|
| |
CHILDREN & TV VIOLENCE.
Term Paper ID:28643
|
|
|
Essay Subject:
Discusses research studies on negative effects of TV violence. Views of social psychologists.... More...
|
6 Pages / 1350 Words
7 sources, 14 Citations,
APA Format
$24.00
Return to List of Papers
|
Paper Abstract:
Discusses research studies on negative effects of TV violence. Views of social psychologists.
Paper Introduction:
Television viewing has become one of the most prevalent pastimes in the United States, with violence one of the most common acts portrayed on television shows, network and cable alike. Because of this, social psychologists have studied the effects of violent television on aggressive behavior.
The two major theories concerning television aggression are frustration-aggression and social learning; each theory makes different predictions about the effects of television violence. The frustration-aggressive theory suggests that viewing an aggressive act will lessen the instigation toward future aggression. If children vicariously experience aggression by watching violence on TV, they should therefore be less likely to aggress. Social learning theory, on the other hand, suggests that witnessed aggression leads to more aggression rather than
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
Perhaps such a long-term study would be difficultto achieve, but it would seem that such a study would be as crucial to anunderstanding of the effects of TV violence on children as the many short-term studies undertaken. Children (like adults) are drawn to TVviolence. The National Television Violence Study of the University of Texas atAustin College of Communication "finds TV violence continues to pose aserious risk of harm to children." Particularly alarming is the fact thatthere is a "rise in the level of visual violence in the late afternoon"(National, 1998, 2), a time when child viewing is high. (1998). Hearold's meta-analysis (inLippa) is particularly telling because it demonstrates that the greatmajority of studies do make such a correlation clear. (1995). Specifically, minority and immigrantchildren (who watch inordinate amounts of TV), emotionally disturbedchildren (who tend to believe that TV violence reflects the real world),abused children (who admire violent heroes), and children of families ingreat distress (who learn more from TV about the world than from theirparents) (Josephson, 1995, 37). We now are aware of the negative short-termeffects, but what might be the long-term effects? (1998). The literature reviewed, in general, acknowledges contrary findings,but it is clear that those findings (that TV violence does not lead tochildren's aggression) are in the minority. The two major theories concerning television aggression arefrustration-aggression and social learning; each theory makes differentpredictions about the effects of television violence. If there is one major problem with the studies in this literature, itis that they do not provide a long-term portrait of the damage done tochildren by TV violence. Children, however, cannot stop themselves from watching. http://helping.apa.org/family/kidtvviol.html. February 27, 2 . College of Communication. "Family and Relationships: Children and Television Violence." (2 )APA HelpCenter. The UCLA Television Violence Report, 1997. But what isgoing to be done with this evidence? In other words, what long-term effects (violence, anti-social behavior, serial killing) may be causedin adults who watched great amounts of TV violence as children. The AACAP reports that Hundreds of studies of the effects of TV violence on children and teenagers have found that children may: become "immune" to the horror of violence; gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems; imitate the violence they observe on television; and identify with certain characters, victims and/or victimizers ("Children," 2 ). http://www.utexas.edu/coc/research/ntvs/. The social psychological perspective, then, in general, is that sucha relationship does exist and should be a concern for parents and society. In one "meta-analysis" of 23 studies into this relationshipbetween TV violence and children's aggression, one researcher found consistent evidence that TV violence is related to children's aggressiveness. The APA HelpCenter reports that the "television industry took stepstoward implementing a ratings system for its programming" and a V-chipsystem is slowly being implemented ("Family," 2 , 2). Many experimental and correlational studies suggest that it does. Laboratory experiments show that immediately after viewing violent TV shows, children often behave and play more aggressively and choose aggressive solutions to social problems (Lippa, 199 , 453). The studies taken as a whole leave no doubt thatchildren are damaged by such violence, and that society owes those childrenprotection from such damage. February 27, 2 . However, violence is a dominant factor even inprogramming for children. Because of this, socialpsychologists have studied the effects of violent television on aggressivebehavior. The same study shows that "watching a single violent program canincrease aggressiveness." In addition, the more realistic the violence, thegreater the frequency, and the degree to which it goes unpunished, are allfactors increasing the likelihood that the child viewer will "imitate whatthey see" ("Children," 2 ). The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatryreports that children in the United States watch from 3-4 hours oftelevision a day, and concludes that "Television can be a powerfulinfluence in developing value systems and shaping behavior." Used well andwisely, television could obviously be a positive influence on a child(Lippa, 199 , 49 -491). The evidence is clear -- TV violence is bad for children, causing themto be more violent, to look at the world as a violent place, to seeviolence as a legitimate (or even the most effective) means of solvingproblems and conflicts, to fear the world and other people. Violence will remain in programmingfor both children and adults, and children will continue to watch it,fascinated and vulnerable. This research contributes to our social and psychological knowledgeby making clear that television, the most powerful medium in our society,can be used as either a force for good or a force for evil. Pacific Grove,California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.----------------------- 8 These and othersteps must be taken, of course, but as the same report goes on to say, thecentral role is that of the parents. Although some experimental research has concluded that therelationship between TV violence and aggression in children is tenuous atbest, the majority of the sources consulted for this study make clear thatthere is indeed such a relationship, and that the problem requires activeremedies on the part of parents and society: Does watching all this TV violence actually influence children's behavior? The social and psychological knowledge thatchildren are hurt by violent TV will not stop programmers from showingviolent programming -- unless they are stopped by ongoing public outragefrom parents and from the representatives of the government. Television Violence: A Review of theEffects on Children of Different Ages. Worchel, S., Cooper, J, Goethals, G.R. (199 ). (199 ). Clearly, all the social and psychological knowledge in the world willnot change this dreadful situation unless it leads to action involving allparts of society -- parents, child advocate groups, networks, advertisers,etc. References "Children and TV Violence." (2 ). Department of Canadian Heritage.http://www.media-awareness.ca/eng/med/home/resource/tvviorp.htm. Hearold's meta-study is particularly significant because of itsoverview, which indicates clearly that the majority of studies does show acorrelation between TV violence and aggression in children's behavior. Thisrequires parental and governmental involvement, because the TV industryshows o inclination to change its violent programming, without pressurefrom those parents and the government. Josephson adds to our social and psychological knowledge by pointingout that particular groups of children are more vulnerable to the impact oftelevised violence than others. . Social learning theory, on the other hand, suggests thatwitnessed aggression leads to more aggression rather than to catharsis(Worchel, et al, 199 ). The Liebert and Brown study exposed one group of children to aviolent program and another group to a sports program, and then had thechildren play together. In addition, she observed the following trends: the effects of TV violence tend to increase with age for boys but decrease for girls; TV violence encourages real-life violence, particularly when it is realistic and portrayed as justified, and finally, children need not be aroused to be affected by TV violence. . Introductions to Social Psychology.Belmont, California: Wadsworth. The frustration-aggressive theory suggests that viewing an aggressive act will lessen theinstigation toward future aggression. Austin: University ofTexas. It is finally up to parents themselves topolice their children's viewing and to simply eliminate the watching ofviolence -- if they care about their children. However, to date, themoney-driven motivations of the networks and advertisers have dominatedprogramming, resulting in increased levels of violence in shows which areaimed at children. Social psychology, therefore, views the question of the effects oftelevision violence on children as a testable problem, based, for example,on cause and effect, or the analysis of the relationships betweenvariables: For example, in an experiment testing the effects of TV violence on children's aggression we might show some children a violent TV show and others a nonviolent show (the violence of the show would constitute the independent variable) and then observe whether the two kinds of programs have any effect on the children's aggressiveness (the dependent variable) (Lippa, 199 , 3 ). If children vicariously experienceaggression by watching violence on TV, they should therefore be less likelyto aggress. . http://www.parenthoodweb.com/parent_cfmfiles/pros.ctm?n=247. Lippa, asalready stated (49 -491), demonstrates that TV can be used to create pro-social rather than anti-social values in children. Whether or notpressure from the government will significantly decrease TV violence overthe long run is questionable. The governmentwill not move against TV violence, fearing combat with the media andadvertisers, unless they are forced to by public outrage, and that outragemust come from the parents themselves, who must be armed with the socialand psychological knowledge revealed by these studies and their findings. February 27, 2 . Josephson, Wendy L. February 27, 2 . Westwood: UCLACenter for Communications Policy. Lippa, Richard A. The literature reviewed in this study provides a complete picture ofthe negative effects of TV violence on the psychological and behavioralrealities of children. The American Academy of Child andAdolescent Psychiatry. The powerful evidence that TV violence harms children (and thereforeall of society, including its future) is undeniable now. The UCLA Television Violence Report, 1997, provides a wealth ofevidence for increased TV violence and its negative effect on children,focusing not only on increased aggressiveness and violence in the behaviorof child viewers, but on the fact that viewers, both adults and children,"are almost paralyzed by fear"of violence as the result of being inundated by televised violence (UCLA,1998, 9). But as research on frustration and arousal suggests, these variables can heighten the effects of media violence on children's aggressiveness (Lippa, 199 , 456). Television viewing has become one of the most prevalent pastimes inthe United States, with violence one of the most common acts portrayed ontelevision shows, network and cable alike. Some studies and social psychologists disagree with these generalfindings, but Lippa argues that "the preponderance of research documents arelationship between TV viewing and aggression in children" (Lippa, 199 ,453). National Television Violence Study. The study "found that children who watched theviolent TV segment hurt other children more in their 'game' and played moreaggressively than did children who watched the sports segment" (Lippa,199 , 31, 33).
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
Click here to request an essay written just for you.
|
|
|
