From Good to Bad and Everything in Between: An Analysis of Genre Differences in the Representation of Moral Nature

Abstract

This study explores the presence of different moral natures-neutral, good, bad, ambivalent-and its association with sociodemographic characteristics in 3 television genres, through content analysis (N = 3,993). Results show that morally ambivalent characters dominate the cast of fiction, whereas neutral characters form a majority in news and information programming. In all genres, morally ambivalent characters are typed by social and professional transgression, while morally bad characters are typed by transgressions of the law. Although two thirds of all transgressions are punished, morally bad characters are always punished, whereas morally ambivalent characters more often get away without consequences. ARTICLE HISTORY

Content Analysis in the Research Field of Fictional Entertainment

“…Other studies focus on comparisons between different fictional genres (e.g., Bilandzic et al 2017;Krüger 2005) or compare the fictional depictions to the news media (e.g., Daalmans et al 2017;Nitsch et al 2021). Longitudinal studies are less common than cross-sectional, but give interesting insights into how the fictional depiction has changed (or remained stable) over time (e.g., Lichter et al 2000;Paasch-Colberg and Küfner 2012;Signorielli 1989a, b).…”

“…Studies on fictional entertainment usually analyze the frequency of occurrence of certain topics (e.g., violence, alcohol use) and characters (e.g., men and women, minorities) and/or how these phenomena and characters are depicted (attributes/stereotypes). The analyses focus on countless aspects, including the representation of morality (e.g., Bilandzic et al 2018;Daalmans et al 2017;Dirikx et al 2012), sexuality (e.g., Dillman Carpentier et al 2017;Timmermans and van den Bulck 2018), family (e.g., Lacalle and Hidalgo-Marí 2016;Scherer et al 2005), or accents (Dragojevic et al 2016). However, the main thematic research foci, constructs and results can be summarized as follows:…”

“…Rather common are studies on individual genres such as crime fiction (e.g., Dirikx et al 2012;Parrott and Parrott 2015), medical shows (e.g., Hetsroni 2009;McLaughlin 1975;Rossmann 2003), daily soaps (e.g., Pelka and Michel 2005) or productions for children (e.g., Hefner et al 2017;Hendriyani et al 2016;Martins and Wilson 2012). Other studies comprise a broad range of fictional productions (e.g., Eilders and Nitsch 2015;Gerbner et al 1980;Igartua et al 2014) or focus on (primetime) programming as a whole, thus including both fictional and non-fictional media content (e.g., Chory-Assad and Tamborini 2001;Daalmans et al 2017;Gerbner et al 1978).…”

Character morality, enjoyment, and appreciation: a replication of Eden, Daalmans, and Johnson (2017)

“…For example, a source of confusion may be that certain terms such as "morally ambivalent character" (e.g. Daalmans, Hijmans, & Wester, 2017) or "neutral character" (e.g., Tamborini et al, 2010) have been used to refer to the same type of character defined by "morally ambiguous character" who engages in both good and bad moral behavior. In addition, some research has centered on specific prototypical examples of MACs (e.g., Janicke & Raney, 2015;Tsay-Vogel & Krakowiak, 2016;van Ommen, Daalmans, & Weijers, 2014), while other studies examine MACs broadly (e.g., Krakowiak & Tsay-Vogel, 2013).…”

Toward a humanistic turn for a more ethical journalism

“…. might translate into moral neutrality for most of the persons it presents” (Daalmans et al, 2017: 41). This moral neutrality in journalistic discourse parallels an observed decrease in the use of language concerning moral virtue in American books, suggesting ‘the attention paid to concepts of moral character and virtue has declined over the course of the twentieth century’ (Kesebir and Kesebir, 2012: 478).…”