Factors Involved in Generating Suspense

Abstract

Two factors said to produce varying levels of dramatic suspense are examined: degree of perceived outcome-uncertainty and audience disposition toward the heroprotagonist. In spite of the general consensus that these two factors affect suspense, there is wide disagreement as to the optimal level of viewer uncertainty regarding the hero's fate, and there is some question as to whether it is necessary for the viewer to be positively disposed toward the hero to produce a maximal level of suspense. To test competing claims, different versions of an audio-visually presented chase sequence were produced. Experimental materials were varied in a factorial design featuring the five levels of perceived outcome-uncertainty (hero's chances of success/survival = 0/100, 1/100, 25/100, 50/lOO, 100/100) and three levels of disposition toward the protagonist (neutral, mildly positive, strongly positive). Sex of viewer was included as a third factor. Degree of experienced suspense was assessed in viewer ratings. Both perceived outcome-uncertainty and viewer disposition variables yielded strong effects, though no significant sex differences were found. Rated suspense was at a maximum when the hero's chances of success/survival were perceived to be about one in 100 and minimal when either success or failure seemed absolutely certain. Further, suspense increased with increasingly positive dispositions toward the protagonist. Practical and theoretical implications of these results are considered.Suspenseful television and motion picture drama is produced and consumed in enormous quantities each year, yet mass communication researchers have largely ignored the topic of suspense. Subsequently there is no satisfactory theory of suspenseful drama; moreover, the extant writing on the topic is primarily historical, descriptive, and speculative. LITERARY AND PHILOSOPHICAL OFFERINGS ON DRAMAPhilosophical speculations about drama can be traced to Aristotle's observations in the Poetics (cf.

Unraveling consumer suspense: The role of hope, fear, and probability fluctuations

“…Some researchers argue that a high-but not 100% (indicating certainty)-probability (often of a negative event) creates the most suspense (Carroll, 1996;Comisky & Bryant, 1982;Zillmann, 1996). Emotion researchers make a similar argument regarding the anticipatory emotions, suggesting that the higher the likelihood of a positive event occurring, the higher the hope, and the higher the likelihood of a negative event occurring, the higher the fear (Ortony et al, 1988).…”

“…Most research in suspense has supported the linear relationship between probability and suspense (Comisky & Bryant, 1982;Jose, 1988). However, these studies considered suspense in a context in which the probability information is static, in that participants were told one specific probability of the event occurring.…”

“…However, these studies considered suspense in a context in which the probability information is static, in that participants were told one specific probability of the event occurring. In Comisky and Bryant's (1982) study, participants watching a narrated film were told the chance of the protagonist escaping-0, 1, 25, 50 or 100%; in the 0% likelihood condition, the protagonist's chances of survival were stated as "absolutely nil," and in the 1% likelihood condition, his "odds [of survival] were tremendously against him" (p. 54).…”

“…While a scenario in which the respondents imagine themselves in story would likely induce more intense emotional reactions, the protagonist approach allows for more control by ensuring that the respondents perceive the story uniformly. Further, the protagonist approach is common in other cognitive appraisal research (e.g., Dube' & Maute, 1998) and suspense research (e.g., Comisky & Bryant, 1982).…”

Ways to engage readers

“…The forewarning effect (Hoffner & Cantor, 1990) predicts that hinting at the fearful event that is awaiting the character will heighten tension. So will the degree of uncertainty about the outcome of the story (Comisky & Bryant, 1982), or expectations about how near the outcome is (De Wied, 1986). Helpful could also be the implications of the story-structure-affect theory (Brewer & Lichtenstein, 1982).…”