The Role of Epistemic Emotions and Empathy in Eudaimonic Entertainment Experiences and Political News Processing

Felix Dietrich, Tanja Kugler, Sarah Hennings, Celine Conrad, Frank M. Schneider, & Peter Vorderer

Paris, France, 26-30 May 2022

Introduction

International, radical decline in sales of print newspapers

Chung, D. S., & Yoo, C. Y. (2008). Audience motivations for using interactive features: Distinguishing use of different types of interactivity on an online newspaper. Mass Communication and Society, 11(4), 375–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205430701791048

Maier, S. R., Slovic, P., & Mayorga, M. (2017). Reader reaction to news of mass suffering: Assessing the influence of story form and emotional response. Journalism, 18(8), 1011–1029. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916663597

Research, P. (2021, June 29). Trends and facts on newspapers: State of the news media. Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project. https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/newspapers/

Reinemann, C., Stanyer, J., Scherr, S., & Legnante, G. (2012). Hard and soft news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism, 13(2), 221–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911427803

  • Journalists include emotionalizing elements in news reporting (Reinemann et al., 2012)
    • Interactive features in online articles generate curiosity and appeal to the exploratory drive of the reader (Chung & Yoo, 2008)
    • Reporting style that fosters empathy with subjects portrayed in the news (Maier et al., 2017)

Surprised–curious–confused, empathetic, and entertained?

Political information processing and entertainment experiences

Bartsch, A., & Schneider, F. M. (2014). Entertainment and politics revisited: How non-escapist forms of entertainment can stimulate political interest and information seeking. Journal of Communication, 64(3), 369–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12095

Schneider, F. M., Bartsch, A., & Leonhard, L. (2021). An extended dual-process model of entertainment effects on political information processing and engagement. In P. Vorderer & C. Klimmt (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Entertainment Theory (pp. 536–557). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190072216.013.29

Epistemic emotions

D’Mello, S., Lehman, B., Pekrun, R., & Graesser, A. (2014). Confusion can be beneficial for learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 153–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.05.003

D’Mello, S., & Graesser, A. (2012). Dynamics of affective states during complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.10.001

Hookway, C. (2008). Epistemic immediacy, doubts and anxiety: On a role for affective states in epistemic evaluation. In G. Brun, U. Doğuoğlu, & D. Kuenzle (Eds.), Epistemology and emotions (pp. 51–65). Ashgate.

Kang, M. J., Hsu, M., Krajbich, I. M., Loewenstein, G., McClure, S. M., Wang, J. T., & Camerer, C. F. (2009). The wick in the candle of learning: Epistemic curiosity activates reward circuitry and enhances memory. Psychological Science, 20(8), 963–973. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02402.x

Pekrun, R., Vogl, E., Muis, K. R., & Sinatra, G. M. (2017). Measuring emotions during epistemic activities: The Epistemically-Related Emotion Scales. Cognition and Emotion, 31(6), 1268–1276. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2016.1204989

Pekrun, R., & Stephens, E. J. (2012). Academic emotions. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, T. Urdan, S. Graham, J. M. Royer, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook, Vol 2: Individual differences and cultural and contextual factors. (pp. 3–31). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13274-001

Vogl, E., Pekrun, R., Murayama, K., Loderer, K., & Schubert, S. (2019). Surprise, curiosity, and confusion promote knowledge exploration: Evidence for robust effects of epistemic emotions. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2474. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02474

Vogl, E., Pekrun, R., Murayama, K., & Loderer, K. (2020). Surprised–curious–confused: Epistemic emotions and knowledge exploration. Emotion, 20(4), 625–641. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000578

Related to knowledge or the acquisition of knowledge (Pekrun & Stephens, 2012)

(D’Mello et al., 2014; D’Mello & Graesser, 2012; Hookway, 2008; Kang et al., 2009;
Pekrun et al., 2017; Pekrun & Stephens, 2012; Vogl et al., 2019, 2020)


H1: If a newspaper article simultaneously triggers the epistemic emotions of surprise, curiosity, and confusion, readers’ eudaimonic entertainment experiences will be stronger compared to an emotionally neutral newspaper article.

Empathy

Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University Press.

Oliver, M. B., Dillard, J. P., Bae, K., & Tamul, D. J. (2012). The effect of narrative news format on empathy for stigmatized groups. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89(2), 205–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699012439020

Walkington, Z., Wigman, S. A., & Bowles, D. (2020). The impact of narratives and transportation on empathic responding. Poetics, 80, Article 101425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2019.101425

Wondra, J. D., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2015). An appraisal theory of empathy and other vicarious emotional experiences. Psychological Review, 122(3), 411–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039252

Narrative news formats lead to increased feelings of empathy
(Oliver et al., 2012; Walkington et al., 2020)

A process through which individuals can understand others
(Lazarus, 1991)

The essence of empathy is to feel what someone else is feeling because of something that happened to them
(Wondra & Ellsworth, 2015)


H2: If a newspaper article elicits readers’ empathy with the persons portrayed in the article, the readers experience more eudaimonic entertainment compared to when they feel less empathy.

Deliberation within, information seeking, and knowledge acquisition

Bartsch, A., & Schneider, F. M. (2014). Entertainment and politics revisited: How non-escapist forms of entertainment can stimulate political interest and information seeking. Journal of Communication, 64(3), 369–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12095

Goodin, R. E. (2000). Democratic deliberation within. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 29(1), 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2000.00081.x

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123–205). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2

Schneider, F. M., Bartsch, A., & Leonhard, L. (2021). An extended dual-process model of entertainment effects on political information processing and engagement. In P. Vorderer & C. Klimmt (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Entertainment Theory (pp. 536–557). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190072216.013.29

Weinmann, C., & Vorderer, P. (2018). A normative perspective for political entertainment research: Connecting deliberative democracy and entertainment theory. Communication Theory, 28(4), 466–486. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qty018

Yang, Z. J., & Kahlor, L. (2013). What, me worry? The role of affect in information seeking and avoidance. Science Communication, 35(2), 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547012441873

Deliberation Within

Reflective process during which an individual weighs reasons and arguments
(Goodin, 2000; Weinmann & Vorderer, 2018)

Information Seeking & Knowledge Acquisition

Normatively desirable outcomes according to deliberative theory

Effortful information processing and eudaimonic entertainment experiences
(Bartsch & Schneider, 2014; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986; Schneider et al., 2021; Yang & Kahlor, 2013)


H3: Higher eudaimonic entertainment experience of readers is associated with a) higher deliberation within, b) more information-seeking, and c) more knowledge about the topic.

Method

Schneider, F. M., Bartsch, A., & Oliver, M. B. (2019). Factorial validity and measurement invariance of the appreciation, fun, and suspense scales across US-American and German samples. Journal of Media Psychology, 31(3), 149–156. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000236

Shen, L. (2010). On a scale of state empathy during message processing. Western Journal of Communication, 74(5), 504–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2010.512278

Vogl, E., Pekrun, R., & Muis, K. R. (2018). Validierung eines deutschsprachigen Instruments zur Messung epistemischer Emotionen: Die Epistemic Emotion Scales – Deutsch (EES-D) [Validation of a German language instrument for measuring epistemic emotions: The Epistemic Emotion Scales - German (EES-D)]. In G. Hagenauer & T. Hascher (Eds.), Emotionen und Emotionsregulation in Schule und Hochschule [Emotions and emotion regulation in schools and universities] (pp. 259–272). Waxmann.

Weinmann, C. (2018). Measuring political thinking: Development and validation of a scale for “deliberation within.” Political Psychology, 39(2), 365–380. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12423

Yang, Z. J., & Kahlor, L. (2013). What, me worry? The role of affect in information seeking and avoidance. Science Communication, 35(2), 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547012441873

3 (epistemic emotions vs. empathy vs. control) × 2 (Black lives matter vs. climate change topic) between-subjects online experiment
between 22 September - 20 October 2020

N = 407 (after exclusions, N = 372; 72% female)

Age: 17-71 (M = 26.00, SD = 8.91)

Education: Overall high

Measures:

  • Epistemic Emotions (Vogl et al., 2018)
  • State Empathy (Shen, 2010)
  • Entertainment Experience (Schneider et al., 2019)
  • Deliberation Within (Weinmann, 2018)
  • Information Seeking (Yang & Kahlor, 2013)
  • Knowledge about the topic (knowledge questions)

Stimulus Material

Excerpts from the stimulus news websites (climate change topic)
from left to right: control, epistemic emotions, empathy

Results

Preacher, K. J., & Selig, J. P. (2012). Advantages of Monte Carlo confidence intervals for indirect effects. Communication Methods and Measures, 6(2), 77–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2012.679848

Manipulation Check

Epistemic Emotions \(\scriptsize F(2, 366) = 21.07, p < .001, \eta_G^2 = 0.103\),
and Topic, \(\scriptsize F(1, 366) = 7.40, p = .007, \eta_G^2 = .020\),
but no Topic × Treatment interaction, \(\scriptsize F(2, 366) = 0.58, p = .560, \eta_G^2 = .003\)

Empathy all p > .05



Hypothesis Testing

Structural Equation Model, \(\scriptsize \chi^2_{robust} = 299.42, df = 183, p < .001, \chi^2/df = 1.64 CFI_{robust} = .884, RMSEA_{robust} = .044\ [90\%\ CI\ .035, .053], SRMR = .088\)

Indirect Effects: Monte Carlo simulated 95% confidence intervals (Preacher & Selig, 2012)

Hypothesis 1

Standardized Coefficients, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

H1: If a newspaper article simultaneously triggers the epistemic emotions of surprise, curiosity, and confusion, readers’ eudaimonic entertainment experiences will be stronger compared to an emotionally neutral newspaper article.

Hypothesis 2

Standardized Coefficients, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

H2: If a newspaper article elicits readers’ empathy with the persons portrayed in the article, the readers experience more eudaimonic entertainment compared to when they feel less empathy.

Hypothesis 3

Standardized Coefficients, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

H3: Higher eudaimonic entertainment experience of readers is associated with a) higher deliberation within, b) more information-seeking, and c) more knowledge about the topic.

Discussion

Lench, H. C., Flores, S. A., & Bench, S. W. (2011). Discrete emotions predict changes in cognition, judgment, experience, behavior, and physiology: A meta-analysis of experimental emotion elicitations. Psychological Bulletin, 137(5), 834–855. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024244

Emotionalizing news content can elicit elaborate information processing and more knowledge about political topics.

Other modalities (e.g., AV news content) might be more effective to induce emotions such as empathy (Lench et al., 2011)

Epistemic emotions are noteworthy predictors of eudaimonic entertainment experience, extending the current state of knowledge in entertainment research

Interactive elements of online news can increase elaborate information processing

Limitations: Causality; self-report; generalizability to other media content

Thank you!

Slides:
https://felix-dietrich.de/presentations/ica22/epistemic-emotions-and-entertainment

Contact:




Complementary Talk about Epistemic Emotions:
If you are interested in epistemic emotions, you can also listen to my other presentation in the same panel on the role of epistemic emotions in the processing of cross-cutting news exposure.