의제설정 이론의 정향욕구에 관한 연구

Abstract

The Need for Orientation (NFO) is known for explaining ‘why people cognize media issues as important’, the key psychological backbone in agenda-setting theory. It seemed to successfully describe how media effects take place, specifically in first level studies with traditional media settings. Relevance and uncertainty, the very two components of NFO, have been regarded as the strong variables to support the effects, and thus treated as naturally solid predictors which were barely scrutinized further to guarantee the theory. Since the emergence of new media armed with internet technology, however, new questions have loomed asking whether the robust power of the two variables can be maintained in defining the agenda-setting effects. Such questions were encompassed with curiosity about if the original NFO variables can support the other phases of agenda-setting effects including the second level dimension. Along with these queries, scholars suggested combining the agenda-setting research with other media effects theories including uses and gratification to enhance its explanatory power. In that regard, this article explores if there is any chance to find or develop NFO variables to elucidate what causes the agenda-setting effects to occur. To meet the goal, this study firstly attempted to refine relevance, the fundamental NFO variables, with two dimensions (cognitive and affective). The cognitive dimension was then divided into four sub-dimensions (topical, substantive, situational, and surveillant), and the affective dimension into another four sub-dimensions (hedonic, self, belonging, and aesthetic). Following the preceding literatures, author borrowed Saracevic’s conceptual manifestation of relevance (1996) and utilized some of the original ideas of NFO researchers (Camaj, 2014; Matthes, 2005; McCombs & Weaver, 1973; Weaver, 1980; Valenzuela & Chernov, 2016) and uses and gratification theorists (Katz, Blumler & Gurevitch, 1973; Katz, Haas, & Gurevitch, 1973; McQuail, Blumler & Brown, 1972; Palmgreen, Wenner, & Rayburn, 1980; Papacharissi & Rubin, 2000; Rubin, 1981; Rubin & Perse, 1987) in order to theoretically support these 8 variables. Then, uncertainty, the other original NFO component, was also categorized into 8 dimensions, accordingly, based upon the uncertainty orientation theory (Brouwers & Sorrentino, 1993; Kagan, 1972; Rokeach, 1960). And also the two components of NFO, relevance, and uncertainty were redefined based on utilitarian cognitive theory which was theoretical backbone of NFO and expectancy-value theory which was media user’s motivation-oriented. At the result, relevance was conceptualized as inclination of something to get to seek information and uncertainty discontent of self-esteem which ignites people to seek information to meet their own appetite. And NFO is the motivation to make people seek information, combined with relevance and uncertainty. Therefore this study had three research questions and models. RQ1 is about statistical classification of Relevance to 8 types (4 cognitive & 4 affective relevance sub-variables), RQ2 is statistical classification of Uncertainty into 8 types (4 cognitive & 4 affective uncertainty sub-variables) and RQ3 is statistical classification of NFO to 8 types (4 cognitive & 4 affective combined [relevance x uncertainty] sub-variables). After organizing the conceptual variables, this study conducted a survey (N=334) to find if they can be employed as feasible variables to explain agenda-setting effects. Factor analyses revealed that each of the variables had satisfactory internal reliabilities (All Cronbach’s Alpha values are over .7 excepting ‘Topical uncertainty’). And all research models’ structural validities are not perfect but statistically meaningful. addition, the results are so important, in the way that the goal of this study is exploring various variables encompassed NFO and developing the measurement tools It is believed that the results of this study can lead various ways to consider the nature of NFO, and it is hoped that the variables investigated here will eventually grow to be some effective keys to widen the understanding of agenda-setting effects. Numerous studies including experiments with different settings are highly recommended to achieve this end.;의제설정 이론에서 정향욕구는 관련성과 불확실성으로 정의되며, 관련성과 불확실성으로 나눠진다. 즉, 정향욕구는 수용자가 관련 있다고 생각하는 정보 혹은 자신이 확신할 수 없는 미지의 정보에 대해 알고자 하는 동기라 할 수 있으며, 그 하위 요소는 관련성과 불확실성으로 구분될 수 있다. 그러므로 정향욕구는 사람들이 높은 관련성과 불확실성을 가짐으로서 매체의 정보를 추구하게 하고, 결국 매체가 생각하는 대상에 대해 생각하게 만드는 역할을 한다고 볼 수 있다. 그러므로 본 연구는 빠른 매체 환경 변화로 인한 이용자의 심리적 측면 중요, 2차 의제설정 단계에서의 정향욕구의 설명력 부족과 같은 한계에서 출발했다. 그러므로 정향욕구에 대한 개념적 진단을 실시했으며, 이를 통해 하위 요소인 관련성과 불확실성에 대한 기존 정의를 보다 구체화하고자 하는 시도를 했다. 그 결과, 본 연구는 관련성과 불확실성 그리고 두 하위 요소의 결합물인 정향욕구를 인지적 차원에서 4가지 하위 변인(화제적, 실제적, 상황적, 사회감시적), 정서적 차원의 4가지 하위 변인(쾌락적, 자아적, 소속적, 위안적) 총 8개의 변인으로 구분하고자 했다. 그에 대한 검증은 확인적 요인분석을 통해 이뤄졌으며, 의미 있는 모형 적합도 수준을 보였다. 궁극적으로 본 연구는 정향욕구가 매체의 생각과 대중의 생각 사이에 발생하는 차이를 설명할 수 있도록 개념적 발판을 마련하고자 했다. 다시 말해, 정향욕구로서 의제설정 효과를 설명하기 이전에, 정향욕구로서 적용가능한지 그 가능성을 확인하는 탐색적 연구라 할 수 있다. 그 결과 본 연구가 설정한 변인들이 통계적으로 정향욕구를 설명할 수 있는 설명력을 가졌음을 확인할 수 있었으며, 앞으로 보다 체계화될 수 있는 방향성을 제시했다고 볼 수 있다. 그러므로 본 연구를 통해 정향욕구가 함의하고 있는 다양한 측면들을 이끌어낼 수 있는, 이론적으로 체계적으로 정립할 수 있는 다양한 시도들이 이뤄졌으면 한다.