A few years ago Covid-19 locked people down at their homes, effectively limiting their social connections and pushing the communicative outlet of the online realm in the forefront. If one wanted to socialize or seek entertainment, there was almost no other choice but to do so via turning to popular or social media. However, with the newly increased frequency of exposure came the question of whether there was also a change in the formation of parasocial relationships formed in isolation and this thesis explores the meaningfulness and longevity of such connections, tracing them before, during and after the pandemic. It also makes note of phenomena such as loneliness, parasocial romance and parasocial breakup, additionally examining the degree of attachment formed to media figures during isolation, as well as their relevance to the public. To achieve that, the empirical portion of this study consists of a survey in which 114 participants had to answer questions relating to isolation and parasocial behaviour. Additionally, for the purposes of the thesis two social media creators were contacted for interviews and were asked to share their views on parasocial interactions and attachments as they observed them in isolation from the other side of the connection. On the basis of previously existing separate research in parasocial relations and isolation six hypotheses were formed in this thesis relating to people’s online activity, perceived loneliness and financial generosity, as well as the degree of relatability and attachment they felt towards media personae.

Three experiments examined how a transgressor’s response, once accused of a wrongdoing, alters other’s perceptions of transgressor. Study 1 investigated how a baseball player’s response to steroid usage accusations affected fans’ perceptions of him. Participants thought of the athlete more positively when he apologized for his drug usage as compared to when he denied it or provided no comment. Study 2 examined if the effects of a transgressor’s response are moderated by the transgressor’s reputation. Participants were predicted to prefer apologies over denials if they had a pre-existing positive view of the transgressor (i.e., the person was a friend and not a stranger or someone known for being lazy). Results showed that, similar to Study 1, participants respected the transgressor and thought he handled the situation better when he apologized instead of denied the transgression, but contrary to predictions, the transgressor’s reputation did not have an effect on participants’ reactions to a transgressor’s responses. Study 3 examined whether feelings of schadenfreude (i.e., positive affect resulting from another’s misfortune) mitigated negative feelings toward a transgressor who denied the transgression. After participants witnessed a transgression, they then had to work with the transgressor on a task. When the transgressor performed the task incompetently, participants were predicted to feel schadenfreude and therefore not feel it was as important to hear the transgressor admit to his wrongdoing. Results indicated that participants felt more negatively toward an incompetent transgressor than one who contributed equally to the task, regardless of whether he denied or apologized for the transgression. Furthermore, contrary to the results of Studies 1 and 2, participants did not have increased positive feelings toward transgressors who apologized. Overall, these studies provide evidence that apologizing and expressing ownership for a transgression is the best method to respond with to facilitate relationship repair within multiple situations.