effects of television aggression on adult males(paper)

7/30/2019 Effects of Television Aggression on Adult Males(Paper)

1/11

1

A. Introduction

Nowadays it is more than common to come across aggressive acts on television.

Programs such as dramas, reality shows, news and even cartoons are not exempt of such

aggressive acts being whether verbal or physical.

Frequent exposure to such televised acts is increasing with the years and is becoming more and

more common than one would expect or even realize.

Numerous studies such as those of Paik and Comstock (1994) or Wood and colleagues (1991)

have proven that aggressive acts on television have substantial short-term effects on children in

particular and on young adults as well.A. Bandura (1963 and 1977) famous for his Bobo Doll experiment has published extensive

work on the effects of television violence and his work has even been presented several times to

the American congress. He demonstrated in his social learning theory model how aggression on

TV shaped the perception in children and how the effects could be carried out in their lives as

adults.

In another model called the cognitive neo-association model of aggression, Berkowitz (1984)

proposes that media violence might prime aggressive ideas, feelings and actions that are

already present.

In a more recent study Johnson et al. (2002) reported a significant association between the

amount of time spent watching television during adolescence and young adulthood and the

likelihood of subsequent antisocial behaviour such as threatening aggression and assault.

This confirmed an earlier study by Huesmann et al. (2003) showing that exposure to media

violence was predictive of aggressive behaviour in early adulthood in both men and women.

This study will investigate whether adult males viewing a certain amount of aggressive acts on

television are in turn aggressive in real life or if they present a potential for aggressive behaviour

in their lives.


2/11

2

B. Method

Through a survey, adult males from 18 years of age and over will be asked specificquestions, and from their answers this study will assess the number of aggressive acts

committed in the past year as compared to their exposure to aggressive acts on television.

This study will also assess the potential response to aggression as compared to their

exposure to violence on television.

In the first part, the independent variable will be being exposed or not being exposed to

aggressive acts on television and the dependant variable will be the number and the amount

of aggressive acts shown in the past year.

In the second part, the independent variable will be being exposed or not being exposed to

aggressive acts on television and the dependant variable will be the potential response when

being punched or insulted.

You will find attached at the end of this study a copy of the survey questionnaire.

Details of how the results were obtained:

A total number of 57 surveys were answered from random adult males.

The following questions were taken into account for this study:

The first question was used to discriminate between the people watching

or not watching television.

Then questions 4 and 5 were used to select the people watching

programs containing both physical and verbal violence.

Questions 5 and 7 were used to separate the people watching very often

and often as compared to people not often watching those programs

containing both physical and verbal violence.

Questions 9 and 11 were used to assess the number of either verbal or

physical aggressive acts a person was involved in during the past year.

Questions 10 and 12 were used to discriminate between the people

more or less active in those acts versus those who were passive during

those aggressive acts.

And finally, questions 13 and 14 were used to assess the potential

response a person might have in time of aggression.


3/11

3

C. Results

Exposed to TV violenceNot exposed to TVviolence

Number of people watching TV 55 0

Number of people exposed to both verbal andphysical violence on TV

53 0

Number of people very often and oftenexposed to both physical and verbal violenceon TV

28 0

Number of people not often exposed to bothverbal and physical violence on TV

16 0

Table 1: Trend of general results

Note: Of a total of 57 surveyed individuals, 28 were considered to be exposed to both

physical and verbal violence on TV as compared to 16 which were not considered

to be really exposed to both verbal and physical violence on TV.


4/11

4

Exposed to TV violence Not exposed to TV violence

Number

of

aggressive

acts

No of people

involved in

active verbal

aggressive acts

No of people

involved in active

physical

aggressive acts

No of people

involved in active

verbal aggressive

acts

No of people

involved in active

physical aggressive

acts


5/11

5

Graph showing aggressive acts of people exposed

to TV violence

0

5

10

15

20

25


6/11

6

Exposed to TV violence Not Exposed to TV violence

People's reactionNo. of people

reacting ifpunched

No. of peoplereacting if

insulted

No. of peoplereacting ifpunched

No. of peoplereacting if

insulted

Punch back16 1 11 1

Insult3 15 2 8

Not respond and call for help to getrevenge 1 0 0 0

Not respond and call forprofessional help 8 3 2 1

Not respond at all1 7 0 4

Mean 9.5 8 6.5 4.5

Table 4: Potential reactions in response to aggressive behaviour shown by people

exposed or not exposed to TV violence.

Note: Only the punch back and the insult reactions are considered as aggressive response.

The mean represents the mean of the number of people showing a potential for anaggressive response.

A total of 28 people exposed to TV violence.

A total of 16 people not exposed to TV violence.

Table 5: Percentages of people possibly showing aggressive behaviour in times of

aggression.

Exposed to TV violence Not exposed to TV violence

% of people possibly reacting whenpunched

68 81

% of people possibly reacting wheninsulted

57 56

Mean % 62.5 68.5


7/11

7

Possible reactions of people exposed to TV

violence when punched

Punch back

Insult

Not respond and

call for help to get

revengeNot respond and

call for

profess ional helpNot respond at all

Possible reactions of people not exposed to

TV violence when punched

Punch back

Insult

Not res pond and call

for help to get

revengeNot res pond and call

for professional help

Not respond at all

Graph 3: Potential response of people exposed Graph 4: Potential response of people not

to TV violence when punched. exposed to TV violence when punched.

Note: taken out of a total of 28 people. Note: Taken out of a total of 16 people.

Possible reactions of people exposed to TV

violence w hen insulted

Punch back

Insult

Not respond and call

for help to get

revenge

Not respond and call

for professional help

Not respond at all

Possible re actions of people not exposed to TV

violence whe n insulted

Punch back

Insult

Not respond and

call for help to getrevenge

Not respond and

call for professional

help

Not respond at all

Graph 5: Potential response of people exposed Graph 6: Potential response of people not

to TV violence when insulted. exposed to TV violence when insulted.

Note: taken out of a total of 28 people. Note: taken out of a total of 16 people.


8/11

8

D. Conclusion

To begin with, it is important to highlight that for the purpose of this study, verbal and physical

violence were taken into account based on J. Leddy and M. OConnells (2002) study where they

took verbal and physical abuse into account in their study.

However most researchers would define violence most relevant to visual media as in

Browne et al.s (2005) review: The exercise of physical force so as to injure or damage persons

or property.

Results in table 3, show a higher value of 39,5% representing the mean percentage of the

number of people being involved in an aggressive act whether verbal or physical, this groupbeing the one exposed to violence on television.

As opposed to that, a value of 31% was obtained from the people not exposed to TV violence

but yet still involved in aggressive acts.

From these values, one can conclude that the general trend of increased aggressive behaviour

showed by the people watching violence on TV was followed.

As researchers Bandura (1973) and Huesmann et al. (1988) have demonstrated in their studies,

the results of this survey also followed their general findings.

However there are certain drawbacks that will have to be highlighted from this work.

As these results are based on a survey, first of all one has to rely on the people answering

correctly in order for this study to be more accurate and secondly the number of men surveyed

does not necessarily reflect what happens in a larger population sample.

On an interesting note, one example taken out of the survey represents that of a person who

does watch programs containing physical violence, but not that often. This person mentions that

he has been involved in a more or less active manner in both verbal and physical aggressive

times more than 10 times in the past year. This example is a clear illustration that violence on

television is not the cause of his aggressive behaviour in real life.

The second part of this study deals with the potential reactions that people would show if they

were involved in an aggressive act.

Surprisingly as shown in table 5, a higher a mean value of 68,5% as opposed to a mean value of

62,5% was shown by the people not exposed to TV violence as opposed to those exposed to

TV violence respectively.


9/11

9

One can conclude from these results that potential aggressive behaviour does not necessarily

arise from watching or not watching violent programs on television. They are probably closely

linked to the nature of a person. And again, one has to rely on the answers of a surveyed

individual to draw any results. Would a person actually react in real life in the same way as in an

imaginary situation? There would be too many outside factors, such as the mood, the

environment that would need to be taken into account in a real situation.

Therefore it would be reasonable to conclude that a potential situation does not represent a

factual one.

In general, one can conclude that although violence on TV tends to increase aggressive

behaviour, as shown by this study there are too many unknowns left unexplored.

For example, the people surveyed were taken at random, therefore their every day living

environment was not taken into account, and nothing about their childhood or families was

known either.

Additionally, an alternative hypothesis can also be taken into account in this study, that of Turner

et al. (1986) hypothesizing that some or all of the association is due to the fact that aggressive

individuals prefer violent television programs.

A survey such as this one can therefore be used to measure the trends but as far as to drawing

an actual conclusion, more work would have to be done.

Examples of the type of work would be the nature and the number of questions asked, which

might result in more accuracy.

One could also do more research on causation.

As stated by A. Martin and I. Smith in their review, the studies supporting the fact that television

violence causes aggressive behaviour still contain methodological limitations and thus need

more investigations.

As a final statement, there certainly exist a correlation between the viewing of television violence

and aggression as showed by numerous groups such as Huesmann and Eron (1986) or

Milavsky et al. (1982) but additional methodologies to a survey should be used for research on

the subject.


10/11

10

E. Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Michael OConnell, Lecturer in Social Psychology at Trinity College for

kindly providing us with articles on his work and Mary Beirne for kindly providing us with

references for this work.

I also give many thanks to everybody who helped for the survey.

Finally, I thank my Lord for all the strength while completing this research.

F. References

1. Bandura, A, Ross, D., Ross, S.A., (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. J

Abnorm. Soc. Psychol; 66: 3-11.

2. Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice

Hall.

3. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

4. Berkowitz, L. (1984). Some effects of thoughts on antisocial and pro-social influences of

media events a cognitive-neo-association analysis. Psychol. Bull; 95: 410-27.

5. Browne, K.D., Hamilton-Giachritsis, C. (2005). The influence of violent media on children and

adolescents: a public-health approach. Lancet; Vol. 365, 702-10.

Giauque, A.L., Larsen, J.J., Rembusch, M.E., Lowe, M.J., Li, TQ. ( 2005). Media

6. Huesmann, L.R. (1988). Aggressive behaviour. 34,13.

7. Huesmann, L.R., Eron, L.D. (1986). Television and the aggressive child: A cross-national

comparison. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

8. Huesmann, L.R., Moise-Titus J., Podolski, C.L., Eron, L.D., (2003). Longitudinal relations

between childrens exposure to TV violence and their aggressive and violent behaviour in

young adulthood: 1977-1992. Dev. Psychol. 39: 201-21.

9. Johnson, J.G., Cohen, P., Smailes, E.M., Kasen, S., Brook, J.S. (2002). Television Viewing

and Aggressive Behavior During Adolescence and Adulthood.

Journal of Clinical Psychology, Vol.61 (6), 725-737.

10.Kronenberger, W.G., Mathews, V.P., Dunn, D.W., Wang, Y., Wood, E.A.,


11/11

11

11.Leddy, J., OConnell, M., (2002). The prevalence, nature and psychological correlates of

bullying in Irish prisons. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 7, 131-140.

12.Martin, A.J., Smith, D.I. (1997). Television violence: a review, suggested research design and

statistical approach. Australian Journal of Social Issues, Vol.32, no 4 407-430.

13.Milavsky, J.R., Stripp, H.H., Kessler, R.C., and Rubens, W.S. (1982). Television and

aggression: A panel study. In D. Pearl (ed), Television and behaviour, Washington DC:

Department of Mental Health and Human Services.

14.OConnell, M. (1999). Is Irish Public Opinion towards Crime Distorted by Media Bias?

European journal of Communication, Vol. 14(2), 191-212.

15.OConnell, M., Casey, S. (1999). The influence of consequentiality on perception of crime

seriousness.Legal and Criminological Psychology, 4, 265-271.

16.Paik, H, Comstock, G, (1994). The effects of television violence on antisocial behavior. A

meta-analysis. Commun. Res.; 21: 516-46.

Science; Vol. 295 Issue 5564, p2468-p2416, 4p, 2 charts, 1graph.

17.Turner, C.W., Hesse, B.W., Peterson-Lewis, S. (1986). J. Soc. Issues 42,51.

violence exposure and executive functioning in aggressive and control adolescents.

18.Wood, W., Wong, F.Y., Chachere, J.G., (1991). Effects of media violence on viewers

aggression in unconstrained social-interaction. Psychol. Bull; 109: 371-83.

By Andre Kadima

For the completion of the Diploma in PsychologyCMIT College, Dublin

2006

effects of television aggression on adult males(paper)

Documents