Sarin Thesis

unning Head: SINGLE WOMEN IN SITUATION COMEDIES

The Impact of Single Women in Situation Comedies
on College Male's Perceptions of Women.
Mei-Ling I. Sarin
Western Connecticut State University

Abstract
This study investigated the impact of single women in top-rated situation
comedies on college male's perceptions of real-life single women. George
Gerbner's Cultivation Theory was applied to see if resonance and
mainstreaming effected the subject's perceptions of single and real-life
television women. 70 male college students between the ages of 18-23
completed a survey that consisted of rating primary single female
characters and an "average single female" using a Likert Scale. The
characters and the "average single female" were rated on 9
characteristics including: independence, power, femininity, motivation,
attractiveness, maturity, intelligence, assertiveness, and self-esteem.
The results indicated that there was a general correlation between the
perceived characteristics of the television and real-life women.
Resonance was not supported because the more popular characters were
not rated closely to the average single female. Mainstreaming did occur
because the more "status quo" characters were rated closer to the average
single female.

Literature Review

Gender studies in media covers a wide and significant area in the
ommunications field. A very powerful part of media is the television.
here is a color television in 99% of American homes, with the average
ousehold watching 6 hours and 53 minutes of television per day (Monush,
995, p. 20A). With television being so prevalent in our lives, it is crucial
hat we examine the images we get exposed to on a daily basis.
The subject of the representation of women on television is an
mportant area to study, because in our society, television plays a
onsiderable role in the socialization of sex roles (Signorelli, 1989).
ngham (1995) has stated: "Television is regarded by many as the most
real' form of media. If this is the case, it is important for us to question
ow real the representations of women are on television and how this
ffects the attitudes of those who watch". This study looked for the
nswer to the question: To what extent do college male's perceptions of
ingle women match the images represented on current situation
omedies.
College males make an interesting population to study. One would
ssume that being in an academic environment would foster and promote
ealthy ideas on the role of women in society. Living on a college campus
xposes one to a wide range of ideas on the role of women in society, with
any of them unfortunately being degrading and demeaning to women.
ith this inconsistency in ideas, there must be other factors that affect
hese perceptions. Perhaps television could be a factor.
As a communications researcher, one begins to wonder to what
xtent have the media played in the development of these perceptions of
omen. How real are these representations of women supposed to be?
arren Littlefield, president of NBC entertainment has stated: "We don't
ant a gap between the characters on TV and people in the real world
identification is very important for TV success. We like to reflect
hat's going on in society, and even be a little ahead of it" (Schwarzbaum,
995, p.3). As a television viewer, one can witness many gaps between
he characters on television and real life women.
While there have been studies on the portrayal and images of women
n advertising (Kolbe & Langefeld 1993; Ferrante, Haynes, & Kingsley,
993),in music television (Sommers-Flanagan, Sommers-Flanagan, &
avis, 1993), and in dramas (Meehan, 1983; Lichter, Lichter, & Rothman,
991), few have looked specifically into situation comedies. Currently,
ituation comedies are important to study, because they are capturing the
atings on television with the success of such top ten shows as: Seinfeld,
riends, Roseanne, Caroline in the City, and Grace Under Fire. On all these
hows, women are playing roles that are supposed to represent real life
omen. When it comes to comedy though, often the characters play
xaggerated stereotypical characters for comedic effect. An example of
his would be the "dumb blond" character Christina Applegate plays on the
how Married With Children. Often the humor in comedy comes from gross
tereotypes or generalities made towards an individual or group. One can
rgue that humor is only to be taken lightly, but underneath the layer of
umor lies many of the hidden beliefs and ideas a society. If humor
ncovers some amount of truth about the way society views women, it is a
ubject worth studying.
Historically, single women have broken into the television world
hrough sitcom comedy. The Mary Tyler Moore Show , which made its
ebut on CBS in 1970 (Brooks & Marsh, 1992), was the first series to
ocus extensively in a single professional female without marriage plans
Brown, 1991). Shows prior to that have included single females, but the
ajority were widowed or divorced. Since then, there have been over 100
eries that have addressed single women (Atkin, 1991). Though the
umber has grown, it is important to look at the representation of single
omen in addition to the number represented on the air.
It might be assumed that current television series are changing with
he times, moving away from the stereotypes because of the advancement
f women through the years. Unfortunately, because much of comedy's
ppeal is extreme characterization and stereotyping, the stereotyping
rend still exists (Butsch, 1992). For example, there are many racial
tereotypes presented on television. In Douglas's article, "Sitcom Women:
e've Come a Long Way. Maybe" (1995), stereotypes and uneven
epresentation of women are discussed. Even though the fall 1995
elevision season presented more primary female characters in sitcoms,
hey are primarily white. In addition, most shows are segregated, not
aving different races working or living together.
Some other gender research related to this study has involved
elevision studies that explored audience perceptions of the traits of
omen on television (Atwood, Zahn, & Webber, 1986). A study done by
twood, Zahn, & Webber (1986) found that when describing
haracteristics of television characters, negative or positive correlations
ould change depending on the gender of the character. In 3/4 of the
ubjects, when female characters held the stereotypical and "traditional"
oles, they were viewed negatively. With stereotypes being so common on
itcom shows, there may be a prevalence in negative correlations with the
emale characters.
Zemach and Cohen conducted a study which examined the differential
erceptions of men and women as they appear on television. To study
erception, they used the phenomenological approach to study the social
onstruction of reality. This approach suggests that there are three types
f reality: a) objective social reality, which is experienced as the world
xisting outside the individual and regarded as fact; b) symbolic reality,
hich consists of all forms of symbolic expression such as art, literature,
nd the contents of electronic media; and c) subjective social reality,
hich is the realm where the objective and symbolic realities converge in
he process of the formation of one's own personal identity. Zemach and
ohen's (1986) study attempted to show that individuals can distinguish
etween the objective and symbolic reality to varying degrees, depending
n how much television they have watched. The study used Gerbner's
ultivation Theory to demonstrate that heavier television viewers are
ore likely to perceive the portrayal of women on television as more
imilar to reality. To study the role in which television plays in college
ale's perceptions of single women, this study will also use Gerbner's
heory.
George Gerbner's Cultivation Theory
According to Gerbner's Cultivation Theory (Griffin, 1994), the more
viewer watches television, the more he/she will start to form
xpectations about reality based on the represented world, rather than the
xperienced world. Gerbner's main use of Cultivation Theory is to
emonstrate the link between communication media and violence. "He
elieves that the violence one sees on the screen cultivates a social
aranoia that resists notions of trustworthy people or safe environments"
Griffin, 1994, p. 334). Instead of researching violence, this study
ooks at single female representation, to see what sort of perceptions it
ultivates.
Gerbner has two explanations for how cultivation takes place-
ainstreaming and resonance. Gerbner refers to the process of
ainstreaming as "blurring, bending, and blending". Through the constant
xposure to the same images, beliefs, and labels on television, one's own
utlook blurs and becomes common with those who watch television.
ince the creators of television want to attract the largest audience
ossible, it presents the moderate view or the mainstream, in addition to
upporting the status quo. Gerbner has found that 50 percent of the people
n television are white, middle-class males, and that women are
utnumbered by men 3 to 1 (Griffin, 1994, p. 346). This mainstream
epresentation leaves out a large part of the viewing audience.
Resonance is the other way in which cultivation takes place.
his occurs when a symbolic portrayal is repeated on a regular basis, and
n turn, the viewer replays real-life experience in his/her mind over and
ver again. This conditioning reinforces the viewer's experiences, even if
he viewer's experiences have occurred to a lesser extent. Gerbner's
elevision and violence studies tried to show that many people's real-life
iolent experiences were amplified by watching violent acts on television
aily basis. In regards to single females on television, being exposed to a
tereotypical or traditional character on a daily basis may amplify certain
ypes of perceptions of real-life women.
This study uses Cultivation Theory to examine the perceptions that
ollege males have of females- fictional and real. By taking into account
he process of mainstreaming and resonance, it explores the possible
onnections between social reality and symbolic reality.

Methodology
For this study a survey was used to collect data. It was an effective
ay to gather information from a large group and organize the data in an
rderly way. The survey also made it possible to collect a large amount of
ata in a short period of time. The subjects involved were college males
etween the ages of 18-24. The college males surveyed were students at
estern Connecticut State University. Both commuter and hall residents
ere surveyed for the project. The researcher found subjects in the
esident halls and dining areas on campus.
The survey was 5 pages in total, including the consent form (see
ppendix). The survey basically consisted of rating 9 chosen
haracteristics of single female characters on situation comedy shows,
hen rating "average single female" using the same set of characteristics.
The television shows that were used were the five situation
omedies rated in the top ten in the Neilsen Television Ratings as of March
0, 1996. These shows included:
"Grace Under Fire" ABC Wednesday @ 9:00 PM
Caroline in the City" NBC Thursday @ 9:30 PM
Friends" NBC Thursday @ 8:00 PM
Seinfeld" NBC Thursday @ 9:00 PM
Roseanne" ABC Tuesday @ 8:00 PM
The Neilsen top rated comedy shows were used for this study
ecause the rating system is supposed to be representative of what
merica is watching. Therefore, it should also be representative of what
ollege males are watching since they are part of this culture.
For each of these shows, the primary female character/s were rated.
here were eight all together. They were:
"Grace Under Fire" Grace
Caroline in the City" Caroline and Annie
Friends" Monica, Rachel, and Phoebe
Seinfeld" Elaine
Roseanne" Darlene
The measure that was used was a Likert Scale. A Likert Scale rates
tems using a scale that ranges between 1-5. In this particular study,
ach of the numbers represented a degree to which the characteristic was
isplayed by the character or real life single female. The numbers were
epresented as the following:
1 = high
2 = medium high
3 = average
4 = medium low
5 = low

The characteristics chosen for the rating of the characters were
aken from a brain-stormed list made by the researcher. The list was
arrowed down to 9 characteristics. They included a wide range of
haracteristics that could be representative of a single female. The
haracteristics were: independence, power, femininity, motivation,
ttractiveness, maturity, intelligence, assertiveness, and self-esteem.
The first part of the survey included information about the subject.
he subject first had to indicate his age and whether he lived in the
esidence halls or commuted. Age was important because it was
ecessary to keep the age to a certain range, since the study was geared
oward those who were of typical college age. The age range used for this
tudy was between 18-24 years of age. The housing status of the student
as also taken into consideration, just in case there might have been
ifferences in viewing habits between the commuters and hall residents.
fter the subject gave statistical information on the top, he moved on to
he instructions and then rated the characters he was familiar with.
inally, he rated an "average single female" on the same 9 characteristics.
The purpose of the survey was to give a standard measure for what
he subject considered an "average single female". Once the subject had
one that, it would provide the researcher with something to compare the
elevision characters to, to see if there were perceived similarities
etween the average single female and the sitcom characters. Since the
ame characteristics were used for the characters and the ASF (average
ingle female), it would be easy to compare and contrast how the subjects
elt about each.
Results
The total number of surveys passed out was 70. Out of the 70
urveys, 68 were returned and a total number of 62 were usable. Out of
he total population, 4 were commuter students and 58 lived in the
esident halls. The ages of the usable surveys ranged between 18-23 and
roke down into the following:
AGE (years) # OF SURVEYS
18 7
19 24
20 12
21 14
22 4
23 1
62 SURVEYS

Once the surveys were completed, each survey was individually
oded on the bottom left hand corner. They were coded by the age of the
ubject and a number was given to distinguish between the different
ame-aged subjects. This was done because the researcher was going to
eparate the pages of the survey in order to make recording of the
nformation quicker. The surveys would be coded in case they needed to be
eassembled.
The researcher first recorded the number of subjects familiar with
ach character and with the ASF (average single female).
Character # familiar % familiar
laine 58 96.6 %
arlene 55 91.6 %
hoebe 37 61.6 %
race 34 56.6 %
achel 34 56.6 %
onica 34 56.6 %
aroline 16 26.6 %
nnie 9 15 %
SF 58 96.6 %

For each sitcom character and the ASF, the averages were tabulated
or each characteristic by adding the rating numbers (which ranged
etween 1-5 ) from the surveys and dividing by the number of subjects
amiliar with the character.
Once that was completed, the averages were figured out for each
haracteristic, if all the characters were to be represented by one
haracter (ex. average independence for all characters, average power for
ll characters, etc. . . .). This was done by adding all the character's
verages for each individual characteristic and dividing by the number 8
the number of characters). This is represented by "ACR1" (average
haracteristic rating).
An average character number was tabulated by adding all 8
haracteristic averages for each individual character and dividing by 8.
his number represented by "ACR2" (average character rating). It
epresented the character's overall rating.
Once the average of ACR1 and the average of ACR2 were tabulated,
hey were added together and divided by 2 to get "ACR3" which
epresented the overall average character's, average characteristic
umber.
Result Chart
Grace CarolineAnnie Monica Rachel Phoebe Elaine Darlene ACR 1 ASF
ndep. 1.38 1.75 1.77 2.2 2.35 2.59 1.58 1.74 1.7 2.29
ower 1.67 2.31 2.55 2.67 2.58 3.05 2.13 2.01 2.1 2.37
emin. 2.94 1.81 2.22 1.58 1.47 1.94 1.72 3.61 1.92 2.05
ot. 1.91 2.12 3.22 2.5 2.67 2.7 1.86 2.98 2.21 2.2
ttra. 3.05 1.56 1.77 1.47 1.35 2.16 1.72 3.23 1.81 2.36
atu. 2.2 2.43 3.44 2.64 2.64 3.29 2.17 2.9 2.41 2.41
ntel. 2.2 2.12 3.33 2.5 2.61 3.7 1.81 2.27 2.28 2.12
sser. 1.64 2.75 2.55 2.52 2.52 2.91 1.81 2.3 2.11 2.56
elf 2.05 2.75 2.77 2.5 2.32 2.83 2.1 2.98 2.25 2.72
CR 2 2.12 2.17 2.62 2.28 2.27 2.79 1.88 2.66 2.08
CR 3 2.34

indep.= independence, femin.= femininity, power= power, mot.= motivation, attra.= attractiveness,
atu.= maturity, intel.= intelligence, asser.= assertiveness, self.= self-esteem

ating Scale Used On Survey (1=high, 2=medium high, 3=average, 4=medium low, 5=low).
CR 1=Average Characteristic Rating, ACR 2=Average Character Rating, ACR 3=Overall
haracter/Characteristic Average

The ratings for the ASF ranged from 2.72 (self-esteem) to 2.05
femininity). The overall average of all the characteristics for the ASF
as 2.34, which was rated lower than the overall ACR 3 (2.08) for all of
he sitcom characters averaged together. When looking at individual
haracter's ACR 2, Grace, Caroline, Monica, and Elaine rated higher than
he ASF, while Annie, Phoebe, and Darlene rated below the ASF.
For the individual characteristics, most of the characters rated
igher on the ACR 1 than the ASF. The sitcom women were rated higher on
ower, femininity, intelligence, self-esteem, and were rated significantly
igher on independence and attractiveness. The ACR 1 for maturity (2.41)
as the same for the characters and the ASF, and the ACR 1 for
otivation was practically the same for both groups (characters 2.21, ASF
.20). The only characteristic that the characters rated lower on was
ntelligence. Overall though, the difference in the scores were not that
ignificant (biggest difference of 0.59 rating points), therefore there was
moderate similarity between the characteristics of the ASF and the
itcom women.
In regards to the similarity of characteristics between the
haracters and the ASF, the results showed that the ASF was most
imilarly rated to the character Caroline from Caroline in the City. The
ndividual character ratings were closest between Caroline and the ASF
ith power, motivation, maturity, intelligence, and self-esteem (5 out of
he 8 characteristics). The ASF's independence rating was the closest to
onica and the ASF's femininity and attractiveness ratings were closest
o Phoebe. When looking at the overall ACR 2, Monica's average was closet
o that of the ASF.
When comparing the number of subjects familiar with the character
o the ACR 2, there seemed to have been a slight positive correlation
etween the two figures. The character most familiar to the subjects,
laine, rated highest in ACR 2. The character least familiar to the
ubjects, Annie, rated low (but not the lowest).
Age of the character was also taken into consideration when
abulating the results to see if there were any correlation's between age
nd characteristic rating patterns. The researcher listed all 8 characters
n order of perceived age. The actual ages of the characters were not
nown at the time of the survey, and the order may be slightly off. The
ge order of the characters were listed as the following (going from
ldest to youngest):
race, Elaine, Caroline, Annie, the 3 characters from Friends around the
ame age (Monica, Rachel, Phoebe), and Darlene.
Correlation's were found with several characteristics. With
ndependence, power, and assertiveness, the older the characters were,
he higher they were rated on these characteristics. The exception in the
ge rating was Darlene. In all three categories, she was rated higher than
any characters older than she.

ignificant Results Summary

When looking at the ACR 3, and the average single female's overall
verage, the television character is rated slightly higher, but still close
o the ASF. Both the ASF and the ACR 3 have the 2 (medium high) rating
nd differ only by 0.26 points. This shows that there was a similar rating
ith between the ASF and the ACR 3. These particular statistics
emonstrate that in a broad sense, the ASF and "average" sitcom woman
ere perceived as closely characterized.
When examining ACR 1 (average characteristic rating) numbers, they
aried from characteristic to characteristic. In general, the sitcom
haracters were rated slightly (but not significantly) higher than the ASF.
he exceptions were with intelligence, which had a higher ASF rating, and
ith maturity and motivation, which had an equal rating. Here again,
here is a general similarity.
The ACR 1, ACR 2 , and ACR 3 are averages of characteristic and
haracter ratings, which deals with the statistics on a very broad level.
he purpose of the averages was to get a general sense of sitcom
haracter representation. When looking at these results in a very general
evel, there is a closeness in ratings to the ASF. The results vary though,
hen looking at the individual characters. In the discussion section, there
s a more in-depth examination of individual character patterns, which
an offer different explanations for varied character results.

iscussion
Using cultivation analysis, one might assume that the more subjects
ere familiar with a particular character, the closer her ratings would be
o the average single female. This comes from the idea of resonance. The
ore a person is exposed to a symbol, the more the viewer plays his/her
eal-life experience back in his/her mind and amplifies the experience. In
his study the "real-life experience" of the female is represented by the
SF's averages. Therefore, the most familiar character should have
atings closest to that of the ASF.
In the case of this study, the character that was the most familiar
o the subjects was Elaine from Seinfeld. When comparing her averages to
hat of the ASF, there is a wide difference between some of Elaine's
ndividual characteristics and the ASF's characteristics. For example,
etween Elaine's and the ASF's independence rating, there is a .55
ifference in score, which is significant for this particular study. On the
ther hand, when looking at individual statistics there was an
nconsistency. Caroline, who had 5 (out of 8) closest characteristic
atings to that of the ASF, was rated only 5th most familiar. These
ndividual character statistics do not support the idea of resonance, for
he more familiar character's ratings were not closer to the ASF's ratings.
The show's ratings (which would be another factor in determining
amiliarity), were also taken into consideration to examine resonance. At
he time of the study, Seinfeld was rated higher than Caroline in the City
n Neilsen Ratings, therefore if more people were being exposed to Elaine's
haracter, then Elaine's scores should have matched the ASF's more than
aroline. This was not the case. Caroline was rated closer to the ASF.
The reason why resonance was not supported, may have had to do
ith another factor that was not addressed by the survey; characteristic
ikability. The researcher approached this study with the assumption that
he characteristics listed on the survey were positive characteristics for
female to have. When the subjects rated the characters, they did not
ave to indicate if being rated highly signified a positive/negative
haracteristic. For example, a subject may have rated a character highly
n a characteristic (for example power), but not have thought of it as a
ositive thing. In turn, this could have affected the character rating by
iving her a lower rating even though she was highly deemed (or vice
ersa).
On the other hand, with the subject of likability, the researcher also
ound certain patterns in the surveys that may have suggested that the
ore the subject liked a character, the higher the overall score for the
haracter would be. The researcher observed on several occasions with
he female cast of Friends, subjects making verbal comments such as
Wow, Monica is hot" then circling all 1's on the survey. The same also
appened in reverse with Darlene from Roseanne. Two subjects verbally
eferred to her as unattractive and then circled all 4's and 5's for her
haracter.
In regards to mainstreaming, it appeared that the characters who
ere more "status quo" were rated closed to the ASF. One example of this
ould be Caroline from Caroline in the City. Her character rated closest
o the ASF, when looking at the individual characteristic ratings. Her
haracter on the show is a very middle-of the-road character (for a
ingle woman on television). She is a white, upper-middle class, thin, not
oo tall, working woman. Her scores reflected that the subjects also
onsider her the "average single female" on television. It is interesting
hat in comparison to Caroline, Annie's scores contrast significantly more
o the ASF's, yet they are on the same show.
When conducting this survey, the researcher tried to get an idea of
hat the subject thought of as the mainstream, by having him rate an
hat he considered to be an "average single female". Using this term on
he survey, though did provide some problems. Two subjects indicated
hat they thought that rating the "average single female" was a trick
uestion, since a rating of 3 on this Likert Scale equaled average. And two
ther subjects simply could not answer the question, they thought the
erm "average single female" was too vague. It was difficult to use this
erm, because the researcher realized that it was vague, but this was done
urposely, not to lead the subjects toward a particular association with
n ASF.
In addition, the researcher discovered that in general, everyone was
ated fairly high. On individual surveys, some characters and the ASF
ere rated with 4's and 5's, but when averaged out, the range for the
haracters in the survey was between 2.79-1.87. This meant that the
haracteristics were on the medium high to high range.
The study's results generally showed the male's perceptions of
itcom women come close to their perceptions of real life women, but
hen looking at individual character, there was a great variance. This had
o do with the fact that the characters ranged in age, class, personality,
nd in other ways which offered a variety of women to rate. They ranged
rom divorced mothers (Grace) to trendy college grads (the characters
rom Friends), but top shows did not include any non-white primary
emale characters. One of the subjects wrote on the bottom of his survey
what about African -American women?" The lack of non-white
epresentation in the top rated shows is clear in this study.
Since the results were that of averages and were carried out to the
undredth of a degree, the difference may have been accentuated. If whole
umbers were used (by rounding off averages), even less of a difference
ould have been presented (but would have been less accurate). The
ifference in characteristics in many cases were to such a small degree,
ven though the original rating scale dealt only in whole numbers. There
ere whole number equivalents to the original rating system, but for
ecimals, there was no word equivalent. For example, 1 = high and
= medium high, but what does 1.38 equal? This was a problem for the
esearcher. Even the though the Likert Scale is a quick way to get general
mpressions, it is limiting in several ways; it only offers five distinct
egrees of rating (with no gray areas) and with averages, one can carry
ut the ratings to decimal amounts, but there is no definite word
quivalent for that fraction of a rating.
Cultivation theory suggests that television is the mainstream
Griffin, 1994), which further suggests that television may be the cause
r control of what the mainstream is. One critique of this theory is that
t draws too much from the idea that correlation equals causality.
elevision in opposition may actually reflect what society is. The
roducers of television (usually) live in American society, so perhaps they
re reflecting the world which they are experiencing. Another critique of
elevision being the mainstream leads back to the idea that in sitcom
elevision grossly exaggerates and stereotypes people for comedic effect.
t may be presenting the world with a "slap-stick" version of females.
Since there were so many different factors used in this study, there
re many different possibilities for expansions of it. One possibility
ould be to look at other types of television shows like dramas or non-
iction television (news) to see if the results are similar to this study.
he shows used could also include ones that have non-white primary
haracters to see if there is a difference in the rating. Married female
haracters could also be used to see if they are viewed differently than
ingle female characters.
Other possibilities would include surveying different populations to
ee what effect different backgrounds have on the results. Other
rospective subjects include: women, non-college educated subjects, non-
ollege aged subjects, and subjects of different specified races.
If this study were to be reconducted, one suggestion might be to use
n one characteristic as opposed to 9 for a more focused study. Any one of
he characteristics would make a good subject to study. Another
uggestion might be to alter the term "average single female" to be less
ague.
Hopefully this particular study will help people gain insight into
hat extent television plays in the development of our social and
ymbolic realities. If there are in fact connections between television
iewing and the shaping of one's realities, then it is imperative to
uestion the accuracy of the images that bombard the viewer on a daily
asis. With comedy shows being watched by so many, we must heed the
arning: "While we're laughing, we're also sensing that we're going to pay
or this not too far down the road" (Douglas, 1995, p. 78).

References
Atkin, D. (1991) . The evolution of television series addressing
ingle women, 1966-1990. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media.
5, 517-523.
Atwood, R. A. , Zahn, S. B. , & Webber, G. (1986) . Perceptions of
he traits of women on television. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic
edia. 30, 95-101.
Brooks, T. , & Marsh, E. (1992) . The Complete Directory To Prime
ime Network TV Shows, 1946-Present. New York, NY: Random House, Inc.
Brown, M. E. (Ed.). (1990) . Television and Women's Culture.
ondon, England: SAGE Publications.
Butsch, R. (1992) . Class and gender in four decades of television
ituation comedy: Plus ça change. Critical Studies in Mass
ommunication. 9, 387-399.
Douglas, S. (1995) . Sitcom women: we're come a long way. maybe.
s. 5 (3), 76-80.
Ferrante, C. L. , Haynes, A. M. , & Kingsley, S. M. (1988) . Image
f woman in television advertising. Journal of Broadcasting and
lectronic Media. 32, 231-237.
Griffin, E. (1994). A First Look at Communication Theory. New
ork, NY: McGraw-Hill Inc.

Ingham, H. (1995) . The portrayal of women in television. The
edia and Communications Studies Page [On-line].
ttp://www.aber.ac.uk/~ednwww/womenl.html.
Kolbe, R. H. , & Langefeld, C. D. (1993) . Appraising gender role
ortrayals in TV commercials. Sex Roles. 28, 393-417.
Lichter, R. S. , Lichter, L. S. , & Rothman, S. (1991) . Watching
merica. New York, NY: Prentice Hall Press.
Meehan, D. M. (1983) . Ladies of the Evening: Women Characters of
rime-Time Television. Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow Press.
Monush, B. (Ed.). (1995) . Television and Video Almanac. New York,
Y: Quigley.
Schwarzbaum, L. (1995) . We're gonna make it after all. Working
oman. 20, 30-36.
Signorielli, N. (1989) . Television and conceptions about sex roles:
aintaining conventionality and the status quo. Sex Roles. 21, 341-360.

Sommers-Flanagan, R. , Sommers-Flanagan, J. , & Davis, B.
1993) . What's happening on music television? A gender role content
nalysis. Sex Roles. 28, 745-753.
Zemach, T. , & Cohen, A. A. (1986) . Perception of gender equality
n television and social reality. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic
edia. 30, 427-444.

ppendix I

Western Connecticut State University
Danbury, CT
Informed Consent

Please be assured that any information that you will provide will be
eld in strict confidence by the researchers. At no time will your name be
eported along with your responses. All data will be reported in group
orm only. At the conclusion of the study, upon your request, you will
eceive a report of the results.
Please understand that your participation in this research is totally
oluntary, and you are free to withdraw at any time during this study
ithout penalty and to remove any data that you may have contributed.

igned_________________________________ Date___________
roject Director_________________________________________

Page 2
SURVEY
What is your age? _____
Circle one:
am: a) a commuter student or b) a resident in the halls

nstructions:
ou will be asked to rate 8 different female characters from current
ituation comedy television shows on different characteristics. The
ating scale ranges from 1-5.
1 = high
= medium high
= average
= medium average
= low
Only rate the characters you are familiar with. If you are familiar with
he character, circle "yes" and rate the character. Circle the number that
orresponds to the degree in which you think the character displays each
haracteristic using the scale above. If you are not familiar with the
haracter, circle "no" and move on to the next character. The instructions
re the same for all 8 characters.
For the last question of the survey, you will be asked to rate what you
onsider to be an "average single female" on the same set of
haracteristics.

(1 = high, 2 = medium high, 3 = average, 4 = medium low, 5 = low)
1. character: Grace
television show: "Grace Under Fire"
are you familiar with this character? yes no

independence 1 2 3 4 5
power 1 2 3 4 5
femininity 1 2 3 4 5
motivation 1 2 3 4 5
attractiveness 1 2 3 4 5
maturity 1 2 3 4 5
intelligence 1 2 3 4 5
assertiveness 1 2 3 4 5
self-esteem 1 2 3 4 5
2. character: Caroline
television show: "Caroline in the City"
are you familiar with this character? yes no
independence 1 2 3 4 5
power 1 2 3 4 5
femininity 1 2 3 4 5
motivation 1 2 3 4 5
attractiveness 1 2 3 4 5
maturity 1 2 3 4 5
intelligence 1 2 3 4 5
assertiveness 1 2 3 4 5
self-esteem 1 2 3 4 5
3. character: Annie
television show: "Caroline in the City"
are you familiar with this character? yes no
independence 1 2 3 4 5
power 1 2 3 4 5
femininity 1 2 3 4 5
motivation 1 2 3 4 5
attractiveness 1 2 3 4 5
maturity 1 2 3 4 5
intelligence 1 2 3 4 5
assertiveness 1 2 3 4 5
self-esteem 1 2 3 4 5
1 = high, 2 = medium high, 3 = average, 4 = medium low, 5 = low)
4. character: Monica
television show: "Friends"
are you familiar with this character? yes no
independence 1 2 3 4 5
power 1 2 3 4 5
femininity 1 2 3 4 5
motivation 1 2 3 4 5
attractiveness 1 2 3 4 5
maturity 1 2 3 4 5
intelligence 1 2 3 4 5
assertiveness 1 2 3 4 5
self-esteem 1 2 3 4 5
5. character: Rachel
television show: "Friends"
are you familiar with this character? yes no
independence 1 2 3 4 5
power 1 2 3 4 5
femininity 1 2 3 4 5
motivation 1 2 3 4 5
attractiveness 1 2 3 4 5
maturity 1 2 3 4 5
intelligence 1 2 3 4 5
assertiveness 1 2 3 4 5
self-esteem 1 2 3 4 5
6. character: Phoebe
television show: "Friends"
are you familiar with this character? yes no
independence 1 2 3 4 5
power 1 2 3 4 5
femininity 1 2 3 4 5
motivation 1 2 3 4 5
attractiveness 1 2 3 4 5
maturity 1 2 3 4 5
intelligence 1 2 3 4 5
assertiveness 1 2 3 4 5
self-esteem 1 2 3 4 5
1 = high, 2 = medium high, 3 = average, 4 = medium low, 5 = low)

. character: Elaine
television show: "Seinfeld"
are you familiar with this character? yes no
independence 1 2 3 4 5
power 1 2 3 4 5
femininity 1 2 3 4 5
motivation 1 2 3 4 5
attractiveness 1 2 3 4 5
maturity 1 2 3 4 5
intelligence 1 2 3 4 5
assertiveness 1 2 3 4 5
self-esteem 1 2 3 4 5
8. character: Darlene
television show: "Roseanne"
are you familiar with this character? yes no
independence 1 2 3 4 5
power 1 2 3 4 5
femininity 1 2 3 4 5
motivation 1 2 3 4 5
attractiveness 1 2 3 4 5
maturity 1 2 3 4 5
intelligence 1 2 3 4 5
assertiveness 1 2 3 4 5
self-esteem 1 2 3 4 5
_____________________________________________________________
. average single female
independence 1 2 3 4 5
power 1 2 3 4 5
femininity 1 2 3 4 5
motivation 1 2 3 4 5
attractiveness 1 2 3 4 5
maturity 1 2 3 4 5
intelligence 1 2 3 4 5
assertiveness 1 2 3 4 5
self-esteem 1 2 3 4 5

center>Return to Thesis list /body> /html>