Podcast Uses and Gratifications Scale

Development
Lisa Glebatis Perks, Jacob S. Turner, and Andrew C. Tollison

This study explored reasons for podcast listenership, with a focus on the
construction and validation of a Podcast Uses and Gratifications (U&G)
Scale. A total of 737 podcast listeners, across two studies (Study 1: 333
participants; Study 2: 404 participants), were recruited through Amazon’s
Mechanical Turk (mTurk) human intelligence marketplace. Results from
the two-study design elicited a reliable and valid 18-item Podcast U&G
Scale, which loaded cleanly onto four factors: Controlling Edutainment,
Storytelling Transportation, Social Engagement, and Multitasking. The the-
oretical and practical applications of the Podcast U&G Scale are also
discussed.

Podcast listening is emblematic of the current media environment that prior-

itizes snack-like content in a rainbow of genres, untethered from live listening
constraints; listeners are immersed in a hybrid of push and pull process (Murray,
2009) through a variety of 15 mobile and smart devices. Menduni argued
presciently in 2007 that podcasts could be “the true heir of the urban explora-
tions of the Walkman” (p. 16). Podcast listening can (and does) easily happen on
the go, integrating into one’s life in terms of personal space, time, and content
needs. Although it will likely never be a peak medium, increasing numbers of
people are giving podcasts a try. Edison Research’s 2018 study on “The Podcast
Consumer” revealed that 44% of the representative U.S. survey population had
listened to a podcast at some point in time and 26% listened on a monthly basis.
These figures continue along a line of steady, incremental growth in podcast
listening of 2–4 percentage points annually since 2013.

Lisa Glebatis Perks (Ph.D., University of Texas at Austin) is an Associate Professor of Communication and
Media at Merrimack College. Her research interests include emerging media engagement patterns, audience
reception processes, and media representations of marginalized groups.

Jacob S. Turner (Ph.D., Bowling Green State University) is an Associate Professor of Communication and
Media at Merrimack College. His research interests include sports communication, intercultural commu-
nication, and media processes and effects.

Andrew C. Tollison (Ph.D., University of Texas at Austin) is an Associate Professor of Communication and
Media at Merrimack College. His research interests include health communication, stereotyping, quantita-
tive research methods.
© 2019 Broadcast Education Association Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 63(4), 2019, pp. 617–634
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2019.1688817 ISSN: 0883-8151 print/1550-6878 online

617
618 Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

Edison’s 2018 survey also found that U.S. podcast listeners, in comparison to
the broader population, are more highly educated, more likely to be employed full
time, and more likely to have a smart speaker in their home (“The Podcast
Consumer,” 2018). Home is the most common place that people listen to pod-
casts, followed by in a vehicle and at work (“The Podcast Consumer,” 2018).
Given podcasts’ “loyal, affluent, and educated” audience (“2018 Podcast Stats,”
2018), market research from Nielsen declared that podcasts are “becoming
a darling of advertisers” (“A Marketers’ Guide,” 2018). Contemporary market
research provides a sense of who podcast listeners are and how they interact
with brands, yet there is limited clarity in how people are using this audio
medium. Further, researchers should explore the unique gratifications that listen-
ers receive from podcasts, particularly considering its competition for one’s media
time, from well-established audio media and other sensory-rich media
alternatives.
Scholars have conducted studies on uses and gratifications (U&G) of podcasts
(Albarran et al., 2007; McClung & Johnson, 2010), but these studies all preceded
podcasts’ “golden age.” Berry (2015) and Wade and Patterson (2015) placed this
golden age in late 2014, coinciding with the rise of investigative journalism podcast
Serial. Berry (2015) argued that Serial “forced many to re-evaluate the medium, as it
not only raised the production quality bar […] but presented podcasting as a viable
alternative platform for content creators and storytellers” (p. 176). At the same time,
the proliferation of podcast applications, automatic downloads using Wi-Fi, and
more reliable streaming technologies have likely contributed to the increase in
podcast listeners and programming (see, for example, predictions from Menduni,
2007). Despite the technological and creative innovations, as well as audience
growth, there has not yet been a great deal of systematic research on podcast
listening (Markman, 2015).
The present study, then, offers inherent utility as it investigates a medium that recently
passed into its golden age and in many ways encapsulates current media engagement
practices. And while podcasts might never be as ubiquitous as say, television, recent
trends demonstrate that overall listener numbers have increased and the segment of the
population who does listen represents a desirable sub-group of users for marketers,
advertisers, and media scholars alike to better understand. It is imperative to reassess
podcast U&G in the wake of this evolution. Toward that end, our research has been
framed by two research questions: 1) What gratifications do listeners report seeking
from podcast use? and 2) What motivates their selection of this audio-only medium?
For this paper, we conducted two studies to assess podcast listening U&Gs. The
initial list of survey questions was drawn from McClung and Johnson’s (2010) quanti-
tative study of podcast fans as well as Perks and Turner (2019) qualitative study of
podcast listeners. Our goal with the current research was to identify valid and reliable
U&G typologies for podcast listeners that would help us 1) identify gratifications that
listeners sought and obtained through podcasts and 2) better understand gratifications
offered and accepted from other forms of digital or traditional media.
 Perks et al./PODCAST USES AND GRATIFICATIONS SCALE 619

Podcast Uses and Gratifications

Uses and Gratifications Overview

The current project looks to the uses and gratifications perspective (see, for
example, Rubin, 1994) to guide a systematized investigation of podcast listenership
using the “most traditional approach” in U&G research: the pursuit of a validated
media consumption motives questionnaire (Krcmar & Strizhakova, 2009, p. 53).
Furthermore, this study draws from “the classic two-step [U&G] methodological
approach of focus groups followed by surveys” (Sundar & Limperos, 2013; see also
Ruggiero, 2000), by building on findings from focus group research to identify
gratifications-sought among several small groups of podcast listeners (McClung &
Johnson, 2010; Perks & Turner, 2018).
This theoretical and methodological framework also makes good conceptual
sense in a study attempting to understand podcast listening, because one of
U&G’s central assumptions is that audience members are motivated to actively,
freely, and knowingly make their own media choices to meet their self-identified
needs (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1973; Katz, Haas, & Gurevitch, 1973). This
notion of the self-aware, active audience member is salient within the realities of
this user-directed medium that begets the “hyper-personalization of audio content”
(Wade & Patterson, 2015, p. 222).

Audio Media Uses and Gratifications

Since the 1970s, new communication media led to questions of how U&G
scholars would apply the tenets of the perspective to better understand audience
engagement with each emergent media. Commonly, typologies from existing media
are selected and analyzed in relation to emergent media. For example, Rubin’s
(1984) instrumental and ritualized media use categories (based on television
engagement) have since been applied to talk radio listening (Rubin & Step, 2000),
internet use (Sundar & Limperos, 2013), and media multitasking (Wang & Tchernev,
2012), among others. Ruggiero (2000) asserted that typologies furnish “a benchmark
base of data for other studies to further examine media use,” while acknowledging
that typologies do not offer “what some scholars would consider a refined theore-
tical perspective” (p. 12). Past studies have identified numerous gratifications-sought
related to podcast listening and the devices that enable access like MP3 players,
tablets, and mobile phones, among others.
For example, in Zeng’s (2011) examination of the U&G of MP3 players, five
distinct factors emerged: control, companionship, entertainment, status, and con-
centration. Similarly, Leung and Zhang (2016) used factor analysis methods to look
at the gratifications-sought during tablet use and identified several motivations
salient in the current research: social connection/anytime anywhere, ease of use,
620 Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

and relaxation. Additionally, Leung and Zhang (2016) highlighted that tablet use
mostly occurred while multitasking, either with other media (e.g., TV) or while
engaging in activities in the lived world (e.g., cooking). Along the same lines, Wang
and Tchernev (2012) applied an established U&G media use typology to media
multitasking and found that individuals multitask to meet emotional, cognitive,
social, and habitual needs.
Turning now to studies that looked specifically at podcast engagement, Menduni
(2007) compared the affordances of podcasts to that of terrestrial AM/FM radio and
found podcasts featured greater mobility, an increased social aspect (including
interaction with those producing podcasts and others sharing podcasts), and better
individualized content choice-making. Basing their questionnaire items on past
U&G surveys developed for older media, McClung and Johnson (2010) identified
five reasons why people use podcasts: entertainment, timeshifting, library building,
advertising, and social aspects. Library building and advertising motivations were
not salient in Perks and Turner’s (2019) findings, but additional motivations
emerged: cognitive needs such as–feeding one’s brain; using podcasts as a form
of multitasking while completing a boring/mundane activity; feeling parasocial
connections with podcast hosts– and pleasurably losing oneself in compelling
stories.
Several podcast gratifications, such as multitasking during boring activities and
immersing oneself in a story (Perks & Turner, 2018), suggest some resonance with
transportation. Green and Brock (2000) “conceived of transportation as
a convergent process, where all mental systems and capacities become focused
on events occurring in the narrative” (p. 701). During transportation, the listener’s
world of origin (their “real” world) may “become inaccessible” (Green & Brock,
2000, p. 702). Green, Brock, and Kaufman (2004) argued that one’s involvement in
the narrative is what causes them to lose track of time—which could also make time
feel like it is passing more quickly. However, audio transportation may function
differently than transportation enabled by visual stimuli. The audio immersion
leaves the visual sense free in the lived world (to keep one safe and productive)
while the imagination enjoys its trip to the fictive world. Transportation could thus
be a desired state while one is commuting, cooking, organizing physical space, or
aiming to finish any other number of mundane tasks.
Sundar and Limperos (2013) urged U&G scholars seeking to understand the
gratifications of emergent media to consider the following related cautionary ques-
tions: “Do we seek and obtain new gratifications from new technologies? Perhaps
more fundamentally, do new media create new needs, which they then proceed to
gratify?” (p. 505). Again, these important questions seem to run counter to the
common and long-held U&G practice of relying on established media typologies
from older media when developing typologies to be applied to newer media (for
other examples, see Ferguson & Perse, 2000; Krcmar & Strizhakova, 2009; McClung
& Johnson, 2010; Papacharissi & Rubin, 2000). For this reason, the current study
seeks a compromise by both relying on previous research that looked at
 Perks et al./PODCAST USES AND GRATIFICATIONS SCALE 621

gratifications related to podcast listening (i.e., McClung & Johnson, 2010), while
also making space for gratifications that emanated out of discussions with frequent
podcast listeners in several focus groups (Perks & Turner, 2018).

Podcast Uses and Gratifications Scale Development

Study One: Pretest of Survey Items

Method. The objective of Study One was to pretest 44 items for the purpose of
developing a Podcast U&G Scale. Seven items were adapted from McClung and
Johnson (2010).1 The remaining items were generated from Perks and Turner’s
(2019) focus group investigation of podcast U&Gs, which identified new
gratifications such as temptation bundling (e.g., “I can get housework done when
I listen to podcasts”) and expanding the mind (e.g., “I like to learn about other
people’s experiences through podcasts”).2 Additionally, the Perks and Turner study
built on existing gratifications by describing unique social gratifications and
avenues for parasocial interaction. Examples of these items are “I use social
media to recommend podcasts to others” and “I feel like I’m part of the host/guest
conversation when I listen to podcasts.”

Participants. The pretest was deployed in fall 2017, surveying 333 participants
(216 male, 114 female, 3 nonbinary/gender fluid) through Amazon’s Mechanical
Turk (mTurk) human intelligence marketplace. The mean age of the sample was
32.66 years (SD = 8.13 years).
A majority of the sample self-identified as White/Caucasian (62.8%, n = 209),
while the additional representations of race/ethnicity were as follows: Asian/Pacific
Islander (n = 15%, 50), African-American/Black (5.4%, n = 18), Hispanic/Latino(a)
(5.1%, n = 17), Middle-Eastern (5.1%, n = 17), Multi-Racial (3.0%, n = 10), American
Indian (1.2%, n = 4), self-identified as “Other” (1.8%), and no response (.6%).
The mean time participants spent listening to podcasts weekly was 253.54 min (SD
= 360.63), with a range of 2 to 2,500 min. Eleven participants were identified as
potential outliers due to their listenership being on the high end of this range.
However, Hoaglin and Iglewicz (1987) previously demonstrated the inaccuracy of
the 1.5 multiplier of the interquartile range (IQR) for outlier identification. Further,
controlling for these cases, no outlier effects were observed on the study data, so all
participants were retained for the entirety of Study One. A majority of participants
were college educated: Bachelor’s degree (45.6%), Graduate degree (11.4%), or an
Associate’s degree (10.8%). All participants received payment for their participation.

Procedure. Upon accessing the survey, participants were shown the informed
consent materials. Those who provided informed consent were then presented with
the 44 pretest items, which were anchored on a 7-point Likert-type scale by 1
622 Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

(“Strongly Disagree”) and 7 (“Strongly Agree”). Participants were also asked to

provide basic demographic and relevant podcast listenership information.

Results and Discussion. The pretest was designed to establish item reliabilities,
which Singleton and Straits (2005) explained, “is concerned with questions of stability
and consistency” (p. 91). The initial reliability coefficient across all 44 items was α =
.93, which demonstrates increased levels of covariance among the scale items and an
overall high level of scale reliability. Further examination, through the use of
corrected inter-item correlations, identified a range of scores and indicated that two
items had low and problematic inter-item correlation coefficients below .35. This
reduced the Podcast U&G items from 44 to 42 items.
These 42 items were factor analyzed (principal component extraction, varimax
rotation). Burgoon and Hale (1987) established a set of four evaluative criteria for
exploratory factor analyses: 1) eigenvalues had to exceed 1.0; 2) a factor had to
have at least three items meeting the .50/.30 strength/purity standard for factor
loadings; 3) the scree test had to show each additional factor was making
a reasonable improvement in the variance accounted for; and 4) any item in
a given factor had to have a primary factor loading of .50 or better. Following
these criteria, 15 items were removed from the scale.3 This trim produced
a preliminary 27-item Podcast U&G Scale (reliability coefficient α = .90), with
items loading cleanly on one of three factors (see Table 1).
The main purpose of Study One was to identify relevant scale items that would
inform Study Two. Responses for all 27 items ranged from 2.78 to 7.00 with a mean
of 6.00 (SD = .75). The three factors were all approximately normally distributed
with skewness reports falling within an acceptable range (between −1 and 1). This
initial scale satisfied the requirements of face validity, as the items used to construct
this scale were adapted from the examination of previous podcast U&G research.
Factor one loaded onto several gratifications, which centered on Controlling One’s
Immersive Edutainment. This amalgamation captures several related podcast grati-
fications, spanning how users can conveniently access that media to enjoy content
gratifications. Factors two and three neatly loaded onto Social Connections and
Multitasking and Productivity, respectively.

Study Two: Assessment of Scale Psychometric Properties

A further test of construct validity identified an omission when it comes to the study
of the U&Gs surrounding podcast use, which was centered on one’s ability to multi-
task while listening to podcasts. While Factor 3 from Study One initiated our multi-
tasking investigation, these items lacked depth/clarity and failed to accurately reflect
the multitasking literature. Multitasking is a prevalent subject within media research
(see, for example, Leung & Zhang, 2016; Wang & Tchernev, 2012), with some results
indicating that people of all ages engage in this practice (see, for example, Voorveld &
 Perks et al./PODCAST USES AND GRATIFICATIONS SCALE 623

Table 1
Preliminary Podcast Uses and Gratifications Scale Items

Factor 1: Controlling One’s Immersive Edutainment; 16 items (α = .933)

1) I can learn something new from podcasts
2) Podcasts allow me to consume fresh or novel content not otherwise available in
the media
3) Podcasts provide entertainment at times that are convenient for me
4) I can picture the stories told through podcasts in my mind as I listen
5) I can educate myself when I listen to podcasts
6) I like to learn about other people’s experiences through podcasts
7) Time passes quickly when I listen to podcasts that feature storytelling
8) Podcasts make the time go by quickly
9) Podcasts are entertaining
10) I like to listen to podcasts for the storytelling
11) I can expand my mind from podcasts
12) Podcasts allow me greater control over my listening experience
13) I can listen to the podcast I want when I want
14) I like to hear about the experiences of people who are different than me
15) I can listen to just the podcast episodes that interest me
16) I like hearing the voice of my favorite podcast host in my car or home
Factor 2: Social Connections; 6 items (α = .854)
17) I use social media to discuss podcasts with my friends
18) I use social media to recommend podcasts to others
19) I listen to podcasts that my friends tell me about
20) I talk with other fans about the podcasts I listen to
21) I talk with friends about the podcasts I listen to
22) I listen to podcasts while using other media like Twitter, Facebook, or e-mail
Factor 3: Multitasking and Productivity; 5 items (α = .808)
23) I can get work done when I listen to podcasts
24) I can get housework done when I listen to podcasts
25) I can get things done while listening to podcasts because I can move around
26) Podcasts help me get through a boring activity
27) Podcasts allow me to be more productive with my time

van der Goot, 2013). More specifically, Voorveld and van der Goot (2013) concluded
that multitasking often occurs with audio media and Perks and Turner (2019) found
that podcast listeners, in particular, were likely to multitask.
Based on the research cited above, we incorporated five revised items into the
scale to further investigate podcast listeners’ affinity for multitasking: 1) “I work on
tasks in a sequential manner”; 2) “I usually accomplish several tasks simulta-
neously”; 3) “I am usually occupied with several things simultaneously”; 4) “I
usually work on more than one task at a time”; 5) “I like to do more than one
thing at a time.” The first four were adapted from measures by König, Oberacher,
and Kleinmann (2010), while this study’s authors constructed the latter. These five
624 Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

items were used in replacement of the five items in Factor 3 within Study One.
Additionally, a single reverse-coded item was added into the scale: “Podcasts
discuss experiences that are similar to my own.”
Overall, five new multi-tasking items were developed to replace the five multi-
tasking items from Study One (Factor 3), and a single reverse-coded item was
added for Study Two. These changes put forth a 28-item Podcast U&G Scale.

Method. The objective of Study Two was to further assess the psychometric
properties of the updated 28-item Podcast U&G Scale. A second goal of this study
was to focus our data collection on individuals who demonstrate a weekly
commitment to listening to podcasts. Within Study One, a floor was never set for
listenership per week, which resulted in a large range (2–2,500 minutes/week). For
Study Two, we found it necessary to establish a floor for weekly listenership. Utilizing
the median score for weekly listenership from Study One, the floor was set at 2
hours per average week of podcast engagement, which at a minimum indicated that
participants were listening to at least a single long podcast episode or a series of
shorter episodes. This provides an important investigation to see if results from Study
One hold constant when eliminating participants who were infrequent listeners.

Participants. A unique sample of 404 participants (222 male, 179 female, 1

nonbinary/gender fluid, 2 failed to disclose gender) were surveyed through
Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (mTurk) human intelligence marketplace. To control
for the necessity of a unique sample without participant overlap from Study One,
participants provided their mTurk Worker ID to gain access to the survey. If their
Worker ID indicated that the potential participant had completed Study One, they
were not able to gain access to Study Two.
The mean age of the unique sample was 33.68 years (SD = 9.94 years). Over half
of the sample self-identified as White/Caucasian (59.4%, n = 240). The additional
representations of race/ethnicity were as follows: Asian/Pacific Islander (21.0%, n =
85), African-American/Black (8.2%, n = 33), Hispanic/Latino(a) (4.2%, n= 17),
Multi-Racial (3.5%, n = 14), Indian (2.0%, n= 8), Middle-Eastern (.5%, n = 2),
Native American (.5%, n = 2), and no response (.7%).
The mean time participants spent listening to podcasts weekly was 266.29 min
(SD = 70.06) with a range of 120 to 2,400 min. The skewness report demonstrated
that participant listenership was approximately normally distributed, and no outlier
effects were observed. A majority of participants were college educated: Bachelor’s
degree (48.3%), Graduate degree (17.6%), or an Associate’s degree (8.2%). All
participants received payment for their participation.

Procedure. Upon accessing the survey, participants reviewed and provided

informed consent. For Study Two, participants were tasked to complete the
updated 28-item Podcast U&G Scale. The scale remained on the same 7-point
Likert-type scale from Study One, which was anchored by 1 (“Strongly Disagree”)
 Perks et al./PODCAST USES AND GRATIFICATIONS SCALE 625

and 7 (“Strongly Agree”). Participants were also asked to provide basic demographic
and relevant podcast listenership information.

Results and Discussion. The 28-item Podcast U&G Scale produced a reliability
coefficient of α = .88, which again indicated increased levels of covariance among the
scale items and an overall acceptable level of scale reliability. The corrected inter-item
correlations within the scale identified a single item that contributed to an inter-item
correlation coefficient below .35: “I listen to podcasts while using other media like
Twitter, Facebook, or email.” Thus, this item was removed from the scale, which left
a 27-item Podcast U&G Scale. Using Burgoon and Hale’s (1987) criteria for analysis,
the 27 items were factor analyzed (principal component extraction, varimax rotation).
Nine problematic items were identified and subsequently removed from the scale.4
Upon the removal of these nine items, the remaining 18-item Podcast U&G Scale
produced a reliability coefficient of α = .839, with responses from all items ranging from
2.96 to 6.92 (M = 5.25, SD = .73). All factors were approximately normally distributed,
with skewness reports being within an acceptable range.
All items loaded cleanly onto one of three factors. Factor 1 from Study One
demonstrated greater clarity within Study Two by loading on two factors:
Controlling Edutainment and Storytelling Transportation. Factors 2 and 3 from
Study One – “Social Connections” and “Multitasking and Productivity” – loaded
onto a single factor within Study Two: Social Engagement/Multitasking. Based on
the exploratory factor analysis within Study Two, there appears to be three notable
factors within the Podcast U&G Scale, which are presented within Table 2.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis. A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was

conducted to determine whether the three-factor, 18-item solution proposed above
would remain constant with a larger sample size. Per Jackson, Gillaspy, and Purc-
Stephenson (2009) as well as Kline (2005), the following fit indices were evaluated:
Model Chi-Square, Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker Lewis Index (TLI), and Root
Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), and Standardized Root Mean Square
Residual (SRMR). The three proposed factors demonstrated a lack of model fit during
the initial analysis, so a four-factor solution was analyzed. To generate the four
factors, both Factor 1 (Controlling Edutainment) and Factor 2 (Storytelling
Transportation) were preserved as outlined above, but Factor 3 was split into two
distinct factors (Social Engagement and Multitasking). Specifically, the Social
Engagement factor includes the following measurement items: 1) I use social media
to recommend podcasts to others, 2) I use social media to discuss podcasts with my
friends, and 3) I talk with other fans about the podcasts I listen to.
The measurement items for the Multitasking factor are: 1) I usually accomplish
several tasks simultaneously, 2) I am usually occupied with several things simulta-
neously, and 3) I like to do more than one thing at a time. For the updated four-
factor model, all 18 items yielded a X2 = 397.311 (df = 146; p < .001), CFI = .95, TLI
= .94, RMSEA = .06, and SRMR = .09.
626 Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

Table 2
Updated Podcast Uses and Gratifications Scale Items

Factor 1: Controlling Edutainment; 7 items (α = .89)

1) I can learn something new from podcasts
2) I can educate myself when I listen to podcasts
3) I can expand my mind from podcasts
4) I can listen to the podcast I want when I want
5) Podcasts provide entertainment at times that are convenient for me
6) Podcasts are entertaining
7) I like to learn about other people’s experiences through podcasts
Factor 2: Storytelling Transportation; 5 items (α = .80)
8) I can picture the stories told through podcasts in my mind as I listen
9) Time passes quickly when I listen to podcasts that feature storytelling
10) Podcasts make the time go by quickly
11) Podcasts allow me to consume fresh or novel content not otherwise available in
the media
12) I like to hear about the experiences of people who are different than me
Factor 3: Social/Multitasking; 6 items (α = .80)
17) I use social media to recommend podcasts to others
18) I use social media to discuss podcasts with my friends
19) I talk with other fans about the podcasts I listen to
24) I usually accomplish several tasks simultaneously*
25) I am usually occupied with several things simultaneously
26) I like to do more than one thing at a time

*New and revised items have been italicized

The reported fit indices fall within the commonly accepted levels as outlined
by Hu and Bentler (1999), which suggests a good model fit. Construct validity
for each factor was assessed using Nunnally’s (1978) criteria for each item
within a factor having a minimum standardized CFA factor loading of .60,
which was accomplished within the currently proposed model. Further, the
predictive validity for the overall Podcast U&G Scale on podcast listenership
demonstrates that as participant levels of podcast gratifications increase, so
does their listenership (β = .197, p = .000). This similar trend was observed
for three of the four individual factors – Edutainment (β = .19, p < .001),
Storytelling (β = .12, p < .05) and Social Engagement (β = .160, p < .001) –
with Multitasking being the single factor that failed to demonstrate significant
predictive validity (β = .06, p > .05).
Additionally, the four individual factors of the Podcast U&G Scale demonstrated
acceptable reliabilities: Controlling Edutainment (α = .89); Storytelling
Transportation (α = .80); Social Engagement (α = .86); and Multitasking (α = .87).
See Figure 1 for the four-factor path model. The 18-item Podcast U&G Scale is
available in the Appendix.
 Perks et al./PODCAST USES AND GRATIFICATIONS SCALE 627

Figure 1
Four-Factor Path Model

Edu 1
.77
Edu 2 .71

Edu 3 .74
.70
Edu 4 Edutainment

Edu 5 .71

Edu 6 .76

.71
Edu 7

Sto 1 .60

Sto 2 .69

.68
Sto 3 Storytelling

Sto 4 .69

Sto 5 .68

.95
Soc 1

.84
Soc 2 Social

Soc 3 .87

Mul 1 .82

.82
Mul 2 Multitasking

Mul 3 .85
628 Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

Table 3
MANOVA Results

Factors High Listenership Low Listenership F

Edutainment M = 6.22 M = 5.99 F = (1, 403) = 11.27, p = .001

SD = .645 SD = .740
Storytelling M = 5.91 M = 5.76 F = (1, 403) = 3.86, p = .05
SD = .711 SD = .776
Engagement M = 4.27 M = 3.85 F = (1, 403) = 6.10, p = .014
SD = 1.677 SD = 1.703
Multitasking M = 5.08 M = 4.99 F = (1, 403) = .58, p = .449
SD = 1.253 SD = 1.203

Low versus High Listenership. To test for model differences between low and high
listenership, groups were formed by performing a median split (four hours). The “Low”
podcast group (n = 226) averaged four or fewer hours a week of podcast listening per
week, while the “High” podcast group (n = 178) averaged above 4 h of listenership per
week. Controlling for Type I errors, a Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was
conducted with podcast listenership (low v. high) as the independent variable and the
four factors of the Podcast U&G Scale as the dependent variables.
The omnibus test revealed a significant main effect for podcast listenership (F (4, 399)
= 5.904, p = .000, ηρ2 = .056). Contrasts between podcast listenership on the four scale
factors demonstrated significant differences on three of the four factors, with gratifica-
tions being greater for those with increased podcast listenership (see Table 3). The
single factor that did not produce a significant difference was Multitasking, although
participants in the “High” podcast listenership group did report greater gratifications
surrounding multitasking. From these findings, we conclude that as listenership
increases, so too does an individual’s gratifications associated with podcasts.

General Discussion

This scale development research on podcast U&G makes important contributions

toward understanding audio media engagement patterns. The scale paints the picture
of a regular podcast listener who wants to be in control over the content, timing, and
any secondary or multitasking activities. Podcast listening is not just about the podcast
itself; it is about the way the act of listening to podcasts seems to effortlessly overlap
with and easily nest into the time-crunched, media rich lives we lead today.
The podcast format does not simply offer one form of content: a listener might turn to
a podcast for sports information, political discourse, storytelling, relationship advice,
and much more. Similarly, the podcast platform offers a complex constellation of
affordances that build on and borrow from past and current media, while sprinkling
in some emergent and unique uses of its own. It is a medium capable of transporting the
 Perks et al./PODCAST USES AND GRATIFICATIONS SCALE 629

listener by way of an engaging narrative, of providing stimulating brain food, of

providing a platform for social interaction, and of allowing us to do all of this while
we busy our brains with other media and busy our hands with the mundane tasks of
the day. The podcast is not any one thing, but rather all of these things at once.
The scale items overwhelmingly indicate that listeners want something novel and
unique: new knowledge, intriguing entertainment, stories from people different than
themselves. When theorizing about the relationship between transportation and
entertainment, Green et al. (2004) posited that one can experience positive affect
by expanding “the self and gaining new knowledge about the self or the world”
through the narrative experience (p. 320). Our two items that address the appeal of
unique listening opportunities align with this observation: “Podcasts allow me to
consume fresh or novel content not otherwise available in the media”; “I like to
hear about the experiences of people who are different than me.” Although these
items loaded onto the second factor and not the first, we can start to see a cohesive
picture of podcast gratifications through the vein of learning something new, going
beyond what you already know or have experienced.
Because of this scale’s “two-step” process (of quantitative work drawing from
qualitative), this study offers researchers a more accurate picture of podcast U&G,
compared to solely drawing from or adapting existing typologies. Heeding the advice
of Sundar and Limperos (2013), along with Ruggiero (2000), this work consulted
existing typologies and made space for emergent ones. Considering each scale factor
as a typology, we see some notable patterns emerge. The Controlling Edutainment
factor merges typologies for education and entertainment. The second factor of
Storytelling Transportation indicates that audio raconteurs can create an experience
as powerful and immersive as more sensory-rich storytelling media.
Podcast listening may be a more individualized experience than engaging another
type of medium, but that personalized experience is wrapped in social gratifications—
to share what one hears and to hear what others have shared. Although it is not a uses
and gratifications typology, three of König et al.’s (2010) multitasking survey items
cohered in factor four, thus suggesting more widespread applicability of those items in
understanding media audience behaviors. These four factors, and the hybrid qualita-
tive/quantitative method used to derive them, present a snapshot of the gratifications
most important to and common among regular podcast listeners.
Podcast production companies and smaller-scale podcast producers would be well-
served by taking note of the aggregate picture of podcast listener gratifications. It
behooves production companies and producers to offer a variety of podcast genres
spanning education and entertainment if they are to meet their listeners’ varied needs.
The first factor, Controlling Edutainment, may have hung together because people
want both forms of engagement (entertainment and education), depending upon
mood, time of day, and other circumstances. As for the second factor, Storytelling
Transportation, podcasts can be particularly appealing to listeners who are trying to
make the time pass quickly, perhaps while the Multitasking factor may reflect a more
mundane activity. Furthermore, although many podcasts have mechanisms for the
630 Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

listener to host backchanneling, the Social Engagement factor suggests that listeners
want to have more engagement with fellow listeners. Facilitating that kind of commu-
nication could cultivate a more engaged and loyal audience.

Limitations and Future Research

Some limitations of this study include higher-than-average education levels from

participants, the lack of conceptual clarity surrounding multitasking, and not asking
participants about the conditions under which they listened to podcasts. Although
research indicates that podcast listeners tend to be more educated and affluent (“The
Podcast Consumer,” 2018), we might find different gratifications from a more educa-
tionally diverse population of participants. In terms of multitasking, we surmised that
participants may have had different understandings of what the term “multitasking”
means, dependent upon their age. Clarity about the definition of multitasking may lead
to more illuminating results. Additionally, asking participants about the time of day
they listen and what else they are doing at that time could help us parse out potential
relationships between life circumstances and gratifications sought.
The greater breadth of multitasking activities and the interaction of age and
education level on gratifications are just two areas for future podcast and new
media research. Additionally, we find the question of podcast persuasion to be
ripe for future study. The potential seems great for transported, motivated listeners to
learn from and be persuaded by podcasts. The current scale’s attention to transpor-
tation as well as edutainment, then, suggests there will be value to scholarly work
about the ways story-based beliefs relate to podcast engagement habits.

Conclusions

The goal of this research was to develop a Podcast U&G scale with heuristic
utility for scholars interested in a continued understanding of the gratifications users
seek when they turn to podcasts. In that sense, we hope this scale has fruitfully
addressed the questions: 1) What gratifications do regular podcast listeners report?
and 2) What motivates their podcast engagement?
Overall, the four factors that emerged from the above studies demonstrate that
podcasts enable listeners to connect to the world and the people around them—on
the listeners’ own terms. The four factors comprise a productive U&G typology that
could apply to other media engagement patterns. Furthermore, each factor may be
taken separately to offer explanatory value for various media gratifications. Our first
factor, Controlling Edutainment, has perhaps the most widespread applicability in our
media age of customization and selection. With user-programmable audio services,
television/film streaming services, and widespread availability of digital downloads,
audience members have become our own content curators. This factor addresses the
 Perks et al./PODCAST USES AND GRATIFICATIONS SCALE 631

dual function of podcasts to both captivate audiences as well as expand their minds
as they gain exposure to new ideas put forth by interesting others.
The second factor, Storytelling Transportation, found that podcast listening is an
immersive experience, despite being relatively light on sensory engagement. The
transportative experience relates to feeling connected to a host whose voice is in
one’s ear (perhaps on a regular basis) and can serve as a stand-in for the engaging
protagonist in more traditional narrative formats, thus helping the time pass quickly
for the listener. Green et al. (2004) found that people in a state of transportation “often
lose track of time or fail to notice events occurring around them” because of their
attentiveness to the narrative (p. 315). Although this study cannot confirm a precise
relationship, the sense of time passing quickly also tied into focus group participant
explanations for why they multitasked using podcasts (Perks & Turner, 2019). These
findings can help other scholars investigate the constructions of mediated “presence,”
investigate relationships between temporality and media engagement, or to under-
stand the appeal of other related media such as audiobooks.
The Confirmatory Factor Analysis neatly split the latter six items into two factors of
three (Social Engagement and Multitasking). The first factor emerging from that split
focuses on listener-to-listener engagement. Two of the items specifically mention
social media as a way to connect with other listeners. Because podcasts are not
a mass medium, social media can be particularly useful to connect with niche listener
or fan communities—and to potentially connect with podcast hosts or guests.
Although podcast listening can easily be a solitary activity, this factor suggests that
asynchronous engagement with fellow listeners buttresses that solitary experience.
The fourth factor does not include items that mention podcasts; instead, it addresses
a proclivity for multitasking. The three items, which all reference working on multiple
tasks at one time, suggests that multitaskers may be drawn to podcasts because listening
helps them get things done or at least feel productive. Looping back to our first
and second factors, learning about a new subject or new experience through
a podcast can be a way of a) making time pass faster and b) helping expand the self.
Thus, we see a cohesive collection of gratifications in our first, second, and fourth
factors. The social aspect might be a way of mitigating the loneliness of this customiz-
able medium that people make fit to their own interests and circumstances. People may
listen by themselves, but offer the same gratifications to others by recommending
engaging content or by using podcast content to initiate conversations.
As mobile devices have gained processing power and Wi-Fi networks are more
widespread (among other tech and infrastructure advancements), it seems likely
that digital media can now more effectively support conjoined needs that have
been percolating for at least a century: for immersive and varied audio entertain-
ment that is now on-demand and on the go. This podcast U&G scale underscores
the many reasons that regular listeners engage with podcasts. In this scale, old and
new gratifications combine to give listeners edifying entertainment that enhances
what they know and what they can do—to make the most out of every fast-
passing minute.
632 Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

Notes

1. The original McClung and Johnson (2010) items are as follows, with our modifications in
brackets:“I can [listen to] the podcast I want when I want.”“Podcasts provide entertain-
ment at times that are convenient for me.”“Podcasts are entertaining.”“Podcasts allow me
greater control over my listening experience.”“I talk with friends about the podcasts I
[listen to].”“I talk with other fans about the podcasts I [listen to].”“I [listen to] podcasts
that my friends tell me about” (p. 90).
2. “Temptation bundling” is a phrase coined by Milkman, Minson, and Volpp (2014) to
describe pairing an activity one wants to do with an activity one feels they should do.
3. Please contact the first author for the list of removed items.
4. Please contact the first author for the list of removed items.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding

This work was supported by the Merrimack College school of liberal arts [N/A].

References

“2018 podcast stats and facts”. (2018, June 13). Podcast Insights. Retrieved from https://www.
podcastinsights.com/podcast-statistics/
Albarran, A. B., Anderson, T., Bejar, L. G., Bussart, A. L., Daggett, E., Gibson, S., … Way, H. (2007).
What happened to our audience? Radio and new technology uses and gratifications among adult
users. Journal of Radio Studies, 14(2), 92–101. doi:10.1080/10955040701583171
Berry, R. (2015). A golden age of podcasting? Evaluating Serial in the context of podcast histories.
Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 22(2), 170–178. doi:10.1080/19376529.2015.1083363
Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L. (1987). Validation and measurement of the fundamental theories of
relational communication. Communication Monographs, 54, 19–41. doi:10.1080/
03637758709390214
Ferguson, D. A., & Perse, E. M. (2000). The world wide web as a functional alternative to
television. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(2), 155–174. doi:10.1207/
s15506878jobem4402_1
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public
narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701–721. doi:10.1037/
0022-3514.79.5.701
Green, M. C., Brock, T. C., & Kaufman, G. F. (2004). Understanding media enjoyment: The
role of transportation into narrative worlds. Communication Theory, 14(4), 311–327.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00317.x
Hoaglin, D. C., & Iglewicz, B. (1987). Fine-tuning some resistant rule for outlier labeling.
Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(400), 1147–1149. doi:10.1080/
01621459.1987.10478551
 Perks et al./PODCAST USES AND GRATIFICATIONS SCALE 633

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling:
A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy, J. A., Jr., & Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009). Reporting practices in
confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations. Psychological
Methods, 14(1), 6–23. doi:10.1037/a0014694
Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 37, 509–523. doi:10.1086/268109
Katz, E., Haas, H., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). On the use of the mass media for important things.
American Sociological Review, 38, 164–181. doi:10.2307/2094393
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: Guilford.
König, C. J., Oberacher, L., & Kleinmann, M. (2010). Personal and situational determinants of
multitasking at work. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9(2), 99–103. doi:10.1027/1866-
5888/a000008
Krcmar, M., & Strizhakova, Y. (2009). Uses and gratifications as media choice. In T. Hartmann (Ed.),
Media choice: A theoretical and empirical overview (pp. 53–69). New York, NY: Routledge.
Leung, L., & Zhang, R. (2016). Predicting tablet use: A study of gratifications-sought, leisure
boredom, and multitasking. Telematics and Informatics, 33(2), 331–341. doi:10.1016/j.
tele.2015.08.013
“A marketer’s guide to podcasting”, (2018, March 20). Nielsen. Retrieved from http://www.
nielsen.com/us/en/insights/reports/2018/nielsen-podcast-insights-q1-2018.html
Markman, K. M. (2015). Everything old is new again: Podcasting as radio’s revival. Journal of
Radio & Audio Media, 22(2), 240–243. doi:10.1080/19376529.2015.1083376
McClung, S., & Johnson, K. (2010). Examining the motives of podcast users. Journal of Radio &
Audio Media, 17(1), 82–95. doi:10.1080/19376521003719391
Menduni, E. (2007). Four steps in innovative radio broadcasting: From QuickTime to
podcasting. Radio Journal: International Studies in Broadcast & Audio Media, 5, 9–18.
doi:10.1386/rajo.5.1.9_1
Milkman, K. L., Minson, J. A., & Volpp, K. G. M. (2014). Holding The Hunger Games hostage
at the gym: An evaluation of temptation bundling. Management Science, 60(2), 283–299.
doi:10.1287/mnsc.2013.1784
Murray, S. (2009). Servicing “self scheduling consumers”: Public broadcasters and audio podcast-
ing. Global Media and Communication, 5(2), 197–219. doi:10.1177/1742766509341610
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw.
Papacharissi, Z., & Rubin, A. M. (2000). Predictors of internet use. Journal of Broadcasting &
Electronic Media, 44(2), 175–196. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4402_2
Perks, L. G., & Turner, J. S. (2019). Podcasts and productivity: A qualitative Uses and
Gratifications study. Mass Communication and Society, 22(1), 96–116. doi:10.1080/
15205436.2018.1490434
“The podcast consumer 2018”. (2018, April 19). Edison research. Retrieved from http://www.
edisonresearch.com/podcast-consumer-2018/
Rubin, A. M. (1984). Ritualized and instrumental television viewing. Journal of Communication,
34(3), 67–77. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1984.tb02174.x
Rubin, A. M. (1994). Media uses and effects: A uses and gratifications perspective. In J. Bryant
& D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 417–436).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Rubin, A. M., & Step, M. M. (2000). Impact of motivation, attraction, and parasocial interac-
tion on talk radio listening. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(4), 635–654.
doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4404_7
Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communication
& Society, 3(1), 3–37. doi:10.1207/S15327825MCS0301_02
Singleton, R. A., Jr., & Straits, B. C. (2005). Approaches to social research (4th ed.). New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
634 Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

Sundar, S. S., & Limperos, A. M. (2013). Uses and grats 2.0: New gratifications for new media. Journal
of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 57(4), 504–525. doi:10.1080/08838151.2013.845827
Voorveld, H. A. M., & van der Goot, M. (2013). Age differences in media multitasking: A diary
study. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 57(3), 392–408. doi:10.1080/
08838151.2013.816709
Wade, J. M., & Patterson, E. (2015). Podcasting and its apps: Software, sound and the
interfaces of digital audio. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 22(20), 220–230.
doi:10.1080/19376529.2015.1083374
Wang, Z., & Tchernev, J. M. (2012). The “myth” of media multitasking: Reciprocal dynamics
of media multitasking, personal needs, and gratifications. Journal of Communication, 62(3),
493–513. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01641.x
Zeng, L. (2011). More than audio on the go: Uses and gratifications of MP3 players.
Communication Research Reports, 28(1), 97–108. doi:10.1080/08824096.2011.54136

Appendix
Podcast Uses and Gratifications Scale

Directions: Using the provided scale, please respond to the following items
regarding your podcast use.
1 = “Strongly Disagree” 2 = “Disagree” 3 = “Somewhat Disagree”
4 = “Neither Agree nor Disagree” 5 = “Somewhat Agree” 6 = “Agree” 7 = “Strongly Agree”
1. I can learn something new from podcasts.
2. I can picture the stories told through podcasts in my mind as I listen.
3. I use social media to recommend podcasts to others.
4. I usually accomplish several tasks simultaneously.
5. I can educate myself when I listen to podcasts.
6. I can expand my mind from podcasts.
7. Time passes quickly when I listen to podcasts that feature storytelling.
8. Podcasts make the time go quickly.
9. I use social media to discuss podcasts with my friends.
10. I am usually occupied with several things simultaneously.
11. I listen to the podcast I want when I want.
12. Podcasts provide entertainment at times that are convenient for me.
13. Podcasts allow me to consume fresh or novel content not otherwise available
in the media.
14. I talk to other fans about the podcasts I listen to.
15. Podcasts are entertaining.
16. I like to hear about the experiences of people who are different than me.
17. I like to do more than one thing at a time.
18. I like to learn about other people’s experiences through podcasts.
Controlling Edutainment: Items 1, 5, 6, 11, 12, 15, 18; Storytelling Transportation:
Items 2, 7, 8, 13, 16; Social Engagement: Items 3, 9, 14; Multitasking: Items 4, 10, 17
Copyright of Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media is the property of Broadcast
Education Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email articles for individual use.