The psychology of celebrity

What do I need to know?1. What are the social Psychological explanations?

2. What are the evolutionary explanations?3. What research has been done into intense fandom?

4. What are the explanations of stalking?

Social Psychological explanations

• What are the Social Psychological explanations?• Religiosity• Absorption-Addiction model• The positive/active view• Attachment theory• Social Learning Theory

RELIGIOSITY:• Schumaker (2003) decline in religion and increase in fascination with

celebrity• Fundamental need to worship• Giles (2000) research not supported direct link between positive

attitudes to celebrity and religious fervour• Maltby (2004) celebrity attitude scale. As religion increased, celebrity

worship decreased.• Celebrity worship resembles religious worship. There are different

underlying psychological processes in operation• Houran et al (2005) non-religious individuals more interested than

religious people in celebrities. – fulfils same need as church for beleivers• Jindra (1994) Star Trek followers similar to religious movement. Called

trekkies, have same devotees as any other religion.

Absorption-Addiction model:• Going beyond admiration, extreme, delusional• McCutcheon et al (2002) pursuing parasocial r’ships due to deficits or lacks within their real

life• Attempt to cope / escape reality• Often follow celebrities to gain personal identity and achieve sense of fulfilment• Tied closely to celebrity worship levels• Level 1 – most fans are harmless. BUT, those who have weaker sense of personal identity or

poorer psychological adjustment may absorb into a celebs personal life to gain personal stronger identity

• Can be addictive – hence stronger sense of involvement of celeb• Poorer mental health & level of parasocial r’ships seen as being associated• Maltby et al (2005) also supported by Shorter et al (2008) greater the gap in body comparison

of fave celeb more likely eating disorder• Jones (2001) adolescent boys and girls use celebs for social comparison • Chan and Predergast (2007) social comparison involving celeb lead to greater materialism –

adolescents believe material possession more important than happiness• Evaluations:

Material possessions

THE POSITIVE/ACTIVE VIEW

• Jenkins & Jenson (1992)Parasocial r’ships serve an important functionFans enhance lives by taking active & positive roleCreate social networks (fan clubs)Fans develop sense of appreciation of others peoples talents• Evaluations• Chamberlain et al (2008) examined idea that due to social

power and status celebrities received more favourable treatment. However no differences found and social impact of celeb may be less than imagined

• Richins (1994) individuals identified celebrities to construct their self-concepts and identities

ATTACHMENT THEORY

• Originates in early childhood • Early childhood r’ships between young child and primary caregiver• Insecure-attachment types likely to become strongly attached to celebs than

secure adult attachment types• Insecure attached people get no criticisms, disappointment or rejection which

happens in real r’ships• Anxious-ambivalent attachment style are clingy and needy. Parasocial r’ships likely• Helps to understand intense fandom and stalking• Mcann (2001) stalking bhvr in adolescence & adulthood related to insecure-att

patterns• Anxious amb – try to contact their idol• Insecure-avoidant prefer to keep distance in own r’ship but pursue idol• McCutcheon et al (2006)

Celebrities are necessary?

• http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3147343.stm