Interrelation of the Semantic Structure of Parasocial Relations and Subjectivity of the Individual (On The Example of K-Pop Fans)

Introduction. The relevance of the research is due to the transformation of the phenomenon of parasocial relationships in the digital age, especially in the context of the K-pop industry (an abbreviation for Korean pop), where conditions are created for high emotional engagement of the audience.  While most existing research focuses on quantitative measures of the strength of attachment to a media person, this study shifts the focus to a qualitative analysis of the semantic structure of these connections.
Objective. To identify the features of the semantic field of parasocial relations and determine their interrelations with markers of subjectivity of the fan, in particular with self-efficacy, locus of control and self-attitude.
Materials and Methods. For data collection, we used the “Multi-genre questionnaire of parasocial relations” (D. P. Tkachenko, S. R. Samsonov), “Self-attitude Questionnaire” (V. V. Stolin, S. R. Pantileev), “Scale of general self-efficacy” (R. Schwarzer, E. Yerusalem, V. G. Romek), “Level of subjective control” (E. F. Bazhin, E. A. Golynkina, A.M. Etkind) and the author’s questionnaire for identifying value-semantic aspects of parasocial relations.
Results. The empirical study included 276 women (M_age = 24.93, SD = 7.01) who are fans of K-pop artists. As a result of cluster analysis, three qualitatively different types of configuration of semantic aspects of parasocial relations were identified: “type with an identification orientation”, “type with a motivational orientation” and “type with a mentoring orientation”. It was found that fans with high indicators of self-attitude, self-efficacy, and internal locus of control (motivational orientation) perceive the idol as a source of inspiration for real actions (p < 0.05). Conversely, respondents with low self-esteem, self-efficacy, and external locus of control (mentoring focus) tend to see the idol as a “role model” and a “powerful other”, delegating responsibility for decision-making to him (p < 0.05).
Discussion. The study showed a functional diversity of parasocial relationships. The key role for defining functions can be played not by the strength of attachment to the media person, but by the semantic content of this connection. The data obtained contribute to understanding the relationship between the semantic aspects of parasocial relationships and the subjectivity of fans.

1. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

2. Bazhin, E. F., Golynkina, E. A., & Etkind, A.M. (1984). Method for studying the level of subjective control. Psychological Journal, 5(3), 152–162.

3. Blight, M. G. (2016). Relationships to video game streamers: Examining gratifications, parasocial relationships, fandom, and community affiliation online [Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

4. Chauvin, K., Auverset, L., Madison, P., & Auter, P. (2024). “I learned it from watching YOU!”: Parasocial relationships with YouTubers and self-efficacy. The Journal of Social Media in Society, 13(1), 27–52.

5. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 182–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012801

6. Degen, J. L., Pistoll, D., Brandmaier, A. M., & Bröning, S. (2025). Where you lead, I will follow: Developing a new measure for studying parasocial involvement with influencers. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 19(3), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2025-3-2

7. Dermanova, I. B. (2004). Subject and subjectivity in the structure of human properties: an attempt at an integrated approach. Acmeologiya,3, 106–116.

8. Flint, E., Calicchia, J., McCutcheon, L. E., Browne, B., & Huynh, H. P. (2022). Examining how celebrity admiration influences decision making. Journal of Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities, 8(2), 171–181.

9. Galbraith, P. W. (2016). The labor of love: On the convergence of fan and corporate interests in contemporary idol culture in Japan. In P. W. Galbraith & J. G. Karlin (Eds.), Media convergence in Japan (pp. 232–264). Kinema Club. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781501341144.0014

10. Ganta, V. S. H., Donthu, R. K., & Salaam, M. A. (2025). A cross-sectional study to explore the association between parasocial interaction and big five personality traits toward K-wave/Hallyu. Industrial psychiatry journal, 34(2), 328–334. https://doi.org/10.4103/ipj.ipj_82_25

11. Garcia, D., Björk, E., & Kazemitabar, M. (2022). The A(ffect) B(ehavior) C(ognition) D(ecision) of parasocial relationships: A pilot study on the psychometric properties of the Multidimensional Measure of Parasocial Relationships (MMPR). Heliyon, 8(10), e10779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10779

12. Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215–229 https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049

13. Jarzyna, C. L. (2021). Parasocial interaction, the COVID-19 quarantine, and digital age media. Human Arenas, 4(3), 413–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42087-020-00156-0

14. Jenol, N. A. M., & Pazil, N. H. A. (2020). Escapism and motivation: Understanding K-pop fans' well-being and identity. Geografia Online. Malaysian Journal of Society and Space, 16(4), 336–347. https://doi.org/10.17576/geo-2020-1604-25

15. King-O’Riain, R. C. (2021). “They were having so much fun, so genuinely…”: K-pop fan online affect and corroborated authenticity. New Media & Society, 23(9), 2820–2838. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820941194

16. Kulyapina, A.M., Fam, A. Kh., & Zolotareva, A. A. (2024). Sence of agency: concept, structure, assessment. Educational Studies,1, 127–141. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17323/vo-2024-19790

17. Kuzina, L. B., & Kuzina, N. V. (2020). Influence of modern socio-cultural practices in the Asia-Pacific region on aesthetic preferences, value and behavioral stereotypes of adolescents and young people in the Russian Federation (popular music, animation, amateur literature, everyday life). Modern Studies of social problems, 12(5-3), 137–194. https://doi.org/10.12731/2077-1770-2020-5-3-137-194

18. Le, L. H., & Hancer, M. (2021). Using social learning theory in examining YouTube viewers’ desire to imitate travel vloggers. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 12(3), 512–532. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-08-2020-0200

19. Leontiev, A. N. (1975). Activity. Conscience. Personality. Politizdat. (In Russ.)

20. Leontiev, D. A. (2010). What gives psychology the concept of the subject: subjectivity as a dimension of personality. Epistemology and Philosophy of Science,25(3), 135–153. (In Russ.)

21. Levenson, H. (1981). Differentiating among internality, powerful others, and chance. In H. M. Lefcourt (Ed.) Research with the locus of control construct (Vol. 1, pp. 15–63). Academic Press.

22. Lotun, S., Lamarche, V. M., Matran-Fernandez, A., & Sandstrom, G. M. (2024). People perceive parasocial relationships to be effective at fulfilling emotional needs. Scientific Reports, 14(1), Article 8185. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-58069-9

23. Lukacs, G. (2015). The labor of cute: Net idols, cute culture, and the digital economy in contemporary Japan. Positions: East Asia cultures critique, 23(3), 487–513. https://doi.org/10.1215/10679847-3125863

24. McCutcheon, L. E., Lange, R., & Houran, J. (2002). Conceptualization and measurement of celebrity worship. British Journal of Psychology, 93(1), 67–87. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712602162454

25. Pantileev, S. R. (1991). Self-attitude as an emotional evaluation system. MSU. (In Russ.)

26. Papa, M. J., Singhal, A., Law, S., Pant, S., Sood, S., Rogers, E. M., & Shefner-Rogers, C. L. (2000). Entertainment-education and social change: An analysis of parasocial interaction, social learning, collective efficacy, and paradoxical communication. Journal of Communication, 50(4), 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02862.x

27. Petrovsky, V. A. (1985). The principle of reflected subjectivity in the psychological study of personality. Psychology studies, 4, 17–30. (In Russ.)

28. Pimienta, J. (2023). Towards an integrated and systematic theory of parasocial relationships: PSR as an attachment process of communication in Latin America. Communication Research Trends, 42(1), Article 1.

29. Romek, V. G., Schwarzer, R., and Yerusalem, M. (1996). Russian version of the general self-efficacy scale by R. Schwarzer and M. Yerusalem. Foreign Psychology,7, 71–77. (In Russ.)

30. Rotter, J. B. (1966). General expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0092976

31. Scherer, H., Diaz, S., Iannone, N., McCarty, M., Branch, S., & Kelly, J. (2022). “Leave Britney alone!”: Parasocial relationships and empathy. The Journal of Social Psychology, 162(1), 128–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2021.1997889

32. Sheng, J., Kostyk, A., & Chatzipanagiotou, K. (2025). From parasocial interaction to parasocial relationship: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 49(2), Article e70038. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.70038

33. Silver, N., & Slater, M. D. (2019). A safe space for self-expansion: Attachment and motivation to engage and interact with the story world. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(11–12), 3492–3514. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407519826345

34. Stever, G. S. (2009). Parasocial and social interaction with celebrities: Classification of media fans. Journal of Media Psychology, 14(3), 1–39.

35. Stolin, V. V. (1983). Self-awareness of the individual. Moscow University Press. (In Russ.)

36. Stolin, V. V., and Pantileev, S. R. (2000). Self-attitude questionnaire. In A. A. Bodalev and V. V. Stolin (Eds.), General psychodiagnostics (pp. 381-385). Speech. (In Russ.)

37. Tkachenko, D. P., & Samsonov, T. S. (2022). Approbation and first stage of standardization of the "Multi-genre questionnaire of parasocial relations" (MOPS-O) methodology. New Psychological Research, 2(4), 49–72. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.51217/npsyresearch_2022_02_04_03

38. Tukachinsky, R. H. (2011). Para-romantic love and para-friendships: Development and assessment of a multiple-parasocial relationships scale. American Journal of Media Psychology, 3(1), 73–94.

39. Tukachinsky, R., Walter, N., & Saucier, C. J. (2020). Antecedents and effects of parasocial relationships: A meta-analysis. Journal of Communication, 70(6), 868–894. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqaa034

40. Zsila, Á., Orosz, G., McCutcheon, L. E., & Demetrovics, Z. (2021). Individual differences in the association between celebrity worship and subjective well-being: The moderating role of gender and age. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 651067. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.651067