THE USE OF

NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT IN THE MANAGEMENT

OF TELEVISION NEWSROOMS IN THE SOUTHWESTERN U. S.

A Thesis

Presented to the Graduate Faculty

of Communicative Arts & Sciences

Eastern New Mexico University

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree Master of Arts

Douglas J. Swanson

July 18, 1991

CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE

FINAL COPY

This Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Arts

Douglas J. Swanson

has been accepted by the Graduate Faculty

of Communicative Arts & Sciences

Eastern New Mexico University

Approved:

_______________________________ ___________

Committee Chair Date

_______________________________ ___________

Committee Member Date

_______________________________ ___________

Committee Member Date

_______________________________ ___________

Graduate Coordinator Date

_______________________________ ___________

College Dean Date

_______________________________ ___________

Graduate Dean Date

_________________

Commencement Date

THE USE OF

NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT IN THE MANAGEMENT

OF TELEVISION NEWSROOMS IN THE SOUTHWESTERN U. S.

Abstract of a Thesis

Presented to the Graduate Faculty

of Communicative Arts & Sciences

Eastern New Mexico University

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree Master of Arts

Douglas J. Swanson

July 18, 1991

ABSTRACT

THE USE OF NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT IN THE MANAGEMENT OF

TELEVISION NEWSROOMS IN THE SOUTHWESTERN U. S.

Douglas J. Swanson

Chairman: Dr. Tim Ashmore

This study highlights the extent to which TV news directors and subordinates perceived negative reinforcement used to help establish working climate in their newsrooms. It examines the differences in their perceptions that working climate affects personal ability to do "best" work on the job. Twenty news directors and 40 subordinates from TV newsrooms randomly selected in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah were surveyed. Participants ranked their perception of negative reinforcement techniques in use, and their perception of ability to do "best" work within the working climate established. Rankings to statements involving perceptions of interpersonal communication, job satisfaction, and program ratings were obtained for ancillary data. Response means and standard deviation were determined. News directors overwhelmingly reported use of negative reinforcement. They reported less ability to do "best work" on the job. Subordinates reported greater perception of negative reinforcement in use, but reported better interpersonal relationships and more job security than that perceived by news directors. Statistical tests were conducted at the .99 confidence level.

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank some influential people who helped either directly or indirectly in the creation of this thesis. To my wife, Terri, my sincere thanks for giving generously of her time and knowledge to help ideas take shape on paper. Her support was crucial to the success of this project. Our boys, Matthew and Albert, deserve mention for attempting to understand the importance of this effort--and for patiently giving up many hours which I would otherwise have spent with them. I appreciate the willingness of my mother and father to help fund this expensive endeavor, and I promise someday to get a job that makes it all seem worthwhile. Special mention deserves to be made to Dr. Betty Lyon for her help over the past year, and also to Dr. David Marx for providing inspiration, good theoretical preparation, and a great workplace water fountain story. Last, and certainly not least, I must thank dozens of really nice TV news employees who gladly gave their time and opinions, showing real concern--and real courage--which is sadly lacking among some of their more bombastic counterparts.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT............................................... v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........................................ vi

LIST OF APPENDICES...................................... ix

LIST OF TABLES.......................................... x

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION..................................... 1

Nature of the Problem............................ 11

Managing the Newsroom............................ 13

The Working Environment.......................... 14

Behavioral Reinforcements........................ 15

Negative Reinforcement Defined................... 16

Use of Negative Reinforcement.................... 17

The "Climate of Fear"............................ 20

Likely Consequences of Negative Reinforcement

in the TV Newsroom.......................... 21 Review of the Literature......................... 22

Hypotheses....................................... 28

Justification.................................... 29

References....................................... 31

II. METHODS AND INSTRUMENTS.......................... 40

Subject Stations................................. 40

Subject Employees................................ 41

vii

Instruments...................................... 43

Procedures....................................... 45

Statistics....................................... 46

Expected Results................................. 47

References....................................... 49

III. RESULTS.......................................... 50

Survey........................................... 50

Participant Responses............................ 53

IV. DISCUSSION....................................... 64 Introduction..................................... 64

Comments......................................... 70

Limitations...................................... 73

Future Directions for Research................... 75

Conclusion....................................... 76

Bibliography............................................ 78

Appendices.............................................. 91

viii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix

A. Population for Survey; Approval for Survey

B. Survey Instrument/Management

C. Survey Instrument/Subordinates

D. Survey Completion Instructions

E. Survey Correspondence

F. Statistics

LIST OF TABLES

(see Appendix F)

Table

1. Response Means for Individual Statements

t-Test Results for Significance at .01 and .05

As a consequence of these viewers watching a particular news broadcast, the television station is able to determine its 'rating' for the time period. The 'rating' is a statistical approximation of the number of people watching during the given period, along with estimates of the demographics of the viewers. Station management examines this information to make estimates of the viewers' likelihood of purchasing products and services sold by advertisers buying broadcast time from the station during the time period.

Strong ratings are vital to the success of a TV news operation, to the extent that ". . . [P]rices agencies and their clients pay for advertising are based on ratings" (McIntyre, 1985, p. 1). McIntyre points out that the loss of one ratings point in a local television news program in the Pittsburgh market, for example, can lessen the value of a 30-second spot by an average of $100. Ratings also have been related to the audience's perception of newscast credibility in that local news is seen by many people as "the most important single piece of programming" on television (Meyers, 1982, pp. 73-87).

Existing literature has thoroughly documented obvious variables that result in viewers watching or not watching a particular TV newscast. These include lead-in show effectiveness, anchorperson attractiveness, use of graphics, and use of "live action" video. But one variable which the author believes has marked influence in the creation of local television news has not been thoroughly investigated. There is no research on record which examines which examines the existence of negative reinforcement as an influence on behavior in the television newsroom, and the effect it would

have on employees' perceptions of the workplace and their contributions within it.

This possible existence of negative reinforcement in the organizational climate is significant in a number of ways. Not only can negative reinforcement itself be perceived as a communicative effort, but it can affect other communicative efforts within the newsroom.

On a basic level, Samovar and Porter (1991, p. 7) found people need to interact with others. "[T]his need is met through the act of communication, which unites otherwise isolated individuals. Our behaviors become messages to which other people may respond."

Frequently, verbal interaction is part of this process. Verbal interaction can be conceptualized as a process initiated by a sender utilizing the elements of linguistic code, message context, and message meaning. The linguistic code is the system of symbols used in communicating with others in the language chosen. The symbols chosen facilitate the transmission of a message, help exert social control over the participants, and help guide the recipient of the communication in formulation of a response (Samovar & Porter, 1991; Fisher, 1978).

The message context "determines everything about the nature of the communication" (Hall, 1976, p. 94). A high-context message is one in which very little of the actual message content is explicitly stated. Instead, it is found in the physical context or internalized in the participants in the communication act. A low-context message is one in which the majority of the information is found in the coded message.

Message meaning refers to the definition of the symbols which the sender of the communication wishes the receiver to determine. The perception of meaning is dependent upon the symbols used, pattern of symbols, context applied, and a plethora of other variables which change with each communicative encounter (Fisher, 1978). The recipient of the communication must "grasp the facts and the feelings" in order to attempt to understand the intent of the message (Rogers and Farson, 1979, p. 168).

This points out the critical "other half" of the interpersonal communication exchange--that of the intended recipient. One cannot successfully interpret communicative acts without the ability to measure and define the symbols, context, and message content. This ability is determined by one's personal perspective of the communicative act, which "provides for us the most fruitful conceptualization of reality for our purposes" (Fisher, 1978, p. 59). This perspective is based upon such variables as one's background, education, ethnicity, and cultural experiences (Samovar and Porter, 1991; Klopf, 1987).

Of course, the ability to discern meaning in the messages received is influenced by the recipient's ability to actively listen to the verbal messages and assimilate what is being transmitted--through both the code and the context of the remarks (Lucas, 1989; Rogers and Farson, 1987). Messages transmitted to a recipient are influenced by variables other than those found within the specific verbal content. These "nonverbal" elements can include characteristics of language outside of the words themselves, such as language dialect and structure. Other elements are the sender's body type, body posture, physical expression and display of emotion. In order for these variables to be symbolic elements of the communicative act, Burgoon and Saine believe they must be socially shared signals, made public by a sender, and received by "an encoder who responds systematically to that code" (1978, p. 7).

Klopf looks at the perception process as that of selection of environmental elements to be perceived, organization of the elements into a framework for understanding, the attribution of meaning to the elements, and then action--or lack of action--based upon what our past experiences tell us should take place (1987, pp. 41-49). The human interpersonal communicative process is dynamic, in that the human participants engaging in it are constantly affected by the messages sent and received. Every person is changed every day by the messages he or she creates or encounters. The communicative process is interactive and irreversible. People communicate to one another--and these communications cannot be retrieved once they are sent. These communications take place within a "physical and social context" which establishes rules governing the interactions (Samovar and Porter, 1991, p. 10). Through the communicative process, we as humans structure our thought and create commonality of ideas and actions. In effect, we learn what methods are successful--and what methods are not successful--as we communicate with others to achieve the goals we wish to achieve. "[T]he system of communication is a tool, a progressive invention, whose

improvements react upon mankind and alter the life of every individual and institution" (Cooley, 1962, p. 64).

The interpersonal setting is only one of several types of social organizational structures in which people participate. People also engage in communication with others in the small group setting, and with still larger numbers of people in an organizational setting. "In each case social interaction produces its own system of integrating behavior; and as this occurs, each of these levels of involvement acquires its own particular properties. Thus the character of a group or an organization is something different and apart from that of the individual members or the sum of those members" (Pfiffner and Sherwood, 1960, p. 49).

The small group communicative process includes the concepts of interpersonal communication--but in expanded measure. It involves the establishment of a working group of between three and a dozen people, engaged in working toward a common goal. A designated leader coordinates the group by assigning certain tasks, encouraging participation, leading discussion, and seeing that the designated goal is met (Lucas, 1989; Hanson, 1975). A variety of communicative efforts are employed.

Such groups often utilize Dewey's reflective-thinking method of problem solving, which entails clearly defining the problem at hand, analyzing the problem to determine its severity and causes, establishing criteria to guide in decision-making, generating potential solutions, and choosing the appropriate solution (Lucas, 1989). Certainly members of small groups utilize all the elements of the communicative process already delineated. But the process is much more complex due to the larger number of individuals participating, the myriad of communicative relationships that result, and the need to concentrate group action toward a specific goal. In the small group, these elements add up to create the group's organizational climate. This climate is an indicator of the group members' ability to communicate ideas to each other effectively, act upon those ideas to create goals and objectives, and then move cohesively toward meeting those goals and objectives. Small groups which can do this are ones in which the organizational climate is seen as effective--in that the groups appear unified, growth-oriented, and goal-directed. Small groups which cannot make these goal-directed accomplishments are perceived as ineffective--in that they appear divided, not inclined toward growth, and unsure of the future will bring.

Communication within the structure of an organization is an even more complex concept. Much larger than the small group, an organization is defined as "a collection of people working together in a division of labor to achieve a common purpose" (Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn, 1982, p. 10). In this collection of people, communication can be seen as the transmittal of facts and information, as an exchange of needs and feelings, as a storytelling device, or as a "vehicle for influencing or manipulating others" (Bolman and Deal, 1984, p. 247). Communication can be any one or these--or all of these--depending upon how, where, when, and why it is interpreted.

As in the small group, there are differing interpretations of the communicative process, depending upon where one finds himself or herself in that process. The interpretations are brought about by the individual's perception of the organization's climate. This interpretation allows each individual to make judgements about the organization, based upon the impression he or she gathers from how the organization acts and reacts in its environment to further its aims. To understand how we as humans interpret an organization's climate, all the variables found in the interpersonal communicative process must be considered--multiplied in even greater measure due to the complexities of the organization, its people, their roles within the structure, and their individual and group goals set by the organization's hierarchy.

It is clear, however, that primary functions of communication within the organization would include helping managers make decisions that affect the organization and its output (Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn, 1982, p. 411), creating a "shared reality" that leads to planning, goal-setting, production, and analysis (Zalkind and Costello, 1979, p. 213), and fostering positive attitudes, opinions, and emotions about the organization--both inside and outside of its corporate structure (Murphy and Peck, 1976).

Through this process, organizational climate is formulated. This climate is moderated by the roles workers play, the cultural values established and

maintained by management, (Miller, 1988), and this "shared reality" of management and employee perceptions.

This organizational climate, when perceived as conducive to productivity, morale, and personal satisfaction, is one in which employees and managers feel actively involved in shaping their futures (Chelte, 1989), and feel that the work experience is pleasant and rewarding (McDaniel, 1987). Personal likes and goals "match" with those of the organization (Steele and Jenks, 1977, p. 39).

Because of what we know about communication in general, it is very easy to see how it would be affected by the presence of negative reinforcement used to influence employee behaviors. Previous research has documented that negative reinforcement is perceived by those encountering it as an unattractive stimulus. It transmits very distinct messages about the workplace and peoples' contributions within it. Organizations in which negative reinforcement is used have been found to have climates which discourage employee initiative, ambition, and creativity. In these climates, employees can feel less competent to do their jobs. In television, where journalists uncover news ". . . where the editors tell them to look" (Whetmore, 1982, p. 247), such an environment might not be conducive to employees feeling that they are making their best effort at 'looking' for news, solving problems, and creating an effective product.

An effective survey of local TV newsroom management and subordinate personnel is needed, to determine whether negative reinforcement is widely used. Such a survey would also allow for us to gauge the differing perceptions of its use and their resulting affects in the workplace.

Nature of the Problem

Research has found local TV news to be an important societal link. Viewers want to know what's going on in the world around them and how it affects their lives (Wulfemeyer, 1983). Social life mediates, and is mediated by, television (Lindlof, 1987). Though many variables determine how viewers choose one newscast over another (McDonald and Reese, 1987; Webster and Newton, 1988), Wulfemeyer (1983, p. 323) found viewers will select one local TV news program over another based upon their perception of "quality" in the broadcast.

While "quality" certainly has different meanings to different people, it has been associated with accuracy (McManus, 1990), and honesty (Katz, 1990). Others have associated it with thorough reporting (Pooley, 1989), and a shying away from news events of a more superficial nature ("Journalistic Improvement", 1988; "News Directors", 1988).

As viewers look for "quality" on TV, those in the TV business look for profitability. In recent years, the dollar value of advertising time sold in local television markets has risen dramatically. Projections indicate the billings of local stations will continue to increase between 6 and 7% annually for the immediate future ("TV Business", 1989).

Yet, while ad revenues increase (Stone, 1987), so do costs of production and operation ("TV Groups", 1988). As these costs escalate, and as competition for station revenues heightens, broadcast news managers will find increasing need to use ratings as justification for continuing existing programs or starting new ones (Stone, 1987; Quaal and Brown, 1982). Ratings become the "burden of proof", as decisions on programming are based ". . . not necessarily on whether a program [is] good but on whether it would be 'popular,' as determined by numbers of people tuned in" (Quaal and Brown, p. 134).

In many markets, the margin for error is already slim. The Radio Television News Directors Association surveyed its members in 1987 and found most of the 314 responding television broadcasters reporting profitable newsrooms. But, while 77.1% reported making money, 11.5% were in the red, and 11.4% were just breaking even. Among stations in the top 25 markets in the nation, almost 40% were not profitable, ("RTNDA Station", 1988). Although profitability is desirable everywhere, it is in the top markets where profitability is most critical, since local newscasts there produce as much as 40% of a station's revenue (Boemer, 1987). A ratings difference of less than one point can mean a revenue difference of hundreds of thousands of dollars in a large market (Boemer, 1987; Pooley, 1989).

From a business standpoint alone, the incentive is strong for TV news managers to take every possible step, and have every ounce of knowledge available to them, to attract the greatest numbers of viewers to their programs.

Managing the Newsroom

The manager of a local television news operation certainly should be concerned with this somewhat amorphous situation--program "quality." But, at the same time, there is much more for the news director to be concerned with in his or her day-to-day life. While being the overseer of programming, the news director is also a full-fledged manager of people and resources in a business environment.

Stone's research into this aspect of the news director's responsibilities found, in 1973, news directors reported spending an average of 22% of their time on "managerial activities." By 1985, the figure had increased to 53% (1987, p. 747). Survey respondents were concerned by this shift in emphasis. One in four news directors said they might leave the business as a result of "working conditions." This leads Stone to conclude that ". . . [T]urnover . . . may pose a problem for the quality of broadcast journalism" (p. 749).

It follows then, that there is a need for research which will identify management strategies which are successful, in that they would lessen the burden for news directors and employees by improving the newsroom organizational climate, increasing productivity--and, consequently, improving the quality of the TV programs produced. Everything boils down to a balance of satisfaction. News directors need to be satisfied that they have created an organizational climate which allows them and their employees to produce the best possible television news programs. News directors must be extrinsically satisfied, in that they receive the external rewards which they feel compensate them for the effort they have put out. They must be intrinsically satisfied, in that they feel the appropriate level of personal success and satisfaction for what they have accomplished. Employees, also, must be satisfied with the organizational climate, their ability to work effectively within it, and their ability to do work which is intrinsically and extrinsically satisfying to them. All must feel that they can work together in the organizational climate, working toward a common goal, without fear of having some other satisfier (intrinsic or extrinsic) put at risk as a consequence.

The Working Environment

The working environment of the broadcast newsroom has been mostly overlooked in mass communication literature, even though stimuli in non-broadcast workplaces have been studied. More than 60 years ago, Watson (1924, p. 15) theorized that ". . . [T]here is a response to every effective stimulus and that the response is immediate." Watson and other early theorists of behaviorism agreed on several tenets, summarized by Carpenter: there exists a functional relationship between humans and their environment; humans share some basic similarities in terms of behavior and reaction to others' behaviors; humans are capable of a variety of forms of behavior in most situations; and, human behavior has an impact upon the environment and upon others within it (Carpenter, 1974). In other words, humans make certain perceptions about the environment in which they find themselves. Often, these perceptions are similar among people working together in the same place. People can choose to behave in any number of ways depending upon what actions they think would be appropriate given the situation in the environment and their past experiences; but, regardless of what behaviors an individual chooses, anything he or she does, or does not do, will impact others in the environment.

Behavioral Reinforcements

In his work on behavioral change in the workplace, Thompson writes that "from a profit point of view, what people say to each other and how they say it probably has more influence than any other kind of interaction in private industry. Verbal interactions can make or break a company" (Thompson, 1974, p. 19).

Skinner treats these interactions as reinforcements--either positive or negative. Positive reinforcements are those which add to the environment through management reward of the individual employee for behavior which is conducive to the organization's goals and objectives. A positive reinforcer is "any stimulus, the presentation of which strengthens the behavior on which it is made contingent" (Skinner, 1953, p. 185).

Negative reinforcers are instances where management engages in "disapproving" an employee's current or potential future behavior, report Axelrod and Apsche (1983, p. 17). Rachlin, describing the use of electrical stimulation as a behavior-inducing device in the laboratory, describes negative reinforcement in a more clinical sense. "An aversive stimulus is presented and the experimenter waits until the subject performs some act that the experimenter has specified in advance. When the act is performed, the aversive stimulus is removed" (1976, p. 140).

Negative Reinforcements Defined

Negative reinforcements in the workplace are elements such as those determined by past research to be used commonly by management--those serving in a supervisory (Ford, 1969) or administrative capacity (Rachlin, 1976). They are aversive stimuli presented to obtain specific, predetermined behaviors from workers. They would include, but not be limited to: Removal of something attractive to the employee from the environment (Skinner, 1953), addition

of something unattractive to the employee in the environment (Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn, 1982), ignoring of desirable employee behaviors (Blessing, 1986), excessive criticism of employees (Luthans and Kreitner, 1975), improper or insincere praise (Matejka and Ashworth, 1987), the removal of support for desirable employee behaviors (Kiechel, 1989), a lack of support for desirable employee behaviors (Drory and Shamir, 1988), the addition of stress--or "an extra demand"--to employees in a work environment (Veniga and Spradley, 1981, p. 16), or any one of a number of elements which have been found to add to the formulation of a "climate of fear" among workers (Steele and Jenks, 1977, p. 82). This "climate of fear" defines a working environment in which the employees are primarily uninformed about what the future holds, and what their roles in it will be. They find themselves 'waiting for the other shoe to drop.'

Use of Negative Reinforcement

Employees have been shown to react--or change their behaviors--when faced with negative reinforcement in the workplace. In instances where management removes desirable or attractive stimuli from the environment--such as management feedback for fine performance which is present initially, then disappears--Zivan found employees "often return to their old ways of doing things, producing products

or services lacking the quality that could have been achieved" (Zivan, 1987, p. 52).

Addition of unattractive stimuli to the environment--such as the case where "the executive yells because yelling pays off" (Luthans and Kreitner, 1975, p. 117)--is effective at first, but in the long term works against the manager using it. When, for example, the boss first yells at his subordinates, the reinforcement results in employees ending undesirable behaviors. But, as negative reinforcement continues to be used, it no longer ends undesirable behaviors; rather, it drives them underground. Employees perceive their desire to behave in a way which upsets the boss as a sign of independence from the boss' negative reinforcement that "will go unpunished as long as the boss is not around" (Luthans and Kreitner, p. 120).

Luthans and Kreitner contend there is no self-discipline or self-control associated with a primarily negative reinforcement environment (1975). When desirable employee behaviors are ignored, Blessing finds workers do not perceive the opportunity to grow in their personal job skills. Employees may choose to leave the organization, although "worse than support staffers who quit and leave are those who quit and stay. They won't take any initiative. They're not part of the team" (Blessing, 1986, p. 23). In this same regard, Drory and Shamir (1988) determined that

lack of management support is "the major correlate of [job] burnout" (p. 441).

Negative reinforcement has been found to threaten personal performance effectiveness, inhibit organizational goal attainment, and permanently suppress behaviors involving "decision making, creativity, or problem solving" (Luthans and Kreitner, 1975, p. 121). The manager who negatively reinforces subordinates only motivates people while he or she is present in the work area. Once the manager leaves the work area, "the now unrestrained subordinates get the all-clear cue and control begins to break down" (Luthans and Kreitner, p. 122). Newsom, Favell, and Rincover (in Axelrod and Apsche, 1983) reported that such actions by management produce reactions such as fear, facial and postural adjustments, "imitative aggression", "elicited aggression", escape, and avoidance in persons other than the direct recipient of the reinforcement (p. 292).

Matejka and Ashworth found that proper praise of employees is often overlooked by managers who rationalize that subordinates should not be praised for doing "what they are being paid to do" (1987, p. 22). They further conclude that when praise is given improperly--accompanied by a put-down or criticism--or insincerely--accompanied by incongruent body language--employees feel hurt, resentful, or seek other ways to get management's attention. Frequently, these "other ways" are destructive or contrary to the corporate goals.

Management support for desirable behaviors has been found to result in employee contentment and productivity. Removal of this support can, according to Kiechel, leave employees less likely to take the risks of innovation (1989).

Rasco links support for employees to the manager's survival in the environment. He writes that an individual's success as a manager "will ultimately be determined by his degree of success in identifying and correctly satisfying the motivational factors of his employees" (1987, p. 33).

The "Climate of Fear"

The overall effect on an organization, in which negative reinforcement is extensively used, is the "climate of fear" (Steele and Jenks, 1977, p. 83). In this regard, they propose that an organization's internal, working environment is like weather, and that employees become conditioned to the "climate" present on the job.

Negative reinforcement can contribute to this "climate of fear" within a business. In an organization where it is used, employees can feel threatened "that they are in danger of losing something or of having some very undesirable event befall them if they do not "watch their steps'" (Steele and Jenks, 1977, p. 81). Consequences include decreases in employee performance, anxiety, regression to "safe" behaviors, "patterned, routine, procedure-oriented responses", less initiation of new activities, and "more regression to old solutions" (p. 86-87).

Likely Consequences of Negative Reinforcement

in the TV Newsroom

The employee reactions to negative reinforcement illustrated in the research are opposite of what news directors and production managers seek to have exhibited by their employees. From the highest-paid anchorman to the lowest-paid tape editor, news employees are expected to express innovation, competency, character, and intelligence ("News Directors", 1988). Sobran feels they should demonstrate a personal "code of ethics" (1985, p. 55). Pattison believes TV news production workers should be creative and imaginative in their presentation of a medium "that allows the viewer to take a projected reality and make it his own" (1987, p. 298). Honesty and integrity are suggested as important personal attributes (Katz, 1990). McManus suggests "quality control" is an individual and a group effort (1990, p. 43). There's little doubt that "personal standards" of performance weigh heavily in the production of material to be televised (Smith and Becker, 1989, p. 794).

There can be other factors aside from environmental stimuli which could influence employees' perceptions about their workplace and their desire to do a good job. Employees could, for example, be so intrinsically motivated that no amount of outside influence could dissuade them from happiness on the job and stellar performance in the workplace (Bolman and Deal, 1984; Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn, 1982). But the research into negative reinforcement would suggest that a negative reinforcement presence in the workplace would strongly discourage employee satisfaction in a number of areas. No research has examined perceptions of negative reinforcement in the TV newsroom, or its influence on employees' perception of organizational climate and ability to do "best" work within it. For this reason, the author proposes to address these concerns.

Review of the Literature

Over the years, many researchers have studied television news. This research includes examination of the televised content of specific local news broadcasts (Pooley, 1989), the content of local news broadcasts in general (Pattison, 1987), and a comparison of the contents of local news programs between different markets (Sobran, 1985; Carroll, 1989). The impact of television news scheduling and market characteristics on people's exposure to news has been researched (Webster and Newton, 1988), as has the audience's perception of "credibility" a local news program holds (Gaziano and McGrath, 1986). These studies, and others, contributed to the body of knowledge by examining the format, content, and technical aspects of local TV news and its importance to the viewing audience. But none looked at factors contributing to organizational climate as possible influences on the product produced.

Other research on television has been done from the inside looking out. News directors have been told to re-examine their product for honesty and accuracy (Katz, 1990; McManus, 1990), and to come up with new types of responses to traditional newsroom problems (Lavine and Wackman, 1988). Newsroom staff members have been studied to determine whether the news broadcasts aired reflect their personal standards (Smith and Becker, 1989). Newsroom staffers have been queried as to why they enjoy doing what they do--and what happens when they stop enjoying it (Quaal and Brown, 1982; Stone, 1987). Much of this research was aimed at identifying elements which contributed to journalistic accuracy and integrity.

The connection between ratings and revenues has been examined (McIntyre, 1985; Boemer, 1987), as has the connection between employee interpersonal communication and revenue production (Stearns, Hoffman, and Heide, 1987). This research looked at TV news from more of a profit-and-loss standpoint. But again, no specific references were made to organizational climate.

Research into negative reinforcement and its use has examined on negative reinforcement as part of an overall individual behavior modification scheme (Thorndike, 1911; Watson, 1924; Skinner, 1953; Rachlin, 1976). Research has examined the damaging impact of negative reinforcement on employees' desire to succeed at work (Hertzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman, 1959; Thompson, 1974). Research has identified elements of negative reinforcement which affect administrative effectiveness (Luthans and Kreitner, 1975; Steele and Jenks, 1977). Tauber (1988) looked at the ways managers misunderstand negative reinforcement and its affects. Foxx examined negative reinforcement's use in the behavior training of mentally handicapped and autistic children. The basic finding of these studies was that, while negative reinforcement can result in behavioral change in some situations, its use over the long-term generally does not stabilize the behaviors sought.

The use of negative reinforcement and its effects on production have been examined. Veniga and Spradley found (1981) employees put under workplace stress through use of negative reinforcement seek only "to bring relief from the stress" (p. 18), although the means sought for this relief are not always conducive to organizational goals. Comparisons have been made between negative reinforcement in the workplace in the U.S. and in England, in which it was

found that workers responded differently to the use of certain types of behavioral reinforcements (Earley, 1986).

Allied issues involving the use of behavioral reinforcements have been looked at--both in the professional and general literature. Some researchers found positive reinforcement to increase productivity in the workplace (Ancona, 1989; Cope, 1988), some "myths" about positive reinforcement's effects were identified, showing it is not a cure-all for organizational problems (Ancona, 1989, p. 51). Different examples of positive reinforcers in the work setting have been noted (Szilagyi and Wallace, 1983; Strang, 1985; Zivan, 1987; Lorentzen, 1983). Some effects of positive reinforcement on increasing student productivity were identified (Van Sciver, 1983; Brady, 1985; Roetter, 1987; Kidd and Saudargas, 1988). The use of positive reinforcement to obtain specific task accomplishment was studied (Sattler and Betz, 1978; Hingsburger, 1986) as was positive reinforcement as reward for good behavior during dental procedures (Allen and Stokes, 1987).

Social scientists have studied the results of behavioral reinforcements in the workplace, including the degree of job satisfaction perceived by employees (Ash, 1972; Vanderslice, Rice, and Julian, 1987; Drory and Shamir, 1988; Bhagat and Allie, 1989; Bruce, 1989; Gattiker and Larwood, 1989; Grunig, 1990). The issues of workplace productivity have been dealt with, through investigation of what makes an effective manager (Blake and Mouton, 1964; Blake and Mouton, 1978), and an ineffective manager (Thompson, Kirkham, and Dixon, 1985). Employees perceptions of levels of management effectiveness have been examined (Greenhaus and Gavin, 1972; Becker and Klimoski, 1989).

The importance of good morale as a positive influence on workplace climate and productivity has been documented (Pollock, 1987; Rasco, 1987; Kiechel, 1989; Koenigsberg, 1989; Roberts and Harris, 1989). The elements which contribute to employee creativity have been studied, in an attempt to isolate elements conducive to creativity (Balkin, 1990; Moore, 1990; Webster, 1990).

Researchers have studied organizational effectiveness and its ties to individual employee contentment and feelings of "involvement" (Patchen, 1970; Nelton, 1986; Sullivan and Wircenski, 1986; "Talking to the Silent Majority", 1988; Portis and Hill, 1989.) Extensive research has been dedicated to organizational climate and the factors that result in people feeling positively or negatively about the place where they learn (Baruk, 1987; McDaniel, 1987; Moran and Volkwein, 1988; Blendinger and Jones, 1989) or where they work (Miller, 1988; Chelte, 1989).

Managers in the workplace have been shown how to manage a productive work culture (Snyder, 1988), organize an effective work climate (Steele and Jenks, 1977), and prepare for what Harris and Harris term "the coming metaindustrial work culture" (Harris and Harris, 1983, p. 22). Studies have shown the importance of communication in the workplace (Blocklyn, 1988) and successes of applying humor in the workplace to fight on-the-job stress (Vinton, 1989).

Indeed, there has been a lot of research into negative reinforcement, behavior modification, and related topics of job satisfaction, employee contentment and morale. But none examines the use of negative reinforcement as a contributing factor to perceptions of organizational climate in the television newsroom. The only findings closely related to his topic of concern are those by Gaziano and Coulson, examining newspaper reporters' perceptions of "democratic" and "authoritarian" management styles (Gaziano and Coulson, 1987, p. 1). The study found journalists working for evening newspapers felt less connection with management, and perceived management as more "authoritarian" than those employees working for morning newspapers. The research did not address the use of negative reinforcement, and its findings are not applicable to the author's concerns.

Still, there is value in examining this earlier research, as it shows negative reinforcement used by management can alter employees' perceptions of organizational climate. The research shows negative reinforcement has a short-term affect on individual behaviors, but a long-term affect on overall work climate. This needs to be investigated in the local TV newsroom. We need to be able to quantify the extent of peoples' perceptions of negative reinforcement in the newsroom, the extent to which they are satisfied with the organizational climate there, and perceptions of personal ability to do "best" work in this climate.

Hypotheses

Hypothesis One: There is no significant difference between TV news employees and managers in the southwestern

U.S. in the way they perceive negative reinforcement as a factor in organizational climate in their newsrooms.

Hypothesis Two: There is no relationship between these TV news employees' and managers' perceptions of negative reinforcement and perceptions of organizational climate.

Hypothesis Three: There is no relationship between these TV news employees' and managers' perceptions of organizational climate and perceptions of their personal ability to perform on the job.

Justification

Because television has such a strong impact on society, it is important that we understand more about it and its effects. The local television newscast is one of the more immediate, personal ways in which TV influences people's lives. Through watching local news, viewers obtain information about people, events, and locales that are within the immediate physical area and have an immediate potential impact on their lives.

The images viewers see depend upon the actions of the journalists who produce the programs. Their efforts and actions as news gatherers and presenters--working under the policies and with the guidance of their news director--create the creation of this televised reality.

Current research does not examine whether management uses negative reinforcement, and how extensive that use might be. It does not examine the perceptions of the use of negative reinforcement by management and subordinates. It does not consider whether perception differences could affect managers' and employees' perceptions of oranizational climate. Nor does the existing research look at how differing perceptions of organizational climate affect peoples' ability to do their best work on the job.

The author's personal experiences have led him to believe that negative reinforcement may be common in broadcasting, as it is in other businesses. Through its use, managers may be introducing stimuli into the environment which employees perceive as unpleasant. As a consequence of the introduction of these stimuli, employees may feel unable to do their best possible work.

The point of this research is not to find fault with managers for using negative reinforcement, or with employees for working under negative reinforcement conditions. The author seeks only to document the extent to which negative reinforcement strategies are used by television news managers, and the extent to which their use is perceived as an influencing factor in the environment of the local TV newsroom. Once this information is known, we can then begin to see a clearer picture of how people really work together--and what they think about their contribution to the local TV newscast.

The findings of this survey into the attitudes of local TV news employees in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah will allow for a greater understanding of what goes on not only inside television newsrooms of the southwest--but inside newsrooms elsewhere. It will allow us to see how management deals with subordinates, and how those employees perceive their relations with management.

References

Allen, K. D., & Stokes, T. F. (1987). The use of escape and reward in the management of young children during dental treatment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20(4), 381-390.

Ancona, J. (1989, August). Positive reinforcement pays off. American Paint & Coatings Journal, 51-52.

Ash, P. (1972). Job satisfaction differences among women of different ethnic groups. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 18, 495-507.

Axelrod, S., & Apsche, J. (Eds.). (1983). The effects of punishment on human behavior. New York: Academic Press.

Balkin, A. (1990). What is creativity? What is not? Music Educators Journal, 76(9), 29-32.