Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Temporal Stability of the Tendency to Worship Celebrities

The Temporal Stability of the Tendency to Worship Celebrities This study examined the test–retest and internal reliability of a scale used to measure celebrity worship. We administered the Celebrity Attitude Scale (CAS) and several related items on two different occasions approximately 3 months apart to 248 participants from three universities and one college. We hypothesized that attitudes about celebrities would remain fairly stable over time. Results confirmed the hypothesis and were discussed in relation to previous research in which the CAS was used. Keywords celebrity attitudes, celebrity worship, test–retest, reliability, absorption-addiction model There is a growing body of research on persons who are fas- interval between the first and last mailing was 11 months, cinated with celebrities—persons who have been termed suggesting that many of the letter-writers were loyal to celebrity worshipers. McCutcheon, Lange, and Houran “their” celebrities for a year or more (Dietz et al., 1991). It is (2002) developed the 23-item Celebrity Attitude Scale (CAS) clear from both the anecdotal accounts and the letters ana- in an effort to facilitate that line of research. This scale com- lyzed in the Dietz study that many of these celebrity wor- prises three subscales, and has been shown to have very good shipers were seriously disturbed, leaving open the question internal reliability and validity across several studies. More of the temporal stability of celebrity “worship” in a more than two dozen studies using the CAS have appeared in print, normal population. and we now have a growing body of knowledge about those The absorption-addiction model of celebrity worship is a who greatly admire celebrities. theoretical outgrowth of an application of both Rasch scaling However, there is still much that we do not know about and traditional factor analyses applied to the CAS celebrity worshipers. For example, we do not know much (McCutcheon, Maltby, et al., 2004). The model holds that about the stability of attitudes about celebrities over time. people become interested in the lives of celebrities because To date, Cronbach’s alpha has been used exclusively to they are frequently good looking, the media constantly measure the reliability of the CAS. According to a book emphasize the importance of celebrity news, their stories are that summarized the first few years of research on the CAS, entertaining, and the stories provide a basis for social inter- alpha reliability coefficients for the total scale ranged from action with other worshipers. Most worshipers never go .84 to .94 (McCutcheon, Maltby, Houran, & Ashe, 2004). beyond this entertainment-social level, which has been Two recent studies revealed total Cronbach’s alphas of .92 linked to extraversion (Maltby et al., 2004; Maltby, Houran, and .94, respectively (Aruguete, Griffith, Edman, Green, & & McCutcheon, 2003). However, some persons become McCutcheon, 2012; Wong, Goodboy, Murtagh, Hackney, & increasingly absorbed in the personal lives of their favorite McCutcheon, 2010). Anecdotal accounts of persons who “worship” the same Shippensburg State University, Shippensburg, PA, USA celebrities for long periods of time (Caughey, 1978; Horton Lincoln University of Missouri, Jefferson City, MO, USA & Wohl, 1956) suggest that celebrity worship is quite Consumnes River College, Sacramento, CA, USA stable—that some worshipers do tend to focus their adora- 4 Elon University, Elon, NC, USA tion on a particular celebrity for months if not years. One North American Journal of Psychology, Winter Garden, FL, USA study examined the content of inappropriate letters mailed to Corresponding Author: Hollywood celebrities. A large subset of the entire sample Mara Aruguete, Lincoln University of Missouri, 820 Chestnut St., 310 FH, originated with persons who had sent more than one letter to Jefferson City, MO 65102-0029, USA. the same celebrity. The authors found that the median Email: aruguetem@lincolnu.edu 2 SAGE Open celebrity to the point that it interferes with their own lives. Measures This second level, called intense-personal, has been linked to We administered the 23-item version of the CAS on both the neuroticism (Maltby et al., 2003) and poor mental health test and retest occasions (with approximately a 3-month (Maltby et al., 2004). The third level, labeled borderline- interval between testing periods). The response format for pathological, consists of a small minority of persons who are the CAS is a 5-point scale with anchor points being “strongly tempted to perform “compulsive” acts that are clearly not in agree” equal to 5 and “strongly disagree” equal to 1. The the best interest of the “worshiper.” Borderline-pathological scale measures three aspects of celebrity worship that were tendencies have been found to be related to some aspects of identified through factor analysis (McCutcheon, Maltby, et al., narcissism (Ashe, Maltby, & McCutcheon, 2005) and psy- 2004). These three subscales address Entertainment-Social choticism (Maltby et al., 2004; Maltby et al., 2003). (10 items; for example, “My friends and I like to discuss Based on the small amount of anecdotal data about the what my favorite celebrity has done”), Intense-Personal temporal stability of attitudes toward celebrities, the perva- (9 items; for example, “I have frequent thoughts about my sive attempts of the media to promote the adoration of celeb- favorite celebrity, even when I don’t want to”), and rities, and the absorption-addiction model, we hypothesized Borderline-Pathological (4 items; for example, “I often feel that CAS-Total scores would remain stable over a 3-month compelled to learn the personal habits of my favorite celeb- interval, and CAS subscale scores would also be positively rity”) forms of celebrity worship. correlated over the same time frame. We further predicted In addition, participants were asked to name their favorite that when asked to name their favorite celebrity, there would celebrity, indicate how strongly they feel about this celebrity be a high percentage of participants who chose the same on a Likert-type scale from 1 (very weak) to 7 (very strong), celebrity across time, and for those who did not, there would and rate their interest in celebrities generally on a Likert-type be a strong tendency to choose another celebrity from the scale from 1 (very weak interest) to 7 (very strong interest). same category (e.g., choosing an athlete the first time and a Thirteen categories of celebrities were listed (acting, author, different athlete the second time). We hypothesized that those artist, medicine, modeling, music, news, politics, religion, roy- who scored high on the Intense-Personal and Borderline- alty, radio or TV talk show, science, and sports). Participants Pathological subscales at Time 1 would be especially likely to were asked to circle one or more of these categories to describe choose the same favorite celebrity the second time, based on why their favorite celebrity is famous. These same items, the absorptive and addictive qualities associated with these along with the CAS, appeared on the questionnaire on both the two levels. We also predicted that the strength of feelings test and retest occasions. about participants’ favorite celebrities and their interest in celebrities in general would remain stable over time. Procedure Method Test. Students were recruited in the early part of fall 2012, and late in the same term. Students reported to designated Participants classrooms where they participated in groups ranging in size Test. The initial sample consisted of 279 college students from 13 to 40. The experimenter handed each participant a (189 females, 90 males) from four institutions of higher survey that contained demographic items, the CAS, and the learning, ranging in age from 17 to 53 years (M = 20.9, SD = additional celebrity-related items described above. These 4.3). The institutions are located in California, Missouri, were a part of a larger study of celebrity worship described in North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. The majority of partici- detail elsewhere (Aruguete et al., 2012). Experimenters pants reported being Caucasian (61%), the second most fre- remained in the room to answer questions and to check to quent category was African American (11%) and Hispanic/ make sure all items were answered before surveys were Latino (11%), followed by Asian American (10%) and other handed back to the experimenter. Participants were debriefed (5%). Two percent of the participants did not indicate their after all of them had completed the study at each institutional ethnicity. site. Retest. Because some participants dropped out or elected not Retest. The procedure was essentially the same except that to participate a second time, we retained 248 (88.9%) of the the additional measures used in early fall in the test situation original participants. The retest sample consisted of a subset of were not administered. Instead, a different measure was 167 females and 81 males, ranging in age from 17 to 53 years given as part of another study not described here. Some of (M = 20.9, SD = 4.2). The majority of participants reported the original participants noticed that the celebrity-related being Caucasian (64%); the second most frequent category items were the same ones they had responded to 3 months was Asian American (11%), followed by African American earlier. If they commented on this to the experimenter, they (10%) and Hispanic/Latino (10%), and other (4%). One per- were given a neutral reply, such as “That’s all right. Just give cent of the participants did not indicate their ethnicity. the answer that you feel is best.” Griffith et al. 3 Table 1. Ms and SDs of Scores for Measures Used. Results Measure Test, M (SD) Retest, M (SD) The analysis plan called for an examination of descriptive statistics, split-half reliability, test–retest reliabilities, inter- CAS-ES 25.9 (7.9) 25.6 (7.4) nal consistency reliabilities, and predictive validity. CAS-IP 15.5 (5.7) 15.8 (5.4) CAS-BP 7.7 (2.8) 7.9 (2.8) Descriptive statistics were calculated for the measures and CAS-TOT 49.2 (14.9) 49.4 (13.9) can be seen in Table 1. Means and standard deviations HSF about favorite celebrity 5.5 (1.1) 5.3 (1.0) remained stable between the two testing intervals. Paired HSF about celebrities in general 4.0 (1.4) 3.9 (1.5) t-tests were conducted on the CAS-Total and three subscales along with the two questions pertaining to their favorite Note. CAS = Celebrity Attitude Scale; ES = Entertainment-Social; IP = Intense-Personal; BP = Borderline Pathological; TOT = Total; HSF = celebrity and general interest in celebrities, between inter- How strongly do you feel. vals. The only observed difference across time was a decrease in how strongly participants felt about their favorite celeb- rity, t(176) = 3.13, p < .01. and its three subscales, along with additional related mea- A series of tests were conducted to examine different sures, overwhelmingly supported these related hypotheses. aspects of reliability. First, test–retest coefficients along with Specifically, responses to the CAS and CAS subscales are correlations between test and retest scores were calculated fairly stable constructs, as their test–retest reliabilities ranged and are presented in Table 2. The diagonal represents the from .68 to .76. It appears that celebrity worship is fairly test–retest correlations and range from .68 to .76 for the resistant to change, although the media often present both CAS-Total and subscales suggesting strong test–retest reli- positive and negative accounts of celebrities. The majority of abilities. Second, the stability of Cronbach’s alpha was also favorite celebrities were categorized as either actors/actresses of interest, and those data appear in Table 3. As predicted, the or musicians (47% and 29%, respectively). As such, it may reliabilities for the CAS-Total and subscales remained con- be the case that celebrity worshipers of these types may like sistent over time. the fact that their favorite celebrity is famous and gets atten- Predictive validity was assessed by determining whether tion, regardless of whether the attention is positive or two subscale scores were related to retaining one’s favorite negative. celebrity. Overall, the percentage of participants who chose The temporal stability of the questions “How strongly do the same favorite celebrity over time was 68.2%. Among you feel about your favorite celebrity?” (.76) and “How those who scored higher than the mean on the CAS Intense- strongly do you feel about celebrities in general?” (.82) was Personal (i.e., 15.5) and Borderline-Pathological (i.e., 7.7) more than adequate. The percentage of participants who subscales at Time 1, the percentage who chose the same chose the same favorite celebrity over time was 68.2%. Of favorite celebrity at Time 2 was 79.2%, and for those below those who chose a different celebrity, the percentage of those those averages, 63.9% chose the same favorite celebrity. who selected a favorite celebrity from the same category was That difference was significant, χ (1) = 4.02, p < .05, con- 81.8%. There was a change to the question, “How strongly firming our hypothesis that the CAS Intense-Personal and do you feel about your favorite celebrity?” such that the Borderline-Pathological subscales were predictive of select- strength of that feeling decreased slightly over time. It should ing the same celebrity over time. Of those who chose a dif- be noted that this may be a case of statistical rather than prac- ferent celebrity, the percentage of those who selected a tical significance, since the effect size was only .053. It may favorite celebrity from the same category was 81.8%. be the case that some aspect of the debriefing session that occurred after the initial test caused participants to feel shameful about their interest in celebrities. This may have Discussion caused them to underestimate celebrity interest during the The descriptive statistics seen in Table 1 are consistent with retest. The observed decrease does provide an opportunity to CAS scores obtained previously from American participants more closely examine factors associated with attitudinal (McCutcheon, Aruguete, Scott, & Von Waldner, 2004; change toward celebrities over time in a future investigation. McCutcheon & Maltby, 2002; McCutcheon, Scott, Aruguete, Specifically, it would be of interest to assess participants’ & Parker, 2006; Wong et al., 2010). Coefficient alphas shown levels of celebrity worship, and then manipulate the amount in Table 3 are also consistent with alphas obtained in previ- and type of news/information about a particular celebrity or ous studies (McCutcheon & Maltby, 2002; McCutcheon, type of celebrity to determine whether that information was Maltby, et al., 2004; McCutcheon et al., 2006). Relatively related to a change in celebrity worship. low alphas for CAS Borderline Pathological stem from the The absorption-addiction model holds that those who fact that there are only four items comprising this subscale. score high on the two problematic subscales, Intense- We hypothesized that, in general, scores on several mea- Personal and Borderline-Pathological, have become absorbed sures of attitudes about celebrities would remain fairly stable or obsessed with their favorite celebrity. If that is true, we over a period of 3 months. Results of test–retest on the CAS would expect high scorers on these subscales to be less 4 SAGE Open Table 2. Correlation Matrix for Celebrity Attitude Measures From T to R. CAS-ES-RT CAS-IP-RT CAS-BP-RT CAS-TOT-RT HSFFC-RT HSFCG-RT CAS-ES-T .76 .51 .56 .71 .32 .35 CAS-IP-T .56 .71 .53 .67 .28 .43 CAS-BP-T .55 .52 .68 .63 .25 .34 CAS-TOT-T .72 .64 .63 .76 .32 .41 HSFFC-T .31 .27 .29 .33 .76 .34 HSFCG-T .26 .26 .29 .29 .34 .82 Note. Correlation coefficients all significant at the p < .001 level. The diagonal represents the test–retest reliability coefficient. CAS = Celebrity Attitude Scale; ES = Entertainment-Social; IP = Intense-Personal; BP = Borderline Pathological; TOT = Total; HSFFC = How strongly do you feel about favorite celebrity; HSFCG; How strongly do you feel about celebrities in general; RT = retest; T = test. personality traits predispose one to retain one’s favorite Table 3. Cronbach’s alphas for the CAS-Total and Subscales at Test and Retest Intervals. celebrity over lengthy periods of time. A second limitation concerns the type and amount of media attention that partici- Measure Test α Retest α pants were exposed to during the study. For example, celeb- CAS-ES .87 .85 rity scandals cannot be controlled and the extent to which CAS-IP .83 .82 participants are exposed to this type of information was not CAS-BP .59 .58 examined. It may be the case that the nature of news about a CAS-TOT .92 .91 particular celebrity may affect one’s view of that and other celebrities. Future researchers might consider including stan- Note. CAS = Celebrity Attitude Scale; ES = Entertainment-Social; IP = dardized, hypothetical reports of the activities of favorite Intense-Personal; BP = Borderline Pathological; TOT = Total. celebrities in an attempt to control the information partici- pants receive. inclined to adopt a new favorite celebrity over a 3-month interval, as compared with those with lower scores on these Declaration of Conflicting Interests two subscales. In fact, among those who scored higher than The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect the mean on the CAS Intense-Personal and Borderline- to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Pathological subscales at time one, the percentage who chose the same favorite celebrity at Time 2 was 79.2%, as com- Funding pared with 63.9% for those who scored below the mean on The author(s) received no financial support for the research and/or these two subscales. This statistically significant difference authorship of this article. lends support to the absorption-addiction model and demon- strates its predictive validity. References One limitation of the present study is that a 3-month inter- Aruguete, M. S., Griffith, J. D., Edman, J., Green, T., & McCutcheon, val may simply be too short to show much change, although L. E. (2012). Body image and the tendency to worship celebri- it is probably long enough that participants are not merely ties. Manuscript submitted for publication. remembering the responses they made on the first testing Ashe, D. D., Maltby, J., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2005). Are celeb- situation. Future research using longer test–retest intervals rity-worshippers more prone to narcissism? A brief report. should clarify that issue. It seems possible that some person- North American Journal of Psychology, 7, 239-246. ality traits might be related to the tendency to fixate on the Caughey, J. L. (1978). Artificial social relations in modern America. same celebrity over time. The lack of openness to change American Quarterly, 30, 70-89. Dietz, P. E., Matthews, D. B., Van Duyne, C., Martell, D. A., Parry, seems like a likely candidate, but a previous study showed no C. D. H., Stewart, T., & Crowder, J. D. (1991). Threatening significant relationships between the NEO Personality and otherwise inappropriate letters to Hollywood celebrities. Inventory–Revised (NEO PI-R) Openness scores and any of Journal of Forensic Sciences, 36, 185-209. the three CAS subscale scores (Maltby, McCutcheon, & Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para- Lowinger, 2011). The same study revealed significant corre- social interaction. Psychiatry, 19, 215-229. lations between NEO PI-R Neuroticism and CAS Intense- Maltby, J., Day, L., McCutcheon, L. E., Gillett, R., Houran, J., Personal, and other studies have found links between the & Ashe, D. D. (2004). Personality and coping: A context for CAS and belief in a just world (McCutcheon, 2003), fantasy examining celebrity worship and mental health. British Journal proneness (Maltby, Day, McCutcheon, Houran, & Ashe, of Psychology, 95, 411-428. 2005), and some Narcissism subscales (Ashe et al., 2005). Maltby, J., Day, L., McCutcheon, L. E., Houran, J., & Ashe, D. Future research might determine whether any of these D. (2005). Extreme celebrity worship, fantasy proneness, and Griffith et al. 5 dissociation: Developing the measurement and understand- to obsess about or stalk celebrities. North American Journal of ing of celebrity worship within a clinical personality context. Psychology, 8, 289-300. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 273-283. Wong, M., Goodboy, A. K., Murtagh, M. P., Hackney, A. A., & Maltby, J., Houran, J., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2003). A clinical McCutcheon, L. E. (2010). Are celebrities charged with murder interpretation of attitudes and behaviors associated with celeb- likely to be acquitted? North American Journal of Psychology, rity worship. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 191, 12, 625-636. 25-29. Maltby, J., McCutcheon, L. E., & Lowinger, R. J. (2011). Brief Author Biographies report: Celebrity worshipers and the five-factor model of per- James Griffith was trained at Texas Christian University in applied sonality. North American Journal of Psychology, 13, 343-348. experimental psychology. His research interests include risk-taking McCutcheon, L. E. (2003). Machiavellianism, belief in a just world, behaviors, program evaluation, and jury decision-making. and the tendency to worship celebrities. Current Rese Current Research in Social Psychology, 8, 131-138. Retrieved from Mara Aruguete was trained at the University of California in com- http://www.uiowa.edu/~grpproc/crisp parative/physiological psychology. Her research interests include McCutcheon, L. E., Aruguete, M., Scott, V. B., & VonWaldner, eating behaviors, celebrity worship, and teaching efficacy. K. L. (2004). Preference for solitude and attitude toward one’s Jeanne Edman was trained in cross-cultural psychology at the favorite celebrity. North American Journal of Psychology, 6, University of Hawaii. She has conducted cross cultural research 499-506. studies in Hawaii, Micronesia, Malaysia, and other locations around McCutcheon, L. E., Lange, R., & Houran, J. (2002). Conceptualization the globe. and measurement of celebrity worship. British Journal of Psychology, 93, 67-87. doi:10.1348/000712602162454 Thomas Green was trained in experimental psychology with McCutcheon, L. E., & Maltby, J. (2002). Personality attributions emphases in cognitive processes and quantitative methods at the about individuals high and low in the tendency to worship University of Nebraska. His research interests include probability celebrities. Current Research in Social Psychology, 7, 325- learning, text comprehension, mental practice effects on task per- 338. Retrieved from http://www.uiowa.edu/~grpproc/crisp/ formance, and attributional processes in performance outcome crisp.7.19.html situations. McCutcheon, L. E., Maltby, J., Houran, J., & Ashe, D. D. (2004). Celebrity worshippers: Inside the minds of stargazers. Lynn McCutcheon has authored or coauthored about 120 research Baltimore, MD: PublishAmerica. articles in a variety of magazines and professional journals and has McCutcheon, L. E., Scott, V. B., Aruguete, M. S., & Parker, P. been a pioneer in research on celebrity worship. He currently serves (2006). Exploring the link between attachment and the inclination as editor of the North American Journal of Psychology. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png SAGE Open SAGE

The Temporal Stability of the Tendency to Worship Celebrities

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/the-temporal-stability-of-the-tendency-to-worship-celebrities-qlkrOMwz5u

References (23)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2013
ISSN
2158-2440
eISSN
2158-2440
DOI
10.1177/2158244013494221
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This study examined the test–retest and internal reliability of a scale used to measure celebrity worship. We administered the Celebrity Attitude Scale (CAS) and several related items on two different occasions approximately 3 months apart to 248 participants from three universities and one college. We hypothesized that attitudes about celebrities would remain fairly stable over time. Results confirmed the hypothesis and were discussed in relation to previous research in which the CAS was used. Keywords celebrity attitudes, celebrity worship, test–retest, reliability, absorption-addiction model There is a growing body of research on persons who are fas- interval between the first and last mailing was 11 months, cinated with celebrities—persons who have been termed suggesting that many of the letter-writers were loyal to celebrity worshipers. McCutcheon, Lange, and Houran “their” celebrities for a year or more (Dietz et al., 1991). It is (2002) developed the 23-item Celebrity Attitude Scale (CAS) clear from both the anecdotal accounts and the letters ana- in an effort to facilitate that line of research. This scale com- lyzed in the Dietz study that many of these celebrity wor- prises three subscales, and has been shown to have very good shipers were seriously disturbed, leaving open the question internal reliability and validity across several studies. More of the temporal stability of celebrity “worship” in a more than two dozen studies using the CAS have appeared in print, normal population. and we now have a growing body of knowledge about those The absorption-addiction model of celebrity worship is a who greatly admire celebrities. theoretical outgrowth of an application of both Rasch scaling However, there is still much that we do not know about and traditional factor analyses applied to the CAS celebrity worshipers. For example, we do not know much (McCutcheon, Maltby, et al., 2004). The model holds that about the stability of attitudes about celebrities over time. people become interested in the lives of celebrities because To date, Cronbach’s alpha has been used exclusively to they are frequently good looking, the media constantly measure the reliability of the CAS. According to a book emphasize the importance of celebrity news, their stories are that summarized the first few years of research on the CAS, entertaining, and the stories provide a basis for social inter- alpha reliability coefficients for the total scale ranged from action with other worshipers. Most worshipers never go .84 to .94 (McCutcheon, Maltby, Houran, & Ashe, 2004). beyond this entertainment-social level, which has been Two recent studies revealed total Cronbach’s alphas of .92 linked to extraversion (Maltby et al., 2004; Maltby, Houran, and .94, respectively (Aruguete, Griffith, Edman, Green, & & McCutcheon, 2003). However, some persons become McCutcheon, 2012; Wong, Goodboy, Murtagh, Hackney, & increasingly absorbed in the personal lives of their favorite McCutcheon, 2010). Anecdotal accounts of persons who “worship” the same Shippensburg State University, Shippensburg, PA, USA celebrities for long periods of time (Caughey, 1978; Horton Lincoln University of Missouri, Jefferson City, MO, USA & Wohl, 1956) suggest that celebrity worship is quite Consumnes River College, Sacramento, CA, USA stable—that some worshipers do tend to focus their adora- 4 Elon University, Elon, NC, USA tion on a particular celebrity for months if not years. One North American Journal of Psychology, Winter Garden, FL, USA study examined the content of inappropriate letters mailed to Corresponding Author: Hollywood celebrities. A large subset of the entire sample Mara Aruguete, Lincoln University of Missouri, 820 Chestnut St., 310 FH, originated with persons who had sent more than one letter to Jefferson City, MO 65102-0029, USA. the same celebrity. The authors found that the median Email: aruguetem@lincolnu.edu 2 SAGE Open celebrity to the point that it interferes with their own lives. Measures This second level, called intense-personal, has been linked to We administered the 23-item version of the CAS on both the neuroticism (Maltby et al., 2003) and poor mental health test and retest occasions (with approximately a 3-month (Maltby et al., 2004). The third level, labeled borderline- interval between testing periods). The response format for pathological, consists of a small minority of persons who are the CAS is a 5-point scale with anchor points being “strongly tempted to perform “compulsive” acts that are clearly not in agree” equal to 5 and “strongly disagree” equal to 1. The the best interest of the “worshiper.” Borderline-pathological scale measures three aspects of celebrity worship that were tendencies have been found to be related to some aspects of identified through factor analysis (McCutcheon, Maltby, et al., narcissism (Ashe, Maltby, & McCutcheon, 2005) and psy- 2004). These three subscales address Entertainment-Social choticism (Maltby et al., 2004; Maltby et al., 2003). (10 items; for example, “My friends and I like to discuss Based on the small amount of anecdotal data about the what my favorite celebrity has done”), Intense-Personal temporal stability of attitudes toward celebrities, the perva- (9 items; for example, “I have frequent thoughts about my sive attempts of the media to promote the adoration of celeb- favorite celebrity, even when I don’t want to”), and rities, and the absorption-addiction model, we hypothesized Borderline-Pathological (4 items; for example, “I often feel that CAS-Total scores would remain stable over a 3-month compelled to learn the personal habits of my favorite celeb- interval, and CAS subscale scores would also be positively rity”) forms of celebrity worship. correlated over the same time frame. We further predicted In addition, participants were asked to name their favorite that when asked to name their favorite celebrity, there would celebrity, indicate how strongly they feel about this celebrity be a high percentage of participants who chose the same on a Likert-type scale from 1 (very weak) to 7 (very strong), celebrity across time, and for those who did not, there would and rate their interest in celebrities generally on a Likert-type be a strong tendency to choose another celebrity from the scale from 1 (very weak interest) to 7 (very strong interest). same category (e.g., choosing an athlete the first time and a Thirteen categories of celebrities were listed (acting, author, different athlete the second time). We hypothesized that those artist, medicine, modeling, music, news, politics, religion, roy- who scored high on the Intense-Personal and Borderline- alty, radio or TV talk show, science, and sports). Participants Pathological subscales at Time 1 would be especially likely to were asked to circle one or more of these categories to describe choose the same favorite celebrity the second time, based on why their favorite celebrity is famous. These same items, the absorptive and addictive qualities associated with these along with the CAS, appeared on the questionnaire on both the two levels. We also predicted that the strength of feelings test and retest occasions. about participants’ favorite celebrities and their interest in celebrities in general would remain stable over time. Procedure Method Test. Students were recruited in the early part of fall 2012, and late in the same term. Students reported to designated Participants classrooms where they participated in groups ranging in size Test. The initial sample consisted of 279 college students from 13 to 40. The experimenter handed each participant a (189 females, 90 males) from four institutions of higher survey that contained demographic items, the CAS, and the learning, ranging in age from 17 to 53 years (M = 20.9, SD = additional celebrity-related items described above. These 4.3). The institutions are located in California, Missouri, were a part of a larger study of celebrity worship described in North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. The majority of partici- detail elsewhere (Aruguete et al., 2012). Experimenters pants reported being Caucasian (61%), the second most fre- remained in the room to answer questions and to check to quent category was African American (11%) and Hispanic/ make sure all items were answered before surveys were Latino (11%), followed by Asian American (10%) and other handed back to the experimenter. Participants were debriefed (5%). Two percent of the participants did not indicate their after all of them had completed the study at each institutional ethnicity. site. Retest. Because some participants dropped out or elected not Retest. The procedure was essentially the same except that to participate a second time, we retained 248 (88.9%) of the the additional measures used in early fall in the test situation original participants. The retest sample consisted of a subset of were not administered. Instead, a different measure was 167 females and 81 males, ranging in age from 17 to 53 years given as part of another study not described here. Some of (M = 20.9, SD = 4.2). The majority of participants reported the original participants noticed that the celebrity-related being Caucasian (64%); the second most frequent category items were the same ones they had responded to 3 months was Asian American (11%), followed by African American earlier. If they commented on this to the experimenter, they (10%) and Hispanic/Latino (10%), and other (4%). One per- were given a neutral reply, such as “That’s all right. Just give cent of the participants did not indicate their ethnicity. the answer that you feel is best.” Griffith et al. 3 Table 1. Ms and SDs of Scores for Measures Used. Results Measure Test, M (SD) Retest, M (SD) The analysis plan called for an examination of descriptive statistics, split-half reliability, test–retest reliabilities, inter- CAS-ES 25.9 (7.9) 25.6 (7.4) nal consistency reliabilities, and predictive validity. CAS-IP 15.5 (5.7) 15.8 (5.4) CAS-BP 7.7 (2.8) 7.9 (2.8) Descriptive statistics were calculated for the measures and CAS-TOT 49.2 (14.9) 49.4 (13.9) can be seen in Table 1. Means and standard deviations HSF about favorite celebrity 5.5 (1.1) 5.3 (1.0) remained stable between the two testing intervals. Paired HSF about celebrities in general 4.0 (1.4) 3.9 (1.5) t-tests were conducted on the CAS-Total and three subscales along with the two questions pertaining to their favorite Note. CAS = Celebrity Attitude Scale; ES = Entertainment-Social; IP = Intense-Personal; BP = Borderline Pathological; TOT = Total; HSF = celebrity and general interest in celebrities, between inter- How strongly do you feel. vals. The only observed difference across time was a decrease in how strongly participants felt about their favorite celeb- rity, t(176) = 3.13, p < .01. and its three subscales, along with additional related mea- A series of tests were conducted to examine different sures, overwhelmingly supported these related hypotheses. aspects of reliability. First, test–retest coefficients along with Specifically, responses to the CAS and CAS subscales are correlations between test and retest scores were calculated fairly stable constructs, as their test–retest reliabilities ranged and are presented in Table 2. The diagonal represents the from .68 to .76. It appears that celebrity worship is fairly test–retest correlations and range from .68 to .76 for the resistant to change, although the media often present both CAS-Total and subscales suggesting strong test–retest reli- positive and negative accounts of celebrities. The majority of abilities. Second, the stability of Cronbach’s alpha was also favorite celebrities were categorized as either actors/actresses of interest, and those data appear in Table 3. As predicted, the or musicians (47% and 29%, respectively). As such, it may reliabilities for the CAS-Total and subscales remained con- be the case that celebrity worshipers of these types may like sistent over time. the fact that their favorite celebrity is famous and gets atten- Predictive validity was assessed by determining whether tion, regardless of whether the attention is positive or two subscale scores were related to retaining one’s favorite negative. celebrity. Overall, the percentage of participants who chose The temporal stability of the questions “How strongly do the same favorite celebrity over time was 68.2%. Among you feel about your favorite celebrity?” (.76) and “How those who scored higher than the mean on the CAS Intense- strongly do you feel about celebrities in general?” (.82) was Personal (i.e., 15.5) and Borderline-Pathological (i.e., 7.7) more than adequate. The percentage of participants who subscales at Time 1, the percentage who chose the same chose the same favorite celebrity over time was 68.2%. Of favorite celebrity at Time 2 was 79.2%, and for those below those who chose a different celebrity, the percentage of those those averages, 63.9% chose the same favorite celebrity. who selected a favorite celebrity from the same category was That difference was significant, χ (1) = 4.02, p < .05, con- 81.8%. There was a change to the question, “How strongly firming our hypothesis that the CAS Intense-Personal and do you feel about your favorite celebrity?” such that the Borderline-Pathological subscales were predictive of select- strength of that feeling decreased slightly over time. It should ing the same celebrity over time. Of those who chose a dif- be noted that this may be a case of statistical rather than prac- ferent celebrity, the percentage of those who selected a tical significance, since the effect size was only .053. It may favorite celebrity from the same category was 81.8%. be the case that some aspect of the debriefing session that occurred after the initial test caused participants to feel shameful about their interest in celebrities. This may have Discussion caused them to underestimate celebrity interest during the The descriptive statistics seen in Table 1 are consistent with retest. The observed decrease does provide an opportunity to CAS scores obtained previously from American participants more closely examine factors associated with attitudinal (McCutcheon, Aruguete, Scott, & Von Waldner, 2004; change toward celebrities over time in a future investigation. McCutcheon & Maltby, 2002; McCutcheon, Scott, Aruguete, Specifically, it would be of interest to assess participants’ & Parker, 2006; Wong et al., 2010). Coefficient alphas shown levels of celebrity worship, and then manipulate the amount in Table 3 are also consistent with alphas obtained in previ- and type of news/information about a particular celebrity or ous studies (McCutcheon & Maltby, 2002; McCutcheon, type of celebrity to determine whether that information was Maltby, et al., 2004; McCutcheon et al., 2006). Relatively related to a change in celebrity worship. low alphas for CAS Borderline Pathological stem from the The absorption-addiction model holds that those who fact that there are only four items comprising this subscale. score high on the two problematic subscales, Intense- We hypothesized that, in general, scores on several mea- Personal and Borderline-Pathological, have become absorbed sures of attitudes about celebrities would remain fairly stable or obsessed with their favorite celebrity. If that is true, we over a period of 3 months. Results of test–retest on the CAS would expect high scorers on these subscales to be less 4 SAGE Open Table 2. Correlation Matrix for Celebrity Attitude Measures From T to R. CAS-ES-RT CAS-IP-RT CAS-BP-RT CAS-TOT-RT HSFFC-RT HSFCG-RT CAS-ES-T .76 .51 .56 .71 .32 .35 CAS-IP-T .56 .71 .53 .67 .28 .43 CAS-BP-T .55 .52 .68 .63 .25 .34 CAS-TOT-T .72 .64 .63 .76 .32 .41 HSFFC-T .31 .27 .29 .33 .76 .34 HSFCG-T .26 .26 .29 .29 .34 .82 Note. Correlation coefficients all significant at the p < .001 level. The diagonal represents the test–retest reliability coefficient. CAS = Celebrity Attitude Scale; ES = Entertainment-Social; IP = Intense-Personal; BP = Borderline Pathological; TOT = Total; HSFFC = How strongly do you feel about favorite celebrity; HSFCG; How strongly do you feel about celebrities in general; RT = retest; T = test. personality traits predispose one to retain one’s favorite Table 3. Cronbach’s alphas for the CAS-Total and Subscales at Test and Retest Intervals. celebrity over lengthy periods of time. A second limitation concerns the type and amount of media attention that partici- Measure Test α Retest α pants were exposed to during the study. For example, celeb- CAS-ES .87 .85 rity scandals cannot be controlled and the extent to which CAS-IP .83 .82 participants are exposed to this type of information was not CAS-BP .59 .58 examined. It may be the case that the nature of news about a CAS-TOT .92 .91 particular celebrity may affect one’s view of that and other celebrities. Future researchers might consider including stan- Note. CAS = Celebrity Attitude Scale; ES = Entertainment-Social; IP = dardized, hypothetical reports of the activities of favorite Intense-Personal; BP = Borderline Pathological; TOT = Total. celebrities in an attempt to control the information partici- pants receive. inclined to adopt a new favorite celebrity over a 3-month interval, as compared with those with lower scores on these Declaration of Conflicting Interests two subscales. In fact, among those who scored higher than The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect the mean on the CAS Intense-Personal and Borderline- to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Pathological subscales at time one, the percentage who chose the same favorite celebrity at Time 2 was 79.2%, as com- Funding pared with 63.9% for those who scored below the mean on The author(s) received no financial support for the research and/or these two subscales. This statistically significant difference authorship of this article. lends support to the absorption-addiction model and demon- strates its predictive validity. References One limitation of the present study is that a 3-month inter- Aruguete, M. S., Griffith, J. D., Edman, J., Green, T., & McCutcheon, val may simply be too short to show much change, although L. E. (2012). Body image and the tendency to worship celebri- it is probably long enough that participants are not merely ties. Manuscript submitted for publication. remembering the responses they made on the first testing Ashe, D. D., Maltby, J., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2005). Are celeb- situation. Future research using longer test–retest intervals rity-worshippers more prone to narcissism? A brief report. should clarify that issue. It seems possible that some person- North American Journal of Psychology, 7, 239-246. ality traits might be related to the tendency to fixate on the Caughey, J. L. (1978). Artificial social relations in modern America. same celebrity over time. The lack of openness to change American Quarterly, 30, 70-89. Dietz, P. E., Matthews, D. B., Van Duyne, C., Martell, D. A., Parry, seems like a likely candidate, but a previous study showed no C. D. H., Stewart, T., & Crowder, J. D. (1991). Threatening significant relationships between the NEO Personality and otherwise inappropriate letters to Hollywood celebrities. Inventory–Revised (NEO PI-R) Openness scores and any of Journal of Forensic Sciences, 36, 185-209. the three CAS subscale scores (Maltby, McCutcheon, & Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para- Lowinger, 2011). The same study revealed significant corre- social interaction. Psychiatry, 19, 215-229. lations between NEO PI-R Neuroticism and CAS Intense- Maltby, J., Day, L., McCutcheon, L. E., Gillett, R., Houran, J., Personal, and other studies have found links between the & Ashe, D. D. (2004). Personality and coping: A context for CAS and belief in a just world (McCutcheon, 2003), fantasy examining celebrity worship and mental health. British Journal proneness (Maltby, Day, McCutcheon, Houran, & Ashe, of Psychology, 95, 411-428. 2005), and some Narcissism subscales (Ashe et al., 2005). Maltby, J., Day, L., McCutcheon, L. E., Houran, J., & Ashe, D. Future research might determine whether any of these D. (2005). Extreme celebrity worship, fantasy proneness, and Griffith et al. 5 dissociation: Developing the measurement and understand- to obsess about or stalk celebrities. North American Journal of ing of celebrity worship within a clinical personality context. Psychology, 8, 289-300. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 273-283. Wong, M., Goodboy, A. K., Murtagh, M. P., Hackney, A. A., & Maltby, J., Houran, J., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2003). A clinical McCutcheon, L. E. (2010). Are celebrities charged with murder interpretation of attitudes and behaviors associated with celeb- likely to be acquitted? North American Journal of Psychology, rity worship. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 191, 12, 625-636. 25-29. Maltby, J., McCutcheon, L. E., & Lowinger, R. J. (2011). Brief Author Biographies report: Celebrity worshipers and the five-factor model of per- James Griffith was trained at Texas Christian University in applied sonality. North American Journal of Psychology, 13, 343-348. experimental psychology. His research interests include risk-taking McCutcheon, L. E. (2003). Machiavellianism, belief in a just world, behaviors, program evaluation, and jury decision-making. and the tendency to worship celebrities. Current Rese Current Research in Social Psychology, 8, 131-138. Retrieved from Mara Aruguete was trained at the University of California in com- http://www.uiowa.edu/~grpproc/crisp parative/physiological psychology. Her research interests include McCutcheon, L. E., Aruguete, M., Scott, V. B., & VonWaldner, eating behaviors, celebrity worship, and teaching efficacy. K. L. (2004). Preference for solitude and attitude toward one’s Jeanne Edman was trained in cross-cultural psychology at the favorite celebrity. North American Journal of Psychology, 6, University of Hawaii. She has conducted cross cultural research 499-506. studies in Hawaii, Micronesia, Malaysia, and other locations around McCutcheon, L. E., Lange, R., & Houran, J. (2002). Conceptualization the globe. and measurement of celebrity worship. British Journal of Psychology, 93, 67-87. doi:10.1348/000712602162454 Thomas Green was trained in experimental psychology with McCutcheon, L. E., & Maltby, J. (2002). Personality attributions emphases in cognitive processes and quantitative methods at the about individuals high and low in the tendency to worship University of Nebraska. His research interests include probability celebrities. Current Research in Social Psychology, 7, 325- learning, text comprehension, mental practice effects on task per- 338. Retrieved from http://www.uiowa.edu/~grpproc/crisp/ formance, and attributional processes in performance outcome crisp.7.19.html situations. McCutcheon, L. E., Maltby, J., Houran, J., & Ashe, D. D. (2004). Celebrity worshippers: Inside the minds of stargazers. Lynn McCutcheon has authored or coauthored about 120 research Baltimore, MD: PublishAmerica. articles in a variety of magazines and professional journals and has McCutcheon, L. E., Scott, V. B., Aruguete, M. S., & Parker, P. been a pioneer in research on celebrity worship. He currently serves (2006). Exploring the link between attachment and the inclination as editor of the North American Journal of Psychology.

Journal

SAGE OpenSAGE

Published: Jun 20, 2013

Keywords: celebrity attitudes; celebrity worship; test–retest; reliability; absorption-addiction model

There are no references for this article.