Abstract
My dissertation seeks to understand the quality of audience engagement by exploring configurations of factors associated with various evaluation outcomes. Specifically, the three essays draw on the category literature to examine the combinations of categorical and product features associated with sustained reviewer attention, the divergence in ratings between critics and general audiences, and the box office success of featured films. Previous scholarly discussion of these outcomes has established their importance, but inconclusive findings regarding their causes have called for further studies beyond the conventional correlation-based, variable-oriented approach. It is essential to theorize and test the causal complexity involved.Configurational theory in management has defined causal complexity in terms of three lines of complexity: conjunctural causation, equifinality, and causal asymmetry (Schneider & Wagemann, 2012). Following this stream of literature, I adopt a configurational approach and employ fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) (Ragin, 2000, 2008) to address the conjunctural, equifinal, and asymmetrical causal relations (Ragin, 1987, 2000) between the categorical features and the aforementioned outcome variables.
Theoretically, this dissertation focuses on several major concepts in the category literature, including contrast (Bogaert, Boone, & Carroll, 2010; Carroll, Feng, Le Mens, & McKendrick, 2010), status (Hsu et al., 2009; Sharkey, 2014), category spanning (Hsu, Negro, & Perretti, 2012; Montauti, 2019; Negro & Leung, 2013; Paolella & Durand, 2016), consensus of category assignments (Hsu, 2006b), and category bundle (Yang & Li, 2022). These concepts appear throughout the dissertation. However, the theoretical conceptualization, focal subject, explanation of mechanisms, and outcome conditions of each chapter vary.
The table below summarizes the emphasis of each chapter. As shown, in Chapter 1, categories and categorical features are conceptualized as cognitive - processing inputs. Chapter 2 draws from both the category and signaling literature (Spence, 1974) and focuses on categorical features that could serve as signal characteristics to create profoundness in a signal. Lastly, Chapter 3 builds on various prior studies in the category literature (e.g., Carnabuci, Operti, & Kovács, 2015; Kovács, Carnabuci, & Wezel, 2021; Negro, Hannan, & Rao, 2010; Yang & Li, 2022; Younkin & Kashkooli, 2020; Zuckerman, 1999) to examine how categories generate appeal while focusing on the conjunct effects of various categorical features.
Ch. - Categories and Categorical - Features as … - Focal Subject - Mechanism - Discussed - Outcome
Chi.1 - Cognitive process inputs - Professional critics - Systematic processing - Sustained attention
Chi.2 - Signal characteristics that create profoundness - Differences between critics and general audiences - Signaling - Differences in ratings (artistic performance)
Chi.3 - Attributes that generate appeal - General audiences - Multiple mechanisms - Box office (financial performance)
Overview of Each Chapter
Chapter 1 explores the combination of category and product features associated with the sustained review attention from professional critics. It presents the argument that critics must engage in effortful evaluation that involves systematic processing (as opposed to using mental shortcuts) to select older films to review. This cognitive process, omitted from prior studies in category theory, has meaningful implications, both theoretical and practical: people do not engage in decision - making only when their cognitive resources are scarce. When making critical decisions, people tend to think deeply and to seek clues that enable them to do so. We know little about the roles that categories and product features play in conjunction with this. The question is essential because (1) the influences of categories and product features are not independent of each other, and (2) effortful evaluation is not uncommon in everyday life.
Building on Chapter 1, Chapter 2 incorporates the literature of signaling theory and explicitly examines the signal characteristics that may complicate the evaluation process. The idea of signal profoundness is proposed, demonstrating that the extent to which a signal contains in-depth information and has implications beyond its surface value can inform us about the divergence in opinion between audience groups. Signal profoundness could be responsible for the multiple interpretations by audiences when they evaluate a subject; thus, it is relevant for such evaluation outcomes as ratings. This paper specifically focuses on how signal profoundness is generated from signal features (i.e., signal observability and interpretability) and tests its association with more divergence between ratings by general audiences and those by professional critics.
Chapter 3 dives deeper into the differences between general audiences and professional critics in film evaluation. Past research has not found conclusive evidence regarding the role of critics (i.e., whether they influence or predict audience taste), implying that critics’ and audiences’ tastes align only at times. Therefore, it is important to ask: What factors are associated with the disagreement in evaluation outcomes? How do film offerings on which audiences and critics disagree become nonetheless successful? This chapter focuses on films that received overall positive reviews from audiences but overall negative reviews from critics and examines the configurations of category and product features associated with their box office. It argues that these films’ paths to success differ from those of blockbuster films, and that studying them increases our understanding of the differences in how audiences and critics think.
| Date of Award | 24 Oct 2024 |
|---|---|
| Original language | English |
| Awarding Institution |
|
| Supervisor | Stan Xiao LI (Supervisor) & Long WANG (Supervisor) |