize the chance of losing any data that is sent over wires. The TCP breaks down
each data piece into small packets, whether it is an e-mail message or computer program
instructions. Each data piece, or packet, is sent in an electronic envelope with Web
addresses for the sender and recipient. The IP then determines the path for the data by
passing it through a series of routers. The data piece is eventually routed to the intended
destination. It is interesting to note that if a data piece, such as an e-mail, was broken into
several packets, the user would never know because the TCP reassembles all packets
before the packet arrives at its intended destination (cnet.com, 1999).
Growth of the ntemet
In the mid-1980s, Americans saw a surge in personal computer industries. Many
businesses also joined the bandwagon and began using the Intemet to communicate with
consumers and their businesses intemally (PBS Online, 1999). By 1988, the Intemet had
grown so extensively, that many believed it to be essential for communication. However,
great concem over security and privacy among users was a dominating issue. By 1996,
there were users within almost 150 countries who were connected to the Intemet.
Computer hosting was near 10 million at this time (PBS Online, 1999). Additional
statistics show that in 1969, there were only four hosts and in July of 1998, there were
21
36,739,000 hosts worldwide (Gromov, 1998). The number of web sites worldwide has
grown from 50 in July of 1992 to 1,200,000 in July of 1997 (Gromov, 1998).
Accordmg to Nielsen Media Research and Commerce Net, a 1999 demographic
study revealed that the number of Intemet users ages 16 and older in the U.S. and Canada
increased 16 percent in the past nine months and the number of online consumers jumped
to 28 miUion. For the first time, however, there was an increase of women Intemet users.
Women Intemet users had reached the 10 million mark. Men were undoubtedly the early
adopters, but women had emerged as a powerful buying force on the Intemet through
e-commerce. Also, of importance for advertisers to note, 41 percent of today's 55 million
Intemet shoppers were women, compared to the last two years at 36 percent
(cyberatlas.intemet.com/big_picture/demographics/article, 1999).
Several studies have been done on Intemet usage. For example in 1995, research
revealed that "play" is a big portion of online activity. Emerging Technologies
researchers found that 52 percent of all World Wide Web use was for personal reasons,
35 percent was for business-related activity and 13 percent was for academic reasons.
Only four percent of all Americans were getting the news online at least once a week, and
87 percent said online information seeking had not affected their reliance on traditional
news sources (Zinsmeister, 1996).
The Importance of the Intemet
Businesses, universities, govemment entities and individuals have a growing need
and desire to communicate quicker and with more ease. One way that consumers are
aware of web sites is through typical mass media advertising formats such as print, radio,
television and direct mail pieces. It is uncommon to find any advertisement that does not
include a web address or interactive means to communicate (Stafford & Stafford, 1998, p.
175). This study will attempt to fmd out why users and browsers of two Lubbock Intemet
22
Service Providers typically used the Intemet and how these uses gratifíed their needs.
This study also attempted to link the Uses and Gratifications Theory to respondent's uses
and gratifications of the Intemet and electronic mail.
Ít Development of the Uses and GTatificafions Theory
The Uses and Gratifications Theory originated in the early 1940s. The theory can
be traced to Harold Laswell's Limited Effects Theory and fmdings on why people chose
specific media. Early research focused primarily on descriptions of audience's uses and
purposes for choosing the media. The approach was developed to study audience
gratifications by the type of media they used and the content of the media which satisfied
their needs socially and psychologically. By determining which media audiences chose,
researchers made assumptions of how a person used the medium to gratify his or her
needs. Early examples of particular types of content typically studied were radio quiz
programs, soap operas, music types and film (Salwen & Stacks, 1996, p. 146).
Researchers saw a resurgence of studies in media gratifications in the late 1960s
and early 1970s. Researchers strove to describe in detail how and why audiences used
specific media (Salwen & Stacks, 1996, p. 146). For example, in 1968, researchers
assumed that when respondents chose print as their medium of choice, the respondent
preferred print to gratify his or her political issue needs (Katz, Haas & Gurevitch, 1973, p.
164).
The rekindling of interest in media uses and gratifications can be traced to three
developmental phases. First, newer research methods and data manipulafion and analysis
techniques allowed important new strategies for coUecting information and analyzing
audience uses and gratifications. New techniques included questionnaires that were
developed to allow respondents' reasons for using specific media to be measured more
systematically and objectively. The Uses and Gratifications approach had been under fire
23
for not having a more methodical approach to analyzing data and this new technique
lessened criticism (Baran & Davis, 1995, p. 218).
The second phase developed in the 1970s from an increasing awareness among
researchers of audiences' active media use as a mediating factor when considering media
effects. Researchers believed that active audience members made a choice whether
specific media effects were desirable and set out to achieve those effects (Baran & Davis,
1995, p. 218).
Third, researchers were concemed that research on media effects focused solely
on negative effects from the media, while intended and positive media effects were
ignored. In the 1970s, there were numerous studies on media and violence and a lack of
studies on positive effects from the media (Baran & Davis, 1995, p. 218).
In 1973, researchers Katz, Haas and Gurevitch were among the first researchers
to compare gratifications among different types of mass media. In addition, they
identified different uses for different media. The study analyzed a sample of 1,500 Israeli
adults. Researchers developed a list of 35 psychological and social need statements
satisfied by exposure to mass media. The need statements were divided into the following
areas: politics, family, religion and education. Mass media under review were radio,
television, newspapers, books and film. Researchers found that respondents used the
media to gratify their needs by escaping reality, for entertainment, for kiUing time and for
social needs (topics of conversation) (Katz, Haas, & Gurevitch, 1973, p. 164).
In 1974, uses and gratifications researchers began measuring audiences' uses and
gratifications by constructmg Likert scales. Scale quesfions were developed from focus
groups, interviews and researcher observations. Researchers found that the uses and
gratifications approach included an audience's needs, which then generate expectafíons of
mass media, which result in gratifications (Salwen & Stacks, 1996, p.l47).
24
In 1988, Dobos and Dominick concluded that gratifícation factors from previous
studies were as follows: seek information, communication (social interacfíon or
companionship), fílling time, escapism, diversion, entertainment and guidance. Dobos
and Dominick determined that these factors could be used as a guide for ftiture uses and
gratifications researchers when determining need statements. These statements were also
applicable across all media (Dixon, 1993, pp. 25-26). For example, Payne, Severin and
Dozier foimd that magazine readers possessed three main gratifications sought and
obtained among respondents in their 1988 study. Gratifications of respondents were
seeking information, diversion and social interaction (Payne, Severin, & Dozier, 1988,
pp. 909-915).
Researchers Katz, Blumler and Gurevitch in their article, "Current Perspectives,"
constmcted a uses and gratifícations model that still guides researchers today. The model
describes the following approach: Social and psychological needs create expectations of
mass media which lead to different exposures to different media, leading to the media
user's gratifications (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1974).
In 1974, Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch described their model as broken down into
several social situations that could involve media-related needs in any of the following
ways: First, social situations may produce conflicts, which lead to comfort through media
consumption. Second, social situations can create an awareness of problems. These
problems may be solved through information sought and received by the media. Third, a
media choice by the audience may serve as a substitute to gratify "impoverished" social
needs. In addition, by consuming a particular medium, audience members may be
remforcing social values. Fifth, familiarity with media may serve as a means of social
acceptance (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1974).
In 1984, Palmgreen and Rosengren gathered and analyzed 20 uses and
gratifícations studies. From these studies, he concluded that audience gratifícations were
25
related to the following media effects: knowledge, dependency, attitude, agenda-setting,
politics and discussion (Palmgreen & Rosengren, 1985).
Uses and Grafífícafíons Assumptions
In 1985, Palmgreen, Wenner and Rosengren produced another important
development in uses and gratifícations studies. They created the foUowing assumptions
for the uses and gratifications model:
(1) the audience is active, thus (2) much media use can be conceived as goal-directed, and (3) competing with other sources of need gratification, so that when (4) substantial audience initiative links needs to media choice, (5) media consumption can fulfill a wide range of gratifications accurately because (7) media characteristics structure the degree to which needs may be gratifíed at different times, and further because (8) gratifications obtained have their origins in media content, exposure in and of itself, and/or the social situation in which exposure takes place. (pp. 11-37)
Katz's model along with Palmgreen, Wenner and Rosengren's assumptions have been the
guidelines for researchers since they were developed.
Several studies have affirmed the active audience assumption. For instance, in
1973, Katz found that audience members could determine between five mass media based
on their perceived gratifications obtained. In a 1977 study, Lometti concluded the same
about the active audience when respondents determined their gratifications obtained
among six mass media (Lometti, 1977, pp. 319-334).
Uses and gratificafíons researcher, J.D. Raybum, states that it would be safe to say
with the Intemet, as an interactive medium, media consumption is purposive. He says that
by defínition, interactive media are intentionally consumed as an audience member must
make conscious choices withm the medium. For instance, with the Intemet, the audience
member chooses his or her Intemet avenue as far as American On-Lme, CompuServe or
iocal Intemet Service Providers (Salwen & Stacks, 1996, p. 157).
26
In 1992, James conducted a preliminary study of Compuserve and Prodigy
interactive online computer users. James asked respondents to write essays describing
their percepfíons of uses and benefits of electronic bulletin boards, what characteristics
these users possess and how using the bulletin board affected their use of other mass
media. James found that statements about gratifícations sought and obtained within the
Intemet service, were in fact obtained (James, 1992).
Motivations for Choosing Mass Media
Researchers acknowledged that specific motivations for choosing certain mass
media were identified through several studies. For example, in 1956, Horton and Wohl
found that television provided viewers with "parasocial interaction with media
personalities." In addition, Pearlin's 1959 study of television uses and gratifications
linked television audience's with escapism as a gratifícation. Mendelsohn's 1963 study
revealed that television served as an entertainment medium. (Bryant, 1994, p. 419). In
1988, Homa examined the uses and gratifícations of mass media. His findings revealed
that the majority of media audiences were seeking entertainment, relaxation, escape or
leisure (Homa, 1988, pp.283-301). Also, a shift of interest in uses and gratifications
studies have focused on satisfying a person's particular need, such as loneliness (Severin
& Tankard, 1997).
Demographic Factors
An additional 1997 study by Richard Vincent surveyed 1,209 coUege students on
their media use. Results revealed that different demographics led to different media
sources. Also, students' media use and motivating factors increased with year in coUege.
Students' entertainment needs resulted in television news viewing. Print media were
related to current events knowledge. Media uses and gratifications were used to examine
27
audience uses of mass media according to social and psychological needs (Vincent &
Basil, 1997).
In the 1970s, several studies by Greenberg and Rubin found age to be a consistent
factor among children. Motivations for uses of particular media were typically to pass
time or were to safísfy a need for entertainment (Greenberg, 1974, pp. 71-92).
Uses and Gratifícations Critics
Although studies have revealed consistent findings, critics continue to question
several aspects of the Uses and Gratifícations Theory. For instance, researchers question
the meaning of lists of media gratifications used to study what an audience seeks or
obtains from the media. In addition, many critics believe the Uses and Gratifícations
Theory to not be a theory at all. Critics consider it an approach rather than a theory,
because they claim it is descriptive and not predictive. Baran and Davis describe a theory
to incorporate the foUowing: it should contain a set of concepts, specify the relationships
between those concepts, describe a phenomena associated with those concepts, it should
offer predictions of the phenomena and suggests explanations for the phenomena's
occurrence (Baran & Davis, 1995, p. 28). Although many argue the theory to not be
predictive, uses and gratifications supporters argue that this "growing inventory of
gratifícations, satisfactions and uses...show a convincing degree of pattemed regularity
and predictability" (Baran & Davis, 1995, p. 219).
In addition, uses and gratifícations theorists argue that the model is more
concemed with what people want from and choose to do with their use of a particular
media, not the effects of the media. Audience members are not passive nor are they
manipulated by the media. Audience members use media to generate desired effects
(Baran & Davis, 1995, p. 219).
28
Also, critics are concemed with methodology used to measure an audience's uses
and gratifícations of media. Critics believe that it is difficuh to measure causalify and that
long-term panel studies are necessary for a valid assessment. However, uses and
gratifícations supporters argue that most studies are low budget and cannot accommodate
a long-term panel study. Supporters believe that although critics argue about credibility,
uses and gratifications studies reveal valuable insight into why people choose specific
media. Typically, respondents are given lists of media uses and gratifications derived
from the researcher's own insights or past studies. For instance, a survey question could
be stated as foUows, "Watching television helps me to fínd a basis for conversation and
social interaction." Critics argue that statements similar to the example used are only cues
and are not accurate representations of how or why the respondent uses that particular
medium (Baran & Davis, 1995, p. 219). Uses and gratifícations research supporters argue
that generalizations are feasible with replication studies where results are consistent
across a similar sample and medium (Bryant, 1994, p. 423).
In 1979, researcher Jay Blumler attempted to resolve an additional theoretical
shortcoming, by defming exactly what an active audience means. He describes the
concept of an active audience in the following defmitions and examples:
Utility: Media have uses for people and people can put media to those uses. Intentionality: Consumption of media content can be directed by people's prior motivations. Selectivity: People's use of media may reflect their existing interests and preferences. Imperviousness to influence: Audience members are obstinate; they may not want to be controlled by anyone or anything, even mass media. They actively avoid certain types of media influence. (Blumler, 1979, pp. 9-36)
29
In short, Blumler is attempting to convey that the Uses and Gratifications Theory
is in essence a model to determine how different audience members become more or less
active and what will result by their media choices (Blumler, 1979, pp. 9-36).
Importance of Uses and Gratifications
In conclusion, the Intemet, as a medium drawing an ever-increasing audience,
demands that researchers continue to track the uses and gratifícations of Intemet and
electronic mail users. As technology advances, audience members are consumed with
"dot com" messages. If researchers are able to have even a small understanding of how
and why users use the Intemet and electronic mail, they may be one step above or will be
able to aid advertisers, news information personnel and "e-commerce" entrepreneurs in
their efforts to capture their audiences.
Purpose of this Study
In this study, research questions regarding how and why respondents use the
Intemet and electronic mail wiU be assessed by evaluating survey responses to motivation
factors and a series of Intemet and electronic mail usage questions.
In 1974, Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch outlined the following objectives for uses
and gratifícations studies: to explain how audiences use media to gratify their needs, to
understand purposes for media choices and to identify consequences that follow
gratifícations sought (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1974). In addifíon, research questions
one and two are important to assess considering the high amount of growth over the past
few years. Accordmg to CyberAtlas hitemet statistics and market research, the number of
U.S. households with Intemet access is projected to nearly double to 90 million by the
end of 2004, as stated by the Strategis Group (www.intemet.com, 2000). Research
question two refers to electronic mail use, which has also grown considerably. hi 1997,
30
there were 60 million electronic mail users. There were 138 million messages per day and
840 messages per year per user. In 2002, it is estimated that there will be 131 million
electronic mail users, 576 miUion messages per day and 1,604 messages sent per year per
user (www.mail.com, 2000).
Swift, in his 1989 uses and gratifícations study of Free-Net bulletin board users,
determined that respondents' motives to use the system were as follows: to fmd out about
interesting events, to exchange information, to keep up with current events, to talk about
interesting things, to compare ideas with others', to be entertained, to meet people, to take
a break from work, to pass time, to have social relationships and to have written record of
conversations (Swift, 1989, p. 106).
Stafford and Stafford's results in their 1998 exploratory study of uses and
gratifications of the World Wide Web, found that respondents used the Intemet mostly
for information purposes. Electronic mail, research purposes, news gathering and
entertainment were among other top uses of the Intemet by respondents (Stafford &
Stafford, 1998, p. 178).
RQl: How do respondents use the Internet?
RQ2: How do respondents use electronic mail?
Research questions three and four attempt to find gratifícations sought and
received through the Intemet and electronic mail. These research questions are based on
past uses and gratifícations studies found in this chapter's literature review. It is
imperative to not only fmd out how respondents used the Intemet and electronic mail, but
how respondents used the Intemet and electronic mail to gratify their needs. By
identifying what gratifícations respondents sought and obtained through electronic mail
and the Intemet, this study revealed motivations and insight as to why respondents
actively used the Intemet and for what reasons.
31
Swift's 1989 BBS study revealed that respondents received gratifícations by using
Free-Net, such as keeping in touch with family and friends, exchanging information,
meeting people, passing time and for entertainment purposes (p. 109).
RQ3: What gratifications are respondents seeking and receiving from using
the Internet?
RQ4: What gratifications are respondents seeking and receiving from using
electronic maíl?
Research question five addresses demographics of respondents. Results of this
study wiU reveal who of respondents typically use the Intemet and electronic mail. In
1989, Griswold and Moore investigated factors associated with newspaper readership.
Demographic questions were key to in determining who was in their readership base.
Griswold and Moore sampled 430 residents of a fíve-county circulation paper.
Demographic questions included year of education completed, gender, marital status,
number of children in the household and annual household income. Key factors were
typically gender and education levels (Dixon, 1993, p. 30).
In 1986, Rafaeli in his study of Stanford University's BuUetin Board System and
their users found that the demographic factor that most affected his study was computer
experience. In addition, Kerr and Hiltz in 1982 found that computer experience led to
more computer buUetin board use. Moderate demographic factors were level of education
and age (Swift, 1989, p. 50). Dixon, in her 1993 dissertation, determined that key
demographic factors were marital status and computer experience in her study of
respondents' uses and gratifícations of SeniorNet, an online program for seniors (p. 80).
In addition, inl988, studies by Greenberg on uses and gratifications of cable
television documented respondent's demographics. Greenberg used demographic results
to convey a clear representation of a typical cable subscriber (Bryant, 1994, p. 467).
32
Research question five in this study also helped to convey the same - a representation of
the typical Intemet and electronic mail user, based on respondent's data.
According to Georgia Tech Universify's Graphic, Visualization and Usability
Center, in 1998 the average Intemet browser was between ages 21 and 26, was male,
Anglo, married, had no children and completed coUege (www.gvu.gatech.edu, 1998). In
February 2000, MySiteInc.com revealed the following statisfícs about Intemet users. The
average user was age 33, was male, had an average income of more than $50,000
annually, was married and lived in the United States (mysiteinc.com, 2000). Information
from research question five may be linked with current or ftiture demographical studies
for researchers and Intemet businesses to determine their primary target audience.
RQ5: What are the demographic profiles of respondents who use the
Internet and electronic mail?
These questions determined respondents' uses and gratifícations of the Intemet
and electronic mail. Research questions were based on the uses and gratifícations of the
Intemet as a mass medium. For instance, Chris Hunter in his 1997 study of Intemet uses
and gratifícations among Boston College faculty and students assessed the factors that
motivated users' selection of the Intemet as a mass medium. He researched the foUowing
questions: How are Boston CoUege faculty, staff and students using the Intemet? What
gratifications are Boston CoUege faculty, staff and students seeking and receiving from
using the Intemet, and what factors motivate the selection of the Intemet as a medium
which will give satisfaction? How well have Boston College faculty, staff and students
adapted to Intemet use, i.e., how easy or diffícult do they find usmg the Intemet?
Hunter found the majorify of Boston College students used e-mail mainly to
communicate with family and friends. The majorify of Boston CoUege faculty members
used e-maii primarily for work and academic purposes. Student Intemet use was mainly
used for the following: browsing, entertainment and for academic research. Faculty
33
members again responded as using the Intemet for academic and work purposes. Himter
also foimd that gratifications sought by students with e-mail were typically related to
communication with friends and family. Faculty members sought to obtain
communication with friends, family and colleagues with e-mail. Intemet gratifícafíons
sought and obtained by students from Intemet use was to provide useftil
research/information and to keep them abreast of current events.
Also, Hunter's results revealed that less than half of student respondents believed
that the Intemet could serve as a substitution for magazines, television or newspapers as
far as obtaining news and information. Although the majority of students said the Intemet
could serve as an altemate form of entertainment to television.
Hunter discovered that the majorify of faculty members sought to obtain useful
research information on the Web and to keep them abreast of current news and
information. In addition, the majority of the faculty and staff sought entertainment
through Intemet use. Faculfy responses showed that they agreed with the students in that
the Intemet would not replace existing mass media such as television, newspapers and
magazines. Furthermore, faculty and staff responded that they believed the Intemet was
not an altemative to television for entertainment purposes.
Additional studies have attempted to reveal the motivations for people using the
Intemet. For instance, Daniel Pantura in his 1995 study of the use of the Litemet by U.S.
radio stations researched how and why radio stations used the Intemet and the level of
satisfaction among radio stations using the Intemet. Pantura found that radio station
respondents connected to the hitemet for the following reasons: for promotion of their
radio station, to receive feedback from their audiences, as an altemative commimication
medium, marketing efforts and for an additional means of contact.
34
Chapters I and n have described a basis for the Uses and Gratifications Theory.
Chapter IQ provides backgroimd information for methodology used in past studies and
describes executions of this exploratory study.
35
CHAPTER m
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of Chapter m is to discuss past researchers' methodology in
measuring uses and gratifications studies and methodology used in this exploratory study.
In addition, Chapter m reviews data treatment, execution and limitations of this study.
Measuring Uses and Gratifications
The Intemet, as an interactive medium, generates a multitude of questions and
interest for mass media researchers. With the abundance of media choices available to the
consimier today and possibilities for the future, researchers are very interested in
gratifícations sought and obtained by a typical Intemet audience. The Uses and
Gratifications approach provides a method to determine these questions (Salwen &
Stacks, 1996, p. 157).
Early methods of assessing uses and gratifications of an audience differ from
modem methods. A common method was to ask the respondent to write essays about why
they chose a specific media. For instance, in 1974, Greenberg had British children ages 9,
12 and 15 write essays entitled "Why I Like to Watch Television" to assess uses and
gratifícations of children's television viewing. Greenberg's results were that children
watched television to pass time, for diversion, to leam, relaxafíon, arousal, daily routine
and companionship (Greenberg, 1974, pp. 71-92).
Other methods included interviews with respondents, focus groups and
observations. In 1983, in a study done by Shaver, the researcher used focus groups to
identify specifíc dimensions of gratifícations sought from cable television viewers. hi
short, methods were qualitative. Today, research has supported consistent and accurate
self-reporting methods (Bryant, 1994, p. 424). Uses and gratification's methods typically
36
use closed-ended Likert scale indicator questions to gather responses (Salwen & Stacks,
1996, p. 149). In 1986, Garramone studied the uses and gratifications of buUetin board
systems. Garramone determined resuhs by listing need statements, such as "I want to be
entertained" and "I want to keep up with current issues and events." Respondents were
asked to rate each need statement along a Likert scale with fíve meaning "strongly agree"
and one meaning "strongly disagree" (Swift, 1989, p. 70). Swift, in his 1989 Free-Net
buUetin board system study, presented a series of Likert scale questions asking
respondents to indicate their support for each statement (p. 56).
In addition, early uses and gratifícations studies in the 1940s, 50s and 60s
typically researched why people used certain media types, instead of examining audience
stimulation for using a particular medium. In the 1970s, researchers attempted to identify
audience motivations. Needs were typically socially and psychologically-related. For
example in 1972, McQuail, Blumler and Brown devised a gratifications listing based on
their findings in a study of television uses and gratifications. Results revealed that
audiences used television to gratify their escapism, companionship, value reinforcement
and informational needs (Bryant, 1994, p. 422).
In 1974, Greenberg developed television uses scales for testing British children.
He determined the following television uses based on his findings: for leaming, out of
habit, for companionship, to escape, to satisfy boredom needs and to relax (pp. 71-92). A
U.S. replication study found similar findings among children's uses of television viewing.
Findings revealed that respondents' used television for escape, leaming, to satisfy
boredom needs, for companionship, and to relax (Bryant, 1994, p. 425). Also, in 1974,
researchers Blumler and Katz's 1974 landmark uses and gratifications study found the
following major gratifícations sought by adults in their media use: entertainment,
companionship, personal identity and surveillance. In 1982, Rubin and Rubin surveyed
television viewers and identified the six key gratifications sought and obtained by
37
respondents. Respondents viewed television to satisfy their informational needs,
communications or social interaction, passing time, escapism, entertainment and seeking
advice (Rubin & Rubin, 1982, pp. 287-313). Each of these studies report similar fmdings,
leading to the basis that uses and gratifications studies are valid and can typically be
generalized.
Methodology of this Study
The design of the methodology for this study was a posted survey on the Intemet.
Respondents' answers aided in determining the uses and gratifications of users and
browsers of two Lubbock Intemet Service Providers. Need statements in this study were
developed based on previous studies, identified in Chapter n. Demographic questions,
combined with uses and gratifications responses, helped determine who Intemet Service
Providers should target to increase their customer base and may aid researchers in
determining exactly who uses the Intemet and electronic mail for ftxture studies. This
study was exploratory in nature. Results cannot be generalized across all World Wide
Web users.
Surveys have been vital to mass communications and Intemet research. For
instance, The Gallup Organization, one of the most highly acclaimed survey specialists,
engage in surveys to determine public statistics numerous times per month. Several
studies in 1998 have developed public perception of several issues via survey. In October
1998, The Gallup Organizafíon determined public perception of frequent worrying of
crime occurring to respondents. They determined that Americans perceive themselves as
less fearftil than five years earlier that they wiU be the victims of violent crimes. From the
survey, Gallup researchers were able to state results with 95 percent confidence (Moore,
1998). The survey used a Likert scale and a nationally-selected survey of 1,013 adults. An
additional study by The Gallup Organization determined how the public perceived the
38
need for new racial initiatives. This study was also based on a survey using a Likert scale
to determine responses. The study revealed with 95 percent confidence that the public
was divided between blacks and whites on the racial initiatives study.
Chris Hunter in his 1997 study of uses and gratifications of the Intemet and
electronic mail among Boston College faculty and students also utilized a survey. Hunter
used Likert scales to measure gratifications sought and obtained by respondents.
Gratifications statements were based on an active audience. Findings are reported in
Chapter E.
Also, a survey method was used in a study to assess the perceptions of the Intemet
among a sample from the advertising commimity. The study was published in the Journal
ofAdverting Research in the March/April 1998 issue. Researchers also utilized a Likert
scale to determine the importance of the Intemet within the specifíed advertising
community. Results revealed the following: advertisers had begun to incorporate Intemet
into their organization, advertisers predicted greater Intemet presence within the next
year, security and privacy issues were barriers to the Intemet as a marketing tool and there
remained an imcertainty conceming the effectiveness of the Intemet as a competitive
advantage (Bush, 1998).
An Intemet survey method has proven to be advantageous for the researcher.
Costs and time to collect data have been much less compared to other survey methods
such as telephone and mall intercepts. Data entry is eliminated using programs such as
Survey Assistant. These types of programs also eliminate data entry errors from the
researcher. One of the largest benefits to Intemet surveying is that respondents are not
limited to one geographic area. Intemet users all over the world have access to answering
questionnaires (Schmidt, 1997). In addition, the researcher can assume respondents are
fairly in touch with the hitemet and will, therefore, respond accordingly to Intemet use
questions (Stafford & Stafford, 1998, p. 177).
39
Limitations
There are several limitations, however. For instance, using Intemet surveying does
not ensure that respondents do not submit responses to the questionnaire more than once.
In addition, the surveys are limited to only Intemet users. In 1997, the typical Intemet user
was male, in his late teens to early thirties and his education and socioeconomic status
were slightly above average (Schmidt, 1997). Researchers must keep in mind the biases
presented by typical Intemet users (Schmidt, 1997). Also, Intemet surveying does not
allow the researcher in most cases to choose who wiU and will not participate in the
survey. Any worldwide browser may choose to select the web site and respond to the
survey (Stafford & Stafford, 1998, p. 177).
An additional limitation to survey methodology is incomplete survey submissions.
Respondents may simply skip a question and forget to retum to that question, or they may
not wish to answer that question (Schmidt, 1997).
Sampling
The universe consisted of browsers or subscribers to Lubbock Intemet Server
companies, The Door and WindmiU. The universe was extracted from these local hitemet
Service Providers and from browsers on their home pages. The number of subscribers to
The Door and the WindmiU was approximately 700 at the time of the questionnaire
posting. This universe was used as a convenience study. Because the universe was so
small in comparison to the millions of subscribers worldwide, results cannot be
generalized. hi addition, results cannot be generalized to this universe because anyone m
any location browsing the Web may have linked to home pages where the survey was
linked. Respondents did not have to necessarily be subscribers to the Lubbock ISPs in
order to complete the questionnaire. The unit of analysis was a browser over the age of 18
years old.
40
This sample size could possibly be a limitation. The number of Intemet surveys
are so limited because of numerous and persistent computer spamming. Therefore, it is
more likely to assume that lower numbers of completed questionnaires were reached
(Wimmer, 1997). In addition to sampling error, The Gallup Organization lists several
limitations to surveys and sampling. For instance, in each of their surveys, Gallup states
that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error
or bias in public opinion polls (Moore, 1998). hi addition, Wimmer and Dominick in a
1997 issue oíMass Media Research state that surveys may introduce bias, because the
researcher can not attest to the respondent telling the tmth about age, socioeconomic
status, religion and so forth. Respondents also may tend to answer in a manner that they
think the researcher wishes them to respond.
Execution/ Design
A posted Intemet survey was conducted. The survey was posted on the home
pages of the following Lubbock Intemet Service Providers: The Door and Windmill.
Presidents of the ISPs were contacted and allowed the electronic mail survey to be posted
at www.door.net and www.windmill.net from December 1999 until suffícient data were
coUected. Both contacts at the ISPs would not allow the survey to be e-mailed to their
subscribers. They believed it to be invasive in a time when Intemet users are bombarded
with junk mail and e-mail spamming. The survey was programmed through Survey
Assistant, an Intemet survey software program. The program is located at
http://www.or.psychology.dal.ca. This program is free for academic and non-commercial
users. Survey Assistant allows the surveyor to enter the questionnaire on the Intemet and
then codes data as respondents answer the survey questions. The data were then flowed
into Excel for data manipulafíon. In order to determine pattems in gratifícations, data
were analyzed by frequency distributions and Anova tests. This process is similar to
41
Swift's study, in which he analyzed data in his 1989 dissertafion on Free-Net buUetin
board system uses and gratifícations (p. 74). hi addition, Stafford and Stafford (1998)
calculated resuhs in their uses and gratifícations study of the World Wide Web by using
frequency tabulations (p. 178).
The Uses and Gratifications Theory assumes that audiences make conscious
decisions about their media consumption (Salwen & Stacks, 19, p. 156).Questions in this
questionnaire were developed with the consideration that respondents are active
audiences. Early research has shown that audiences' responses to uses and gratifications
studies prove that the audience actively seeks their gratifications by media use. For
example, in 1983, cable television studies relied exclusively on respondents' self-report
measures. Results indicated that respondents subscribed to cable with intentions to obtain
improved, clearer television reception and to add a variety and numerous options to
viewing choices (Bryant, 1994, p. 465). However, uses and grafífications reporting may
also present limitations. Interpretive processes such as self-reports and interpreting need
statements may introduce bias. In addition, uses and gratifications studies consider the
respondent to be the unit of analysis; therefore, critics question the generalization of
research resuhs (Bryant, 1994, p. 424). Gratification need statements were constructed
based on previous uses and gratifications studies.
42
Plêtest/Program Limitationg
A pretest was conducted with 10 respondents in November 1999. Several minor
survey programming gliches and the clarity of wording of a few questions were
acknowledged by respondents and then corrected immediately by the researcher. Pretest
resuhs were not included in the final data for manipulation.
In addition, there were several initial setbacks and limitations to the study with
computer programming through Survey Assistant. Specific Intemet applications must be
used in order to run the program. For instance, those researchers with AOL 5.0 must
convert to AOL 4.0 in order for the Survey Assistant to run correctly. Also, both Lubbock
Intemet Service Providers delayed the process. The questionnaire was ready to be linked
to their home pages in late November 1999. The questionnaires were not actually posted
until January 2000. One Intemet Service Provider's respondent was unable to answer one
questionnaire question, so the survey was taken down from their site without contacting
the researcher. Once the researcher contacted the Intemet Service Provider and corrected
the questionnaire error, the questionnaire was placed back on the ISP's web site. In
addition, one of the ISPs went out of business near the end of the study.
Data Treatment
Different data types were collected in different parts of the questionnaire.
However, the questions that attempted to measure uses and gratifications, which were of
most importance to the study, were Likert scales. Likert scales are ordinal data and
non-parametric. Degrees of freedom were six, because there were seven measurements
with a measurement of one meaning Strongly Agree and seven meaning Strongly
Disagree. Alpha level was .05.
Additional questions included demographic data. These are non-parametric and
used descriptive measuring such as frequencies and percentages to determine
43
demographic profiles of the respondents. Demographic questions which included gender,
religious affiliation, number of children and gender are each nominal. Ordinal
demographic questions involved socioeconomic status and age. Alpha level remamed at
.05.
Uses and gratifications quesfions were coded so that Strongly Agree wiU equal
one and Strongly Disagree will equal seven. Each quesfíon was coded consistently so that
low scores showed a higher agreement and higher scores represented a lower agreement.
By analyzing the means of uses and gratifications questions, results revealed
motivations of users and browsers of the two Intemet Service Providers to use the
Intemet. Assessments of questions therefore, led to answers to research questions one,
two, three and four. After results were determined, different demographic variables were
added to determine who used the Intemet and electronic mail. Demographic assessments
determined answers to research question five.
Overall, uses questions addressed research questions one and two. Uses questions
assessed the respondents' use of the Intemet and electronic mail. Participants'
gratifications of the hitemet and electronic mail addressed research questions three and
four. Respondents' demographics questions were Unked to research question fíve.
Assessing target audiences is vital to determining how and to whom a product or
concept should be marketed. Demographics questions assessed target audiences of
hitemet users and audiences of the Lubbock hitemet Service Providers. Knowing who the
Intemet audience is, gains pertinent informafion for future researchers, mass media and
businesses for targeting specific audiences.
Please see the Appendix to review questionnaire.
44
CHAPTERIV
FINDINGS
Chapter FV reviews fmdings of this exploratory uses and gratifícations study.
Conclusions of Research Questions I to V are discussed.
The Intemet posted survey was conducted from November 1999 to March 2000.
The number of usable completed questionnaires was 302. Nine surveys were discarded
due to mcomplete uses and gratifícations information or duplicate submissions. Swift in
his study of Free-Net bulletin board system users had 436 respondents. His sample of
users was not intended to be a random selection of registered Free-Net users, but more of
a convenience sample (Swift, 1989, p. 80), Although this study included a convenience
sample as well and was exploratory in nature, participants' responses confírm results of
past uses and gratifícations studies cited in Chapters n and m. Chapter FV discusses
results to research questions I to V.
RQl: How do respondents use the Internet?
Respondents' weekly use of the Intemet was frequent. For instance, 74% of
respondents used the Intemet more than one time per day (Table 1). An additional 15% of
respondents used the Intemet at least one time per day (Table 1). The respondents'
average length of time spent on the Intemet per access was 15 to 30 minutes (32%) and
31 to 45 minutes (23%) (Table 1).
The majority of respondents used a PC format (95%)) (Table 1). This study
revealed that respondents' main sources driving them to web addresses were friends
(81%) and through following links from other web sites (81%) (Table 1). hi addition,
respondents typically accessed the hitemet from the offíce (59%) and at home (38%))
(Table 1).
45
RQ2: How do respondents use electronic mail?
Table 2 shows that participants' e-mail use was frequent. For example, 92%) of
respondents used e-mail within 24 hours preceding complefíon of the questionnaire
(Table 2). An additional 5% of respondents used e-mail ranging between 24 hours to two
days preceding completion of the questionnaire (Table 2). The remaining 4%) used e-mail
within the past two weeks of completing their questionnaire (Table 2).
Respondents' weekly e-mail use was also recurrent. Table 2 indicates 81%) of
respondents used e-mail more than one time per day. In addition, 13%) of respondents
used e-mail one time per day (Table 2). The remaining 7%) utilized e-mail between three
times per week to one time per week (Table 2).
Table 2 shows that many respondents spent a vast amount of time using e-mail
each time they accessed their e-mail account. For instance, 30%) of participants responded
that they spent an average of 15 to 30 minutes each time they logged on to their e-mail
(Table 2). In addition, 21%o responded that they used e-mail less than 15 minutes during
each use (Table 2). Seventeen percent of respondents spent more than five hours each
time they accessed e-mail (Table 2). About 13%) of respondents spent 31 to 45 minutes
each time they accessed e-mail (Table 2). About 12% of respondents spent 46 minutes to
one hour, while from l%o to 3%) of participants indicated they spent more than one hour to
five hours (Table 2).
Table 2 also indicated whether respondents typically sent or received e-mails. For
example, 10%o of participants responded they typically read e-mail messages only (Table
2). The majority of participants (90%)) answered that they typically read and sent
messages (Table 2). None of the respondents stated that they sent messages only.
In addition, Table 2 noted whether respondents typically initiated or responded to
e-mails. The majority of participants (83%) responded that they regularly initiated and
responded to e-mails (Table 2). About 13% of respondents stated that they typically
46
responded to e-mails rather than initiated them. A small percentage of responses (4%))
indicated that participants usually initiated e-mails.
An integral portion of this uses and gratifications study attempted to determine
why respondents used e-mail. Table 2 revealed that 33%) of respondents used electronic
mail mainly to communicate with friends and family. hi addition, 24%) of respondents
mdicated they used e-mail to communicate at work, while none of the respondents
indicated that they used e-mail solely for academic purposes (Table 2). The largest
proportion of respondents (44%)) stated they used e-mail for a combination of
communicating with friends and family, communicating at work and for academic
purposes (Table 2).
In addition, this study was performed for the purposes of determining the uses and
gratifícations sought and obtained by using the Intemet and electronic mail. Research
questions three and four address the uses and gratifications sought and obtained by
respondents.
RQ3: What gratifications are respondents seeking and receiving from using
the Internet?
Table 3 reflects participants' responses to Intemet uses and gratifications
statements of this study's survey (see Appendix ). On a scale from one to seven, with one
meaning Strongly Agree and seven representing Strongly Disagree, participants were
asked to rate Intemet gratifícations. The mean, standard deviation and mode were
computed based on participants' responses.
The first group of Intemet uses questions pertained to respondents uses and
grafífícations of chat rooms and gaining personal advice from the hitemet. Respondents
generally disagreed with statements regarding seeking companionship (mean=6.3,
median=7, mode=7), maintaining social contact (mean=6.4, median=7, mode=7),
reducing personal insecurity (mean=6.4, median=7, mode=7), gaining value support
47
through chat rooms (mean=6.4, median=7, mode=7) and gaining advice through the
hitemet (mean=4.3, median=7, mode=7) (Table 3).
Participants tended to agree with uses and gratifícations statements regardmg
informational uses of the Litemet. Table 3 reveals that respondents generally agreed with
informational uses and gratifícations of the Intemet. For example, respondents agreed
with the following questionnaire statements: using the Intemet as a source of information
(mean=1.7, median=l, mode=l), keeping abreast of current news (mean=2.3, median=3,
mode=l) and accessing on-line newspapers (mean=3.2, median=3, mode=l).
In addition, participants generally disagreed with statements that respondents
utilized the Intemet for the following: to escape reality (mean=5.3, median=6, mode=7),
to cure boredom (mean=4.2, median=4, mode=7), to fiU time (mean=4.2, median=4,
mode=7) and as a daily routine (mean=4.4, median=3, mode=7) (Table 3). However
respondents tended to agree with the statement suggesting that the Intemet is used for
entertainment purposes (mean=3.4, median=3, mode=2). Respondents also agreed that
they used the Intemet for research purposes including research for academics (mean=3.4,
median=3, mode=l) and business (mean=2.8, median=2, mode=l) (Table 3).
Likewise, participants typically agreed with statements regarding product
information. For instance, Table 3 showed that respondents used the Intemet to seek
product information (mean=2.4, median=2, mode=l) and to purchase personal products
or services (mean=3.3, median=3, mode=3).
Participants responded differently to statements regarding selling and purchasing
products for business purposes. Participants tended to disagree with both statements -
selling products for business (mean=5.6, median=7, mode=7) and purchasing products for
business (mean=5.2, median=7, mode=7) (Table 3).
This study investigated whether respondents utilized the Intemet as an altemative
to different mass media. Respondents used the hitemet as an ahemative to some media;
48
however, the Intemet was not a replacement for others. For instance, Table 3 shows that
respondents generally agreed with the survey statement that participants utilized the
Intemet as an altemative to newspaper for news information (mean=3.4, median=3,
mode=2). In addition, respondents typically agreed with statements utilizmg the Intemet
as an informational altemative to television (mean=3.8, median=4, mode=3). However,
respondents tended to disagree with statements regarding using the Intemet as an
altemative to several mass media for entertainment purposes. For example, participants
generally disagreed with statements regarding the use of the Intemet as an altemative to
television (mean=4.9, median=5, mode=7), radio (mean=5.1, median= 6, mode=7) and
magazines (mean=4.4, median=4, mode=7) for entertainment purposes.
Overall, respondents sought to obtain informational gratifícations from the
Intemet. Respondents did not seek to utilize the Intemet as an altemative to other forms
of mass media for entertainment purposes.
RQ4: What gratifications are respondents seeking and receiving from using
electronic mail?
Table 4 reflects participants' responses to electronic mail uses and gratifications
statements. On a scale from one to seven, with one meaning Strongly Agree and seven
representing Strongly Disagree, participants were asked to rate electronic mail
gratifications. The mean, standard deviation and mode were computed based on
participants' responses.
Table 4 revealed that 33%o of respondents used electronic mail to communicate
with friends and family. In addition, Table 4 reinforces this statement with resuhs that
respondents agreed they actively sought friend (mean=3.2, median=2, mode=l) and
family (mean=3.3, median=3, mode=l) contact gratifications from e-mail (Table 4). Also,
respondents generally agreed with the survey statement that e-mail helped them to
communicate with work contacts (mean=3.6, median=2, mode=l). Maintaining sociai
49
contact was an additional gratification sought and obtained by respondents. Participants
typically agreed that using e-mail helped them to maintain social contact (mean=3.5,
median=3, mode=l). Likewise, participants agreed with the survey statement that e-mail
helped them to communicate with employees and businesses (mean=3, median= 2,
mode=l)(Table 4).
Table 4 showed that respondents were not committed to whether they agreed or
disagreed with the survey statement that respondents used e-mail to fmd useful research
information (mean=3.9, median= 4, mode=4). Respondents generally disagreed with
statements that e-mail helped them to obtain useful product and service information
(mean=6, median=4, mode=3.9).
In addition, respondents typically disagreed with survey statements regarding
using e-mail to seek companionship (mean=5.7, median=7, mode=7), to reduce personal
insecurities (mean=6, median=7, mode=7), to gain support for their values (mean=5.8,
median=7, mode=7) and to gain advice from others (mean=4.4, median=4, mode=7)
(Table 6). Furthermore, respondents tended to disagree with gratifications statements that
e-mail helped them to escape reality (mean=5.6, median=7, mode=7), to cure their
boredom (mean=4.3, median=4, mode=7), to fiU time (mean=4.4, median=4, mode=7)
and to maintain a daily routine (mean=4, median=4, mode=7) (Table 4).
Moreover, respondents generally disagreed that they would seek to use e-mail to
sell and purchase products or services (mean=5.4, median=7, mode=7). Several
respondents agreed with the survey statement that with electronic mail, they sought to
entertain themselves (mode=4, median=7, mode=3) (Table 4).
Overall, respondents sought and obtained communication gratifications with
co-workers, family and friends through electronic mail.
50
Demographic variables have been determinant factors in several past studies as
cited in Chapters n and m. Research Question five determined key demographic factors
in this study.
RQ5: What are the demographic profiles of respondents who use the Internet and
electronic mail?
Resuhs suggest that 70%) of respondents did not have children, while 30%) of
respondents did (Table 5). Respondents' children's ages were mainly 22 to 25 years of
age (12%o) and 26 and older (8%) (Table 5).
This study revealed that respondents were primarily between the ages of 18 and 30
years (69%o) (Table 5). Table 5 shows that 12%) of respondents were ages 31 to 40.
Respondents' ages 51 to 60 were 10%) of respondents and participants ages 41 to 50 were
9%). Respondents overthe age of 61 were 1%.
Religious affiliation results pointed toward Christianity at 93% (Table 5). Jewish,
Muslim, Atheist and other affiliations ranged from 3%) to 1%.
Annual income demographic percentages varied. For example, the majority of
respondents (36%) reported annual household incomes of more than $51,000 (Table 5).
Other income ranges were fairly close. For example, 19% of respondents made between
$31,000 and $40,999 (Table 5). Participants with incomes between $21,000 and $30,999
equaled 17%), while respondents with annual incomes less than $21,000 equaled 16%).
Respondents with incomes between $41,000 and $50,999 equaled 13%).
Table 5 indicates that 69%o of respondents were female. Male respondents
equaled31%(Table5).
In addition, studies noted in Chapters n and m found that computer experience
was a factor in determining how people utilize the hitemet. This study revealed that 80%)
of participants owned their own personal computer (Table 6). In addition, 84%o of
respondents utilized Intemet access at work.
51
Table 7 showed that 26%o of respondents had five years or more experience with
the Intemet. In addition, 25%o of participants responded that they had three years or more,
but less than four years of Intemet access experience. Respondents with four years or
more experience, but less than five years experience equaled 19%o. Respondents with two
years or more, but less than three years Intemet experience equaled 18%o. Respondents
with six months to one year and less than six months Intemet access experience ranged
between4%)to 1%©.
Anova tests were run to determine the significance of electronic mail and Intemet
uses and gratifications with respondents' demographic factors of age and income. Gender
differences were measured through a series of t-tests. Gender was not a significant factor
when paired with Intemet gratifications nor with electronic mail gratifications. Income
and age, however, were statistically significant with several similar Intemet and electronic
mail gratifications (Table 8 & Table 9).
Although the questionnaire initially identified respondents' age in five age
brackets, ages 51 to 60 and 61 and older were combined, because there only two
respondents ages 61 and older. Of the 24 Intemet uses and gratifications measured in this
study, seven statistically significant factors with age were found. For instance, age
compared with utilizhig the Intemet to keep abreast of current news was statistically
significant (F=1.2, df 301, p=.045) (Table 8). In addition, the correlation between age and
using the Intemet to cure the respondents' boredom was statistically significant (F=1.4, df
301, p=.001) (Table 8). The respondents' age with using the Intemet to fill time was also
stafístically significant (F=1.5, df 301, p=.0003) (Table 8). Likewise, age and the use of
the hitemet as a daily routine was statisfically significant (F=1.3, df 301, p=.012) (Table
8). In addition, age and the use of the Intemet for business research was statistically
significant (F=1.2, df 301, p=.03) (Table 8). Using the Intemet as an altemative to
newspapers and age was statistically significant (F=1.4, df 301, p=.001) (Table 8).
52
Moreover, using the Intemet as an altemative to magazmes for entertainment was
statistically significant (F=1.2, df 301, p=.03) (Table 8).
Yoimger respondents tended to have a lower mean, meaning they would typically
use the Intemet more to keep abreast of current news, to cure boredom, to fiU time, as a
daily routine, for business research and as an altemative to newspapers and magazines
than older respondents (Table 8).
In addition, of the 18 electronic mail uses and gratifications tested, four were
statistically significant with respondents' age. For instance, the use of electronic mail to
cure boredom compared with age was statistically significant (F=1.3, df 301, p=.008)
(Table 8). Also, the comparison of the use of electronic mail to fiU time and age was
statistically significant (F=1.3, df 301, p=.01). The use of electronic mail to maintain a
daily routine and age was statistically significant as well (F=1.3, df 301, p=.010). Finally,
the use of electronic mail to entertain the respondent when compared with age was
statistically significant (F=1.4, df 301, p=.002).
Electronic mail comparisons also increased with the respondents' age. Therefore,
younger respondents would typically use electronic mail more than older respondents to
cure boredom, to fill time, as a daily routine and to entertain themselves (Table 8).
Overall, means tended to increase with the age of the respondent. Therefore, older
respondents are less likely to use the Intemet and electronic mail to keep abreast of
current news, to cure boredom, to fill time, as a daily routine, for business research, nor as
an altemative to newspapers and magazines.
Anova tests were also run to determine the significance of income with Intemet
and e-mail uses and gratifications. When testing income with Intemet gratifications, six
of the 24 uses and gratifications were statisfically significant. For example, when
determining the significance of income with using the Intemet to cure respondents'
boredom, resuks were stafístically significant (F=1.4, df 301, p=.003) (Table 9). In
53
addition, resuhs were statistically significant when comparmg income with respondents'
use of the hitemet to fill fíme (F=1.5, df 301, p=.0004). Income with respondents' use of
the Intemet as part of a daily routine was also statisfícally significant (F=1.3, df 301,
p=.017). Also, respondents' use of the Intemet to gratify entertainment needs compared
with income was stafístically significant (F=1.5, df 301, p=.0003) (Table 9). The
comparison of respondents' use of the Intemet to perform academic research with income
was stafístically significant (F=1.4, df 301, p=.003). Similarly, the means of respondents'
use of the Intemet as an altemative to magazines for entertainment and income were
statistically significant (F=1.2, df 301, p=.04).
Respondents' reporting lower incomes typically had a lower mean, meaning they
would use the Intemet to cure boredom, to fiU time, as a daily routine, to entertain
themselves, for academic research and as an altemative to magazines more than
respondents reporting higher incomes (Table 9).
Furthermore, this study revealed similar significant results with income and
electronic mail uses and gratifications. Four of the 18 tested electronic mail uses and
gratifications were significant with respondents' income. For example, respondents' use
of e-mail to cure boredom compared with income was statistically significant (F=1.3, df
301, p=.007) (Table 9). Also, respondents' use of e-mail to fill time with income was
statistically significant (F=1.3, df 301, p=007). Moreover, respondents' use of e-mail to
maintain a daily routine compared to income means was statistically significant (F=1.2, df
301, p=.04). Finally, respondents' use of e-mail to entertain themselves compared with
income was statistically significant (F=1.4, df 301, p=.005).
Electronic mail comparisons also tended to increase with the respondents'
reported income. Therefore, respondents reporting lower incomes would typically use
electronic mail more than respondents reporting higher incomes to cure boredom, to fill
time, as a daily routine and to entertain themselves (Table 9).
54
hi conclusion, means typically increased with age and income. Therefore,
respondents are less likely to use the Intemet and electronic mail to cure boredom, fiU
time, as a daily routine and to entertain themselves with increase in age and income. In
addition, respondents wiU be less likely to use the Intemet as an altemative to magazines
with increase in age and income (Table 8, Table 9).
Uses and gratifications not listed in this portion of the results were not statistically
significant when compared with means by gender, age and income. See Table 8 and Table
9 to review significant demographic profile factors compared with Intemet and electronic
mail uses and gratifications.
55
Table 1
Respondents' Lengths and Sources of Internet Use
Variable Location of Internet Use home office school library other Participants last Internet Access past 24 hours more than 24 hours to past 2 days more than 2 days to past week more than 1 week to past 2 weeks more than 2 weeks to past 3 weeks more than past 3 weeks to past month more than 1 month ago Participants Weekly Internet Use more than 1 time per day 1 time per day less than 1 time per day to 3 times per week less than 3 times per week to 1 time per week less than 1 time per week never use Participants' Average Internet Use Each Log-On lessthan 15 minutes 15to30 minutes 31 to 45 minutes 46 minutes to 1 hour more than 1 hour to 2 hours more than 2 hours to 3 hours more than 3 hours to 4 hours more than 4 hours to 5 hours more than 5 hours never use Participant's Web Address Information Source Books Friends Follow links from other web pages Internet searching services Newsgroups Magazines Newspapers Television advertisements Electronic Mailings Other Sources Participants' Computer Format Macintosh/Apple Windows/PC Format Other
Frequency Percentaqe (N=302) %
115 177 10 0 0
262 26 10 2 2 0 0
223 44 24 11 0 0
31 95 70 50 28 14 0 0 14 0
63 245 244 49 132 73 151 103 103 70
14 288 0
38 59 3 0 0
87 9 3 1 1 0 0
74 15 8 4 0 0
1 32 23 17 9 5 0 0 5 0
21 81 81 16 44 24 5 34 34 23
5 95 0
56
Table 2
Respondents' Length of Electronic Mail Use
Variable Frequency Percentage (N=302)
Last E-mail Access past 24 hours more than 24 hours to past 2 days more than 2 days to past week more than 1 week to past 2 weeks more than 2 weeks to past 3 weeks more than past 3 weeks to past month more than 1 month ago
Average Weekíy E-mail Access more than 1 time per day 1 time per day less than 1 time per day to 3 times per week less than 3 times per week to 1 time per week less than 1 time per week never use Participants' Average E-mail Use Each Log-On lessthan 15 minutes 15to 30 minutes 31 to 45 minutes 46 minutes to 1 hour more than 1 hour to 2 hours more than 2 hours to 3 hours more than 3 hours to 4 hours more than 4 hours to 5 hours more than 5 hours never use Read or Send read messages only send messages only read and send messages Initiate or Respond initiate respond initiate and respond Why Participants Primarily Use E-mail to communicate with friends and family for work for academic purposes a combination of responses A, B and C
276 16 8 2 0 0 0
243 38 18 3 0 0
63 90 40 35 10 8 4 2 50 0
31 0
271
13 40 249
99 72 0
131
92 5 3 1 0 0 0
81 13 6 1 0 0
21 3 13 12 3 3 1 1 17 0
1 0 9
4 13 83
33 24 0 44
57
Table 3
Mean Ratings of Respondents' Internet Uses and Gratifications
Variable (N=302) Reduce Personai Insecurity through Chat Rooms Value Support Chat Room Companionship Social Contact through Chat Rooms Sell Products/Service for Business Escape Reality Purchase Product/Service for Business Alternative to Radio Alternative to TV for Entertainment Daily Routine Alternative to Magazine Gain Advice Cure Boredom Fill Time Alternative to TV for Information Entertainment Research for Academics Alternative to Newspaper Purchase Product/Service for Myself Access On-Line Newspapers Research for Business Product Information Keep Abreast of Current News Source of Information
Mean 6.4 6.4 6.3 6.2 5.6 5.3 5.2 5.1 4.9 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.2 3.8 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.3 1.7
St. Deviation 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 1.8 2.1 2.0 1.8 2.0 2.1 1.7 1.6 1.5
Mode 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 3 2 1 2 3
58
Table 4
Mean
Variable (N=302) Reduce personal insecurity Maintain daily routine Entertain myself
Ratings of Respondents' E-mail Uses
and Gratifications
Communicate with employees/businesses Gain support for values Seek companionship Escape reality Sell products/services Purchase products/services Gain advice Fill time Cure boredom Research Info. Product/Service Information Communicate with Work Contacts Maintain social contact Contact Family Contact Friends
Mean 6.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.8 5.7 5.6 5.4 5.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 3.9 3.9 3.6 3.5 3.3 3.2
St. Deviation 1.8 2.1 2.0 2.4 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.6 2.3 2.3 2.5
Mode 7 7 3 1 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 4 6 1 1 1 1
59
Table 5
Respondents' Demographic Profiles
Variable Frequency Percentage (N=302) % Gender Male Female Children yes no Children's Ages 0to2 3to5 6to8 9to11 12to15 16to18 19to21 22 to 25 26 and older Participants' Age 18to30 31 to 40 41 to 50 51 to 60 61 and older Religious Affiliation Christian Jewish Muslim Atheist Other Annual Income under $20,999 Between $21,000 and $30,999 Between $31,000 and $40,999 Between $41,000 and $50,999 Over $51,000 Area of Residence Lubbock, Texas Areas surrounding Lubbock, Texas Central Texas New Mexico South Texas Other
93 209
92 210
10 6 12 8 12 14 16 35 25
207 36 26 29 2
282 4 2 8 6
47 52 56 39 108
33 xas 4
74 0 73 116
31 69
3 7
3 2 4 3 4 5 5 12 8
69 12 9 10 1
93 1 1 3 2
16 17 19 13 36
11 1 25 0 24 39
60
Table 6
Respondents' Computer Ownership
Variable Participants Owning a Computer Participants Not Owning a Computer Participants w/ work Internet access Participants w/out work Internet access
Frequency 243 59
255 47
Percentage (N=302) % 80 20 84 16
61
Table 7
Respondents' Computer Experience
Variable Frequency Percentage (N=302) % less than 6 months 6 months to 1 year more than 1 year, but less than 2 years 2 years of more, but less than 3 years 3 years or more, but less than 4 years 4 years or more, but less than 5 years 5 years or more never used
4 12 23 53 74 58 78 0
1 4 8 18 25 19 26 0
62
Table 8 Mean Ratings of Uses and Gratifications for Internet and E-mail by Respondents' Age
Internet Uses and Gratíficatíons
Keep Abreast of Current News (m=2.1) Cure Boredom (m=3.2) Fill Time (m=3.3) Daily Routine (m=2.8) Business Research (m=3.0) Alternative to Newspapers (m=2.8) Altemative to Magazines (m=2.8)
E-mail Uses and Gratificatíons
Cure Boredom (m=3.3) Fill Time (m=3.4) Daily Routine (m=3.0) Entertain Themselves (m=2.9)
1 8 -30 (N=208)
2.2 4.0 3.9 4.2 2.7 3.2 4.2
4.0 4.1 3.8 3.8
31 -40 (N=36)
2.3 4.6 4.8 3.9 2.6 3.3 4.7
4.9 4.9 4.4 4.2
41 -50 (N=28)
2.6 4.9 4.9 5.3 3.2 4.3 5.2
5.0 5.1 4.7 4.8
51-H
N=30)
2.7 5.4 5.4 5.1 3.7 4.3 4.7
5.0 5.0 4.6 4.9
F
1.2 1.4 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.2
1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4
df
301 301 301 301 301 301 301
301 301 301 301
P
0.045 0.001 0.0003 0.012 0.03 0.001 0.03
0.008 0.01 0.01 0.002
63
Table 9 Mean Ratings of Uses and Gratifications for Internet and E-mail by Respondents' Income
Lessthan $21,000- $31,000- $41,000- $51,000+ F df p $21,000 $30,999 $40,999 $50,999 (N=47) (N=52) (N=58) (N=37) (N=108)
Internet Uses and Gratificatíons
Cure Boredom (m=3.8) Fill Time (m=4.0) Daily Routine (m=3.5) Entertain Themselves (m=3.4) Academic Research (m= =3.9)
3.8 3.7 4.1 2.9 2.6
3.8 3.7 4.0 3.2 3.2
4.0 3.8 4.3 3.1 3.6
5.1 4.9 4.6 3.8 4.0
4.5 4.7 4.6 3.9 3.7
1.4 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.4
301 301 301 301 301
0.003 0.0004 0.017 0.0003 0.003
Alternative to Magazines (m=3.4) 4.0 4.2 4.6 4.3 4.7 1.2 301 0.04
E-mail Uses and Gratlfications
Cure Boredom (m=4.0) Fill Time (m=4.0) Daily Routine (m=3.6) Entertain Themselves (m=3.5)
4.1 4.1 3.9 3.8
3.8 4.0 3.8 3.5
4.2 4.0 3.7 3.9
4.3 4.5 4.4 4.3
4.8 4.8 4.3 4.4
1.3 1.3 1.2 1.4
301 0.007 301 0.007 301 0.04 301 0.005
64
CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Chapter V will discuss the conclusions and limitations to this study. In addition,
Chapter V considers potential ideas for future studies linked to the Uses and
(jratifications Theory.
Uses and Gratifications of the Intemet
Although researchers and mass media theorists argue whether or not the Intemet
should be considered a mass medium, results of this study revealed that respondents used
the Intemet as an altemative source of information to other mass media. For instance,
respondents answered that they considered the Intemet as an altemative source of
information to newspaper and television. However, participants did not utilize the
Intemet as an altemative source for entertainment. This may change in the near future
with the growing popularity and advancement of streaming video on the Net, as well as
music downloading capabiHties and radio stations linking to the Intemet.
Again, respondents stated that they used the Intemet to seek informational
gratifications. Participants stated that they utiUzed the Intemet as a source of information,
to keep abreast of current news and to access on-Hne newspapers (Table 3). These results
correspond with Dobos and Dominick's 1988 study on gratification factors across aU
media. They found seeking information to be a prominent uses and gratifications factor
(Dixon, 1993, pp. 25-26). Richard Vincent in his 1997 study also found that college
students utilized print media to satisfy needs to know current events (Vincent & Basil,
1997). In addition, Hunter in his 1997 hitemet and electronic mail uses and gratifications
study among Boston College students and faculty, found that college faculty mainly
65
sought to obtain useful research information and to keep abreast of current news and
information (Hunter, 1997). This exploratory study also confirmed informational results
of Stafford and Stafford's fmdings in their 1998 exploratory study of uses and
gratifications of the World Wide Web. They found that respondents used the Intemet
mostly for information purposes. Electronic mail, research, news gathering and
entertainment were among other top uses of the Intemet by respondents (Stafford &
Stafford, 1998, p. 178).
In addition to informational gratifications, participants responded that the Intemet
was a research source for business, academics and product or service information (Table
3). Stafford and Stafford in their 1998 uses and gratifications exploratory study of the
World Wide Web, also found that their respondents sought news and research
information from the Intemet (Stafford & Stafford, 1998, p. 178). Respondents of this
study again believed the Intemet to be a primary source of information.
Also, the majority of the respondents owned a personal computer (80%) and used
their Intemet access at work (84%) (Table 6). The bulk of respondents (74%) also
answered that they accessed the Intemet more than one time per day and used the Intemet
15 to 30 minutes each time they logged on (Table 1). Therefore, respondents are
constantly in touch with the Intemet at home and at work (37% accessed Intemet at home
and 59% accessed the Intemet at work). As the growth of the Intemet expands and
Intemet audiences increase, theorists and researchers may soon change their arguments
and realize the vast and diverse audiences that the Intemet reaches.
Tlses and Gratifications of Electronic Mail
Electronic Mail is becoming an almost vital communication tool for businesses
and for personal use, with capabilities to contact co-workers, businesses, friends and
family. In businesses, it is important to have written documentation of transactions.
66
information, intemal and extemal requests. For personal communication, e-mail users can
communicate on their own time. This study revealed that respondents sought and
obtained communication gratifications from electronic mail.
Table 2 revealed that 81% of respondents utilized electronic mail more than one
time per day. In addition, most respondents (30%) spent an average of 15 to 30 minutes
e-mailing during each use. When asked to respond why participants primarily used
e-mail, resuhs showed that respondents (44%) used e-mail to communicate with a
combination of friends, family or work and academic purposes. Table 4 revealed that
respondents' gratifications sought and obtained pointed toward communication and
contact. This study's electronic mail gratification results paralleled Payne, Severin, and
Dozier's 1988 uses and gratifications study, revealing that social contact or interaction are
among key uses and gratifications sought and obtained (Payne, Severin, & Dozier, 1988,
pp. 909-915). In addition, Swifl's 1989 BBS study found that respondents sought and
obtained the foUowing gratifications: keeping in touch with family and friends,
exchanging information and meeting people (p. 109). Also, Hunter in his 1997 study of
Intemet and electronic mail use at Boston CoUege, found that the majority of Boston
College students used e-mail mainly to communicate with family and friends (Hunter,
1997).
One difference found in past uses and gratifications studies and results of this
study, is that participants in this study responded that they did not utilize electronic mail
or the Intemet to satisfy escapism or boredom needs. For instance, in 1973, Katz, Haas
and Gurevitch found that their audiences under review conceming radio, television,
newspapers, books and film, used these media to satisfy escapism needs and for killing
time (p. 164). In addition, Pearlin in 1959, found that television audiences utilized this
media to satisfy escapism gratifications (Bryant, 1994, p. 419). Respondents in this study
typically disagreed with any statements regarding their use of the Intemet or electronic
67
mail to fill time or to satisfy escapism needs. However, respondents may not be claiming
that they would "surf' the Net to fill time. This is a bias represented in many survey
formats. For example, respondents may answer the question based on how they think the
survey administrator wishes them to answer. In addition, wording of "to escape" or "to
cure boredom" may be seen by the responder as negative. Wording of statements in
surveys may also introduce bias.
Demographic Profiles
Demographic variables are significant to future researchers, businesses and mass
media determining who they should target for Intemet messages and information. The
demographic profiles of Intemet and electronic mail users in uses and gratifications
studies wiU help them to determine their specific audiences.
The demographic profile of this study was as follows. The average user of this
sample was female and had an average annual income of more than $51,000. Her
religious affiliation was Christianity, her age was between 18 and 30 and she had no
children. These results mirrored a Georgia Tech's study in 1998 of the average Intemet
user, with the exception of the respondents' gender. It found that the average Intemet user
was male, had an average income of over $50,000 annually and lived in the United States
(www.gvu.gatech.edu, 1998).
In comparison, the U.S., Texas and Lubbock had the following general
demographic profiles of citizens. As of July 1999, the highest percentage of Americans
were ages 15 to 64. The majority were female. In 1992, the CIA World Factbook revealed
that 83.5% of Americans were white, 12.4% were black, 3.3% were Asian and 0.8%) were
American Indian. The majority of Americans were Protestant (56%) and Roman
Catholics were 28%. Jewish Americans made up 2% of the population and other religions
and no religion were the remaining 14% (The World Factbook ~ U.S., 1999). In 1998,
68
the U.S. Census Bureau found that the average U.S. citizen age 25 to 64, had full-time
median eamings fi*om $25,500 to $28,400 (U.S. Census Bureau, 1998).
The 2000 Texas Almanac revealed similar profiles for Texans. For example, the
majority of Texans were white. Personal income per capita was approximately $26,000 in
the year 2000 (Texas Almanac, 2000).
According to Market Lubbock's 1999 population assessment, more than 64%) of
Lubbock residents were between the ages of 18 and 64. Anglo residents equaled 62.7%,
while Hispanic residents equaled 25.6%. The per capita income equaled $16,462 (Market
Lubbock, 1999). Although the per capita income of Lubbock residents were lower than
this study's average income, it is important to note that the average Lubbock citizen may
not be an Intemet user.
This study's gender results may reflect current research that women are an
ever-increasing audience of Intemet and electronic mail. For example, in 1999 Nielsen
Media Research and Commerce Net revealed that for the first time, there was an increase
in women Intemet users. Women Intemet users reached the 10 million mark in 1999
(cyberatlas.intemet.com/big_picture/demographics/article, 1999). Also, Strategis Group
found that women are now driving the growth of the Intemet in the U.S. In addition,
PeopleSupport found that as of May 2000, almost two in three online shoppers in the U.S.
were women. In January 2000, women made up 50% of Intemet users for the first time,
according to Nielsen NetRatings (NUA Intemet Surveys, 2000).
Computer experience has also been a determinant factor in past Intemet uses and
gratifications studies. For example, Rafaeli in his 1989 study of Stanford University's
bulletin board system found the demographic determinant factor to be computer
experience. Kerr and Hiltz also foimd that computer experience led to more computer use
(Swift, 1989, p. 50). This study parallels these findings as well. Table 7 reveals that the
69
majority of respondents have either five years or more of Intemet experience (26%) or
more than three years experience, but less than four years of experience (25%)).
Results from tests of significance values between uses and gratifications of
electronic mail and the Intemet with age, gender and income, were important for
researchers to note when determining key demographic factors. No significance was
found with gender when comparing Intemet and e-mail uses and gratifications. Male and
female users may seek similar uses and gratifications of the Intemet and electronic mail
technology. In addition, the majority of significant e-mail and Intemet results for both
income and age were similar. Respondents tended to disagree with these uses and
gratifications statements. For example, uses and gratifications for e-mail and the Intemet
linked with fiUing time, curing boredom, and utilizing them as a daily routine were all
significant. Respondents typically disagreed with all these statements in the questionnaire.
In addition, results were significant for both age and income when comparing the
means of the use of the Intemet as an altemative to magazines for entertainment.
Respondents also generally disagreed with this statement in the questionnaire. Also of
importance to note, both Intemet and electronic mail uses and gratitfications tended to
increase with age and income. In most studies, age and income typically correspond, since
as age typically increases, so does income. Therefore, age and income were key factors
when determining whether respondents used the Intemet and electronic mail to gratify
boredom/time-filling needs or to use them as an altemative to media. However, there is a
possibility that the larger proportions of some groups in Tables 8 and 9 caused a greater
significance. For instance, in Table 8 respondents ages 18 to 30 made up 208 of the 301
respondents. In addition, in Table 9, respondents reporting an average annual income of
$51,000 or above made up 108 of the 301 total respondents.
70
Limitations of the study
This study was exploratory in nature; therefore, there are several limitations to
acknowledge. First, because of the small sample size of the Lubbock Intemet Service
Providers' audience in comparison with the millions of Intemet and electronic mail users
worldwide, results cannot be generalized. An additional limitation is that Intemet and
e-mail capabilities are still in progress. Technology is continuously advancing; therefore,
uses and gratifications of both the Intemet and electronic mail are ever-changing and
could be quickly outdated.
Also, when analyzing demographics, several issues could have been considered in
this study. For example, county areas were not defined in the study and the respondents'
selection was at their discretion by region in Texas. This questionnaire failed to ask
respondents their marital status and level of education. Both may have been key
demographic factors.
Moreover, the method of data collection could have presented a potential
limitation. Intemet surveys are limited to only Intemet users. In 1997, the typical Intemet
user was male, in his late teens to early thirties and his education and socioeconomic
status were slightly above average. Researchers must keep in mind the biases presented
by typical Intemet users (Schmidt, 1997). Also, Intemet surveying does not allow the
researcher in most cases to choose who will and will not participate in the survey. Any
worldwide browser may choose to select the web site and respond to the survey (Stafford
& Stafford, 1998, p. 177). Respondents are not limited to any one region.
Also, the number of Intemet surveys are so limited now because of numerous and
persistent computer spamming (Wimmer, 1997). Therefore, it is safe to assume that lower
numbers of completed questionnaires were reached in this study than could have been
without computer spamming. Li addition, to sampling error, The Gallup Organization
lists several limitations to surveys and sampling. For instance, in each of their surveys,
71
Gallup states that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can
introduce error or bias in public opinion polls (Moore, 1998). In addition, Wimmer and
Dominick in a 1997 issue oíMass Media Research, stated that surveys may introduce
bias, because the researcher can not attest to the respondent telling the tmth about age,
socioeconomic status, religion and so forth. Respondents also may tend to answer in a
marmer that they think the researcher wishes them to respond.
An additional setback of this study was using Survey Assistant as the data
collector through the Intemet. The Survey Assistant administrator was somewhat
available for questions via e-mail; however, he was not always able to aid in the initial
survey set-up. Most Intemet programs in 1999 and 2000, such as AOL 5.0, were too
advanced to run the Survey Assistant program. With this study, the Intemet Service
Provider program under AOL, had to be converted to AOL 4.0 in order to run the Survey
Assistant program. In addition, once the data was collected on the Survey Assistant web
link, data were formatted as text. In order to process the collected data for data
manipulation purposes, the data had to be re-entered with numeric values.
Also, the Lubbock Intemet Service Providers presented a limitation. Although
both agreed to participate in the study, both were not easily accessible and did not link the
survey for several months once the survey was ready. In addition, nearing the end of the
study, one of the Intemet Service Providers went out of business.
Although there were several limitations presented with this study, results may
provide additional information for future researchers to build on past uses and
gratifications studies. The results in this study provide an idea of why and how this
study's audience actively used the hitemet and electronic mail to gratify their needs. Any
information of an audiences' motivations or gratifications sought fi-om the Intemet and
electronic mail will help to better serve the audience, allow businesses and marketers to
drive more consumers to their sites and wiU aid in the betterment of the Intemet industry.
72
Future Research
It is important to note that this study is only exploratory as fiiture researchers
analyze the resuhs. Future researchers may want to include more than two Intemet
Service Providers or more diverse web site hosts in order to generalize results across a
given sample in an effort to decrease sample bias. It would be desirable for a researcher to
team up with a nationwide or worldwide Intemet Service Provider, such as AOL or
Yahoo, in order to generalize results across a much broader audience.
In addition, future researchers may want to address specific audiences when
studying uses and gratifications of the Intemet. For instance, researchers may want to
focus specifically on how and why businesses use the Intemet and electronic mail, or how
universities specifically use the Intemet and electronic mail. Also, future researchers may
want to consider a study comparing Intemet-using adults with children versus
Intemet-using adults without children.
Furthermore, as technology advances, the Intemet may soon become an altemative
for most mass media. For example, radio stations are now picked up over the Web,
newspapers are already on-line and streaming video is becoming more common via the
Intemet. It may be important to explore whether audiences consider the Intemet as an
altemative to mass media five years from now as opposed to the year 2000.
Finally, researchers may want to replicate studies to confirm and to build on
current results. Although many theorists argue that uses and gratifications studies do not
have much validity, the results of this study closely parallel the resuhs of past uses and
gratifications studies of various mass media.
73
REFERENCES
Abbate, Janet. 1999. Inventing the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Baran, Stanley and Davis, Dennis. 1995. Mass Communication Theory. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
Becker, L. 1976. "Two Tests of Media Gratificafions: Watergate and the 1974 Election." Journalism Quarterly, 53, pp. 28-33.
Berleson, B. (Ed.) 1949. What Missing the Newspaper Means. Harper and Row, New York.
"The Big Picture: Females Lead Online Growth Spurt." 1999. http ://cyberatlas. intemet.com/big_picture/demographics/article.
Blumler, J.G.1979. "The Role of Theory in Uses and Gratifications Studies." Communication Research, 6, pp. 9-36.
Bryant, Jennings and Zillman, Dolf 1994. Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Bush, Alan J. 1998. "Advertiser Perceptions of the Intemet as a Marketing Communications Tool," Journal of Advertising Research, pp. 17-26.
"CyberAtlas. The Numbers Behind E-mail." 2 February 1999. www.intemet.com.
December, J. and Randall, N. 1994. The World Wide Web Unleashed. hidianapolis, IN: Sams Publishing.
Dixon, Janet. "Uses and Grafifícations Theory to Predict Seniors' Use of an Electronic Commimity." Dissertation, University of San Francisco, Dec. 1993.
"E-mail Market." Feb. 2000. www.mail.com.
"FAS Cyberstrategy Project." October 1997. www. fas.org/cp/netstats.htm.
Greenberg, B. 1974. "Gratificafions of Television Viewing and Their Correlates for Brifish Children. " In Research (pp.71-92), Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Gromov, Gregory R. 1998. History ofthe Internet and WWW: The Roads and Crossroads oflnternet History, Network World.
74
Hardy, Henry Edward. 1993. Master's Thesis "The History of the Net." History_of_the_Net.htmlatinfo.isoc.org.
Homa, J. 1988. "The Mass Media as Leisure: A Westem-Canadien Case." Society and Leisure, 7/, pp. 283-301.
"How the Net Works." December 1999. http://coverage.cnet.com/Content/Features/Techno/Networks/ss20.html.
Hunter, Chris. 1997. Master's Thesis "The Uses and (jratífications of Project Agora." www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/chunter/agora-uses/.
"Intemet Statistics." 1998. www.gvu.gatech.edu.
James, M.1992. An Exploratory Study ofthe Perceived Benefîts ofElectronic Bulletin Board Use and Their Impact on Other Communication Activities. Dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee.
Katz, Elihu, Blumler and Gurevitch, Michael. 1974. "Utilization of Mass Communication by the Individual." The Uses and Gratifîcations ofMass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
. Katz, Elihu, Haas, Hadassah and Gurevitch, Michael. 1973. "On the Use of the Mass Media for Important Things." American Sociological Review.
Lometti, G., Reeves, B. and Bybee, C. 1977. "Investigating the Assumption of Uses and Gratifications Research." Communication Research, 7, pp. 319-334.
"Market Lubbock." 1999. http://www.inlubbock.com/directory/1999est.html.
Meyer, N.D. 1980. "Computer-based message systems: A Taxonomy, Telecommunication Policy," 4 (2), pp. 128-133.
Moschovifis, Christos J.P., Poole, Hilary, Schuyler, Hilary and Senft, Theresa M. 1999. History ofthe Internet. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.
Moore, David W. 1998. "Public's More Positive Feelings May Reflect Real Decline in Crime as Well as Own Precautionary Measures," Gallup News Service, 1998.
Moore, David W. 1998."Public Divided on Need for New Racial hiitiatives," Gallup News Service.
NUA Surveys. 1999. http://www.nua.ie/surveys.
75
NUA Surveys. 2000. http://www.nua.ie/surveys.
Palmgreen, P. and Rosengren, K.1985. "Uses and Gratifications Research: The Past Ten Years." Media Gratifications Research: Current Perspectives. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Pantura, Daniel. 1995. Master's Thesis, Texas Tech University, "Use of the Intemet by U.S. Radio Stafions."
Payne, G., Severin, J. and Dozier, D. 1988. "Uses and Gratificatíons Motives as Indicators of Magazine Readership." Journalism Quarterly, 65, pp. 909-915.
PBS Online. 1998. "Life on the Intemet," www.pbs.org/intemet/ timeline.
Rice, R.E., Grant, A.E., Schmitz, J., and Torobin, J. 1990. "Individual and Network Influences on the Adoption and Perceived Outcomes of Electronic Messaging." Social Networks, 12, p. 28.
Rubin, A. and Rubin, R. 1982. "Older Persons' TV Viewing Pattems and Motivafions." Communications Research, 9, pp. 287-313.
Salwen, Michael B. and Stacks, Don W. (ed.) Raybum, J.D. E. 1996. "Uses and Gratifications." An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research.
Santa Clara University. 1998. "Access, Intemet and Public Libraries."
Severin and Tankard. 1999. "Uses and Gratifications: Current Relevance." http: uts.cc.utexas.edu.
Schmidt, W.C. 1997. "Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers," 29 (2), pp. 274-279. www.or.psychology.dal.ca.
Shaver, J. 1983. "The Uses of Cable Television." Master's Thesis, University of Kentucky, Lexington.
Smith, H.T. 1984 May 1-4. "Computer-based message services: Proceedings of the Intemational Federation for Information Processing (IFIP). Working Conference on Computer-Based Message Services;" Nottingham, England. Amersterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.
76
Stafford, Thomas F. and Stafford, Marla Royne. 1998. "Uses and Gratifications of the World Wide Web: a Preliminary Study." The Proceedings of the 1998 Conference of The American Academy of Advertising. Washington State University, PuUman Washington.
Swift, Clinton R. July 1989. "Audience Activity in Computer-Mediated Communication." Dissertation, School of Joumalism, Indiana University.
"Texas Almanac." 2000. http://www.texasalmanac.com/texasrank_2000.html.
Treese, Win. "The Intemet hidex." 11 Nov. 1995;2 Jan, 1996; 31 May 1998; 31 May 1999. www.openmarket.com.
"U.S. Census Bureau." 1998. http://www.census.gov.hhes/income/income98/in98em.html.
"U.S. Households Continue to Go Online." Feb. 19, 2000. www.intemet.com.
Vincent, Richard C. and Basil, Michael D. 1997 Summer. "CoUege students' news gratifications, media use and current events knowledge." Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media. 41 (3) pp.380-392.
"Who Uses the Net Anyways?" Feb, 2000. http://mysiteinc.com.
Wimmer, Roger D. and Dominick, Joseph R. 1997. Mass Media Research; Wadsworth Publishing Company.
"The World Factbook - United States." 1999. http ://www. odci. gov/cia/publications/factbook/us .html.
Zinsmeister, Karl. 1996 March" Intemet." American Enterprise. 7 (2) p.l7.
77
APPENDDC
QUESTIONNAIRE
78
QUESTIONNAIRE
Uses and Gratifications of the Intemet
Hello, I am a graduate student in the Texas Tech University School of Mass Communications. I would Hke to ask you a couple of questions. It will take approximately 10 minutes of your time. We would like to ask you several questions about your thoughts on Intemet and E-mail use. Are you over the age of 18? (If YES, CONTINUE. IF NO, PLEASE TERMINATE QUESTIONNAIRE.) The following are general questions regarding your Intemet/World Wide Web and e-mail use.
1. Do you own your own computer? a)yes b)no
2. Do you use a computer with Intemet access at work? a)yes b)no
3. How long have you been using Intemet services? a) less than 6 months b) 6 months to 1 year c) more than 1 year, but less than 2 years d) 2 years or more, but less than 3 years e) 3 years or more, but less than 4 years f) 4 years or more, but less than 5 years g) 5 years or more h) never used
4. In which locations do you most frequently access hitemet services? (one response please) a) home b) office c) school d) library e) other
79
5. When was the last time you accessed Intemet services, excluding your current access? a) past 24 hours b) more than 24 hours to past 2 days c) more than 2 days to past week d) more than 1 week to past 2 weeks e) more than 2 weeks to past 3 weeks f) more than past 3 weeks to past month g) more than 1 month ago
6. During a typical week, how often do you use Intemet services? a) more than 1 time per day b) 1 time per day c) less than 1 time per day to 3 times per week d) less than 3 times per week to 1 time per week e) less than 1 time per week f) never use
7. On average, approximately how long do you use Intemet services each time you sign-on? a) less than 15 minutes b) 15 to 30 minutes c) 31 to 45 minutes d) 46 minutes to 1 hour e) more than 1 hour to 2 hours f) more than 2 hours to 3 hours g) more than 3 hours to 4 hours h) more than 4 hours to 5 hours i) more than 5 hours j) never use
8. How do you find out about the World Wide Web pages/sites? (Please check all that apply.) a. Books b. Friends c. Follow links fi-om other web pages d. Intemet searching services e. Newsgroups f Magazines g. Newspapers h. Television advertisements i. Electronic mailings j . Other sources
80
Using a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 meaning Strongly Agree and 7 meaning Strongly Disagree, indicate how much you agree with the following statement. Using the Intemet/World Wide Web helps me to ...
9. Seek companionship through chat rooms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10. Maintain social contact through chat rooms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. Reduce personal insecurity through chat rooms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. Gain support for my values through chat rooms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. Gain advice through posted information on the World Wide Web 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. Utilize the Intemet as a source of informafion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. Keep abreast of current news 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. To access on-line newspapers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
17. Escape reality 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. To cure my boredom 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
19.FiHtime 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. Maintain a daily routine 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
21. Entertain myself 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
81
22. Research for academics 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
23. Research for business 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
24. Search for product information 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
25. Purchase a product/service 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
26. Sell products/services for my business 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
27. Purchase products/services for my business 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
28. Use the Intemet as an altemative to newspaper in order to leam news 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
29. Use the Intemet as an altemative to magazines for entertaiimient 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
30. Use the Intemet as an altemative to television for entertainment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
31. Use the Intemet as an altemative to television for information 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
32. Use the Intemet as an altemative to radio for entertainment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
The following are general questions regarding your e-mail use. 33. When was the last time you accessed your e-mail accoimt, excluding your current access? a. past 24 hours b. more than 24 hours to past 2 days c. more than 2 days to past week d. more than 1 week to past 2 weeks e. more than 2 weeks to past 3 weeks f more than past 3 weeks to past month g. more than 1 month ago
82
34. During a typical week, how often do you utilize your e-mail account? a. more than 1 time per day b. 1 time per day c. less than 1 time per day to 3 times per week d. less than 3 times per week to 1 time per week e. less than 1 time per week f. never use
35. On average, approximately how long do you use your e-mail services each fime you sign-on? a. less than 15 minutes b. 15 to 30 minutes c. 31 to 45 minutes d. 46 minutes to 1 hour e. more than 1 hour to 2 hours f more than 2 hours to 3 hours g. more than 3 hours to 4 hours h. more than 4 hours to 5 hours i. more than 5 hours j . never use
36. The last time you used electronic mail, did you ... (one response only) a. read messages only b. send messages only c. read and send messages
37. Do you primarily Initiate or Respond to electronic mail? a. initiate b. respond c. initiate and respond
38. Do you use electronic mail most frequently...(one response only) a. to communicate with friends and family b. for work (communicate with associates) c. for academic purposes (commimicate with professors, librarians, etc.) d. a combination of responses A, B and C
83
Using a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 meaning Strongly Agree and 7 meaning Strongly Disagree, indicate how much you agree with the following statements.
39. Electronic mail helps me to stay in contact with my friends. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
40. Electronic mail helps me stay in contact with my family. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
41. Electronic mail helps me find useful research mformation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
42. Electronic mail helps me find useful product/service information. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
43. Electronic mail helps me communicate with work contacts. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Using a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 meaning Strongly Agree and 7 meaning Strongly Disagree, indicate how much you agree with the following statement. Using e-mail helps me to...
44. Seek companionship 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
45. Maintain social contact 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
46. Reduce personal insecurity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
47. Gain support for my values 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
48. Gain advice 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
49. Escape reality 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
50. Cure my boredom 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
84
51.FiHtime 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
52. Maintain a daily routine 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
53. Entertain myself 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
54. Communicate with fellow employees or other businesses 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
55. Sell products/services for my business 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
56. Purchase products/services for my business 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
The following are general questions conceming your computer use and demographics. 57. What computer format do you primarily use? a) Macintosh/Apple b) Windows/PC Format c) Other
58. Which Intemet Service Provider do you currently use? a) WindmiH b) The Door c) America On-Line d) Other
59. Do you have any children? If no, skip to question #61. a)yes b)no
60. If so, what are their ages? a) 0 to 2 b) 3 to 5 c) 6 to 8 d ) 9 t o l l e )12to l5 f )16tol8 g)19to21 h) 22 to 25 i) 26 and older
85
61. Which age group best describes you? a) 18to30 b)31to40 c)41to50 d)51to60 e) 61 and older
62. Which religious affiliation best describes you? a) Christian b) Jewish c) Muslim d) Atheist e) Other
63. Which annual income best describes you? a) under $20,999 b) Between $21,000 and $30,999 c) Between $31,000 and $40,999 d) Between $41,000 and $50,999 e)Over $51,000
64. What is your gender? a) Male b) Female
65. Which best describes your area of residency? a) Lubbock, Texas b) Areas surrounding Lubbock, Texas c) Central Texas d) New Mexico e) South Texas f) Other
86
PERMISSION TO COPY
In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a
master's degree at Texas Tech University or Texas Tech University Health Sciences
Center, I agree that the Library and my major department shall make it freely
avaUable for research purposes. Permission to copy this thesís for scholarly
purposes may be granted by the Director of the Library or my major professor.
It is understood that any copying or pubHcation of this thesis for financial gain
shall not be allowed without my further written permission and that any user
may be liable for copyright infringement.
Agree (Permission is granted.)
Disagree (Permission is not granted.)
Student's Signature Date