The Effect of Viewing Television
Violence on Childhood Aggression
Running Head: AGGRESSION
Aggression
2
Abstract
There is a great deal of speculation on the effect television plays in childhood
aggression. Two contrasting views regarding this issue are violent television increases
aggressive behavior and violent television does not increase aggressive behavior. Later
research demonstrates there may be other intervening variables causing aggression. These
include IQ, social class, parental punishment, parental aggression, hereditary,
environmental, and modeling. With all of these factors to take into consideration it is
difficult to determine a causal relationship between violent television and aggression.
It is my hypothesis this relationship is bi-directional. I feel violent television
causes aggressive behavior and aggressive people tend to watch more violent television.
Aggression
3
The Effect of Viewing Television
Violence on Childhood Aggression
Over the years there has been a large amount of research published, many with
conflicting results, to the question of a causal link existing between the viewing of
televised violence and childhood aggression. It is an important question because if
violent television is linked to childhood aggression we need to adapt our television
shows accordingly.
Early 1960's Research
There is earlier research, but the first association between violent television and
aggression was in the early 1960's when Albert Bandura began researching his modeling
theory. His series of experiments first set the precedent for a relationship between
violent television viewing and aggression. He felt children would model or imitate adult
behavior. In one study he subjected children to both aggressive and non- aggressive
adult models and then tested them for imitative behavior in the presence of the model.
His theory was demonstrated when children readily Aggression
4
imitated behavior exhibited by an adult model in the presence of the model (Bandura, Ross
& Ross, 1961). In a similar experiment children were exposed to aggressive and
non-aggressive adult models, but then tested for amount of imitative learning in the
absence of the model. Subjects in the aggression condition reproduced a good deal of
physical and verbal aggressive behavior resembling that of the models. The data clearly
confirmed the prediction that exposure of subjects to aggressive models increases the
probability of aggressive behavior (Bandura et al. 1961). Another study sought to
determine the extent to which film- mediated aggressive models may serve as an important
source of imitative behavior. Children were divided and then exposed to four different
aggression models. A real-life aggression condition, a human film- aggression condition,
a cartoon film-aggression condition, and a control group. The results showed that
exposure to humans on film portraying aggression was the most influential in eliciting
aggressive behavior. Subjects in this condition, in comparison to Aggression
5
the control subjects, exhibited more aggression and more imitative aggression. Subjects
who viewed the aggressive human and cartoon models on film exhibited almost twice as much
aggression as subjects in the control group. These results provide strong evidence that
exposure to filmed aggression heightens aggressive reactions in children (Bandura et al.
1963a). These results add to the conclusion that viewing violent television produces
aggressive behavior.
But, in Banduras next experiment he begins to question if other factors are involved in
the relationship between televised violence and aggression. His subjects are divided
into three groups, model-reward, model-punished, and control. All view an aggressive
filmed model with a task appropriate ending. The results show mere exposure to modeling
stimuli does not provide sufficient conditions for imitative learning. The fact that
most of the children in the experiment failed to reproduce the entire repertoire of
behavior exhibited by the model, even under positive-incentive conditions indicates other
factors are Aggression
6
influencing the imitative response acquisition (Bandura 1965).
At the time Banduras work seemed on target and with no one challenging his theory many
were soon quick to follow in agreement. His modeling theory seems plausible, but the
fact that he only completed experiments in a laboratory setting leaves one skeptical.
Many times results from a laboratory setting will not correlate to real life or in vivo
results. Another problem was he only had acts of aggression toward blown up dolls and
not real people. It would have been interesting to see how children reacted to a real
life person receiving an act of aggression. Another problem is he only used adults as
models. He should have also used children. With only adults as models he can't explain
how viewing an aggressive child in vivo or on television increases aggression. I feel
Bandura was on the right track in his last experiment when he determined other factors
were involved, but he failed to follow up on this question. This is an area in need of
additional Aggression
7
investigation.
1970's Research
Up until now the relation between television viewing habits and aggression had been
shown in several experiments, but what was lacking was the ability to determine cause and
effect. One possible way to demonstrate cause and effect is to use a longitudinal
context (Eron, Huesmann, Lefkowitz & Walder, 1972). In Eron et al. (1972) subjects were
tested over a ten year time period for measures of aggression and predictors of
aggression. Several other factors were taken into consideration in this study. They
included IQ, social status, mobility aspirations, religious practice, ethnicity, and
parental disharmony. The results support the hypothesis that a preference for watching
violent television in the third-grade time period is a cause of aggressive habits later
in life independent of the other causal contributors studied. It is not claimed that
television violence is the only cause of aggressive behavior since a number of other
variables are also related to aggression. However, the effect of Aggression
8
television violence on aggression is relatively independent of these other factors and
explains a larger portion of the variance than does any other single factor which we
studied (Eron et al 1972). Although a longitudinal study was used to try to apply
causation no such correlation could be found. The safest conclusion was the study does
not establish a causal link between television violence and aggression in one direction
or another (Kaplan & Singer 1976).
In another study Kaplan and Singer (1976) propose another view toward televised violence
increasing aggressive behavior. They suggest three different positions on the subject.
An activation view that watching televised fantasy violence causes aggressive behavior.
A catharsis view that aggression in some groups may be decreased following the
observation of such violence. And a null view that such violence on television has not
been demonstrated to have significant effects on aggressive behavior. The evidence in
this study is in support of the null view (Kaplan & Singer, 1976). They have built their
case Aggression
9
around several valid arguments. The first being that the evidence that television causes
aggression is not strong enough to justify restrictions in programming. Most of the
research on television and aggression has been done in the laboratory and we really just
don't know how this correlates with in vivo settings. Secondly, we must look at the
sample from which the subjects for these studies are drawn. Are they representative
samples from a variety of social classes? If not then we cannot speak of overall
effects, but only for that limited sample. Third is method of viewing. In several
studies children are gathered together to view a film. If some of the children begin to
get more active they may stimulate the other children to act accordingly (Kaplan & Singer
1976).
Kaplan and Singer cite several studies in which viewing violence did not cause an
increase in aggression. Feshbach and Singer (1971) conducted an experimental field study
controlling the television viewing of nine to fifteen-year-old boys. For six
Aggression
10
weeks they were required to watch two hours of television per day. Half watched
aggressive shows and half watched non-aggressive shows. Feshbach and Singer found no
evidence that violence on television leads to increases in aggressive behavior.
Certainly the study shows no support for the theory that viewing of aggressive television
increases real life aggression (Kaplan & Singer, 1976).
In a study by Carlisle and Howell (1974), angered and nonangered college students were
exposed to either violent or nonviolent movie scenes. Results revealed that the violent
film was more likely than the nonviolent film to disinhibit aggression among either angry
or nonangry subjects (Kaplan & Singer, 1976). With the above data it is certainly
possible to see why Kaplan and Singer feel the null-effect view to be the most plausible
one. Still as our research moves into the 80's the question of intervening variables has
yet to be well addressed.
1980's Research
It is the research of Leonard Eron (1982) that Aggression
11
first suggests the relation between violent television and aggression does not go just
one way. It is a bi-directional relationship. He demonstrates that television violence
is one cause of aggressive behavior, it is also probable that aggressive children prefer
to watch more violent television (Eron, 1982). This seems to be a more plausible
alternative because it allows for a more circular theory. It means that violent
television may or may not be causing an increase in aggression. I feel it means more
aggressive children tend to watch more violent television shows. These children are
aggressive to begin with and the violence they witness on television does not have a
great deal to do with their aggressive tendencies. I agree televised violence may be an
intervening factor, but I don't think it is the sole contributor to aggression in
children.
Johnathan L. Freedman (1984) reviewed the available field and correlational research on
televised violence and increases in aggressiveness. He only reviewed studies concerning
long-term effects or Aggression
12
natural settings. He found no reason to support the conclusion that violence on
television increases aggressive behavior in a natural setting. It remains a plausible
hypothesis, but one for which there is little supporting evidence (Freedman, 1984).
In another review by Friedrich-Cofer and Huston (1986) their data reveal there is in
fact a bi-directional causal relation between viewing television violence and aggression.
They support their findings with several longitudinal studies including Eron et al.
(1972), Freedman (1984) and Cook et al. (1983). They also measured for several perceived
intervening variables and found none of these variables accounted for the relation
between viewing and aggression (Friedrich-Cofer & Huston, (1986). Still even through the
80's no one has really addressed the question of whether there may be an intervening
variable in this great debate.
Discussion
As one can see from reading the above studies the question of whether televised violence
increases Aggression
13
aggression is still unanswered. There is as much data for as for against so it is hard
to distinguish an answer. There is no concrete evidence to argue for one way or the
other. It is a debate that continues today. The best possible answer I can come up with
is that the causation is bi- directional. Also, it is pertinent to many intervening
factors. Aggression levels of the child to begin with and their home environment play a
big role in determining aggressive tendencies. I think the best way to test for a causal
relationship is a well documented longitudinal study. The subjects must be able to be
contacted in five year increments to answer questions. With this method of testing and
by controlling for all possible intervening variables one can get the best results. It
was interesting to see over the years how thoughts and ideas had changed about viewing
televised violence and aggression. But, even today there are still many unanswered
questions. Maybe sometime in the future we will have a definite answer to this relevant
question.
Aggression
14
References
Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models' reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition
of imitative responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 589-595.
Bandura, A., Ross, D. & Ross, S.A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation
of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575-582.
Bandura, A., Ross, D. & Ross, S.A. (1963a). Imitation of film mediated aggressive
models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3-11.
Bandura, A., Ross, D. & Ross, S.A. (1963b). Vicarious reinforcement and imitative
learning. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 601-607.
Eron, L.D. (1963). Relationship of television viewing habits and aggressive behavior in
children. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 193- 196.
Aggression
15
Eron, L.D. (1982). Parent-child interaction, television, violence and aggression of
children. American Psychologist, 37, 197-211.
Eron, L.D., Huesmann, L.R., Lefkowitz, M.M. & Walder, L.O. (1972). Does television
violence cause aggression? American Psychologist, 27, 253-263.
Freeman, J.L. (1984). Effect of television violence on aggressiveness. Psychological
Bulletin, 96, 227- 246.
Friedrich-Cofer, L. & Huston, A.C. (1986). Television violence and aggression: The
debate continues. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 364- 371.
Kaplan, R.M. & Singer, R.D. (1976). TV violence and viewer aggression: A reexamination
of the evidence. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 33-70.
|