Short- and Long- Effects of Media Violence on Children - Term Paper Example

April 26, Short-term and Long-term Effects of Media Violence on Children Children who grew up in violent homes and neighbourhoods may not always be violent, but growing up consuming and playing violent media may increase violent thoughts and actions in real life. Such an argument will most likely meet strong opposition from parties who sincerely believe that violent media have nothing to do with violent kids nowadays, but empirical and anecdotal evidences are increasing against the media-violence-not-bad-for-kids supporters. Scholars are divided on the direct and indirect effects of violent media consumption on children and adults, but a number already confirmed that, in many cases, children do become more aggressive because of consumption and/or use of violent media. Parents, teachers, and society in general should care more about violent media consumption of the youth because several studies are providing strong evidence that it can influence children’s thoughts, emotions, and actions in ways that can develop their antagonistic actions. Violent media is bad for kids because it has significant short-term and long-term effects on children’s development of aggressive thoughts, emotions, and actions, although several studies supported that gender and personality do have an impact on mediating the development of violent behaviours. Violent media is bad for kids because it has immediate and/or short-term effects on children’s violent thoughts and actions. Daly and Perez studied the impact of TV violence on the play behaviours of seventy (70) kindergarteners in Lake County, California, and published the results in 2009. They trained teachers to use the Temperament and Atypical Behavior Scale (TABS) that measures children’s self-regulation, so that they can measure actual aggressive behaviours from an objective, third-person viewpoint. Play behaviours were categorised as prosocial, assertive, or orally or physically aggressive. Daly and Perez learned that children who regularly watched violent TV shows demonstrated greater general and physical aggression. The most prevalent form of aggression was using physical force against others, such as shoving or hitting peers to get what they want (Daly and Perez 9). The study provides evidence that merely watching violent media can trigger deviant coping mechanisms for young children, thereby suggesting media violence’s short-term effects on children’s behaviours. Watching violence may be teaching kids that violence is a good form of action or reaction to stressful conditions or people. Arriaga et al. mentioned studies on young children, where playing violent games showed immediate effects in play sessions afterwards (360). These aggressions range from being aggressive against inanimate objects and/or peers or speaking or acting aggressively against others (Arriaga et al. 360). These studies underscore that by playing or watching different forms of violent media, children may be learning how to develop violent behaviours in real life. Playing violent video games, in particular, can have effects of violent behaviours because of the active participation in violence itself. Polman, de Castro, and van Aken conducted an experimental study to understand if active participation in playing a violent video game increases aggression more than the passive watching of a similar violent video game. Fifty–six (56) respondents, ages 10 to 13 years old, were recruited from four classrooms in two schools at the Netherlands. They were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) active violent condition, where children played a violent video game, (2) passive violent condition, where they watched the violent video game, (3) or active non-violent condition, where they played a non-violent video game. After fifteen (15) minutes, all children in different game conditions were asked to stop what they were doing and to answer questions on gaming habits. Two free play sessions were done subsequently. Real-life violence was measured through getting peer feedback. Findings showed that playing violent video games was a predictor of violent behaviours among boys than watching the same aggressive video game (Polman et al. 262). The study shows that active involvement may increase aggression in immediate terms in real life. To support the connection between active involvement and Saleem, Anderson, and Gentile studied the impacts of different kinds of video games on children’s positive and negative behaviours. These video games were divided into prosocial, neutral, or violent categories. Participants had ages of 9 to 14 years old and they resided in Iowa. Findings showed that when children played violent media games (which pertains to children’s video games and not graphic violent video games that some adults usually play), it heightened hurtful behaviour and decreased prosocial actions, while prosocial games increased positive or helpful behaviours compared to violent and neutral video games. Saleem et al. argued that consistent exposure to violence can form knowledge structures that construct harmful behavioural scripts. These mental scripts are translated as aggression or anti-social actions in real life. By acting violently through virtual play or active play, these kids are modelling aggressive constructs that can be seen in actual events in their lives too. Apart from having immediate or short-term effects, media violence can have negative effects on children in the long-run too by affecting their thoughts, emotions, and behaviours. Anderson and Bushman reviewed studies on violent media research using meta-analysis. In terms of cognition or thoughts, playing violent video games increased aggressive cognition for male and female children/adults in experimental and non-experimental conditions (Anderson and Bushman 358). By having aggressive thoughts, these children may be acting out violently as a result, which can last until adolescence or adulthood (Anderson and Bushman 355). Anderson and Bushman also learned that violent media increased aggressive “affect” or emotions. Experimental and non-experimental studies showed a strong correlation between media violence and feelings of anger and hostility among girls and boys alike (Anderson and Bushman 355). In addition, the same study showed that several researchers noted that media violence consumption increased physiological arousal through measuring one of these parameters: systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate (Anderson and Bushman 355). Media violence is also physically affecting these children, which can help explain physical activation of violence. Finally, the same study learned that experimental and non-experimental studies provided evidence that exposure to violent video games increased aggressive behaviours for children and adolescents, both males and females (Anderson and Bushman 355). This review demonstrates that gender is not always a moderator or mediator of actual aggression, thereby increasing the validity that it is violent media in itself that increases the tendencies of children to be violent. The main flaw of the study is that it did not consider methodological weaknesses among these included experiments and non-experiments. Nonetheless, it provides initial evidence that many researchers had found that media violence can have long-term impacts on children until they are adults. Another study supported that violent media can have short and long-term effects on children. Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis reviewed studies that had North American settings. They mentioned the study of Johnson et al. in 2002 that consisted of 707 respondents whom they studied for 17 years. Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis noted that in the U.S., around 20 to 25 violent acts were illustrated in children’s TV programs every hour, as well as 3 to 5 violent acts in prime-time shows (703). The study showed that watching more TV during adolescence and early adulthood was correlated with the greater probability of long-term anti-social actions, such as involvement in physical fights and assaults that resulted to injury or robbery, for instance (Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis 703). The same study observed that controlling aggression, poor parenting, family income, neighbourhood violence, parental education, and psychiatric disorders provided the same results (Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis 703). Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis also explored meta-analytic studies, such as the one that Paik and Comstock conducted on 217 published and unpublished articles. Paik and Comstock had findings that established that there was a highly considerable overall correlation between exposure to television violence and antagonistic or antisocial behaviour, with a small impact on criminal violence (Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis 704). The study mentioned that the correlation was strongest for boys, young children ages 0 to 5 years old. In addition, Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis noted that violent media is shown to have short-term negative effects on children, especially boys, affecting their arousal, thinking, and emotions, as well as actions. They asserted that findings were more conflicting with older children and teenagers as participants. They concluded that violent media has effects that are noteworthy enough to be a public health concern, though evidence does not show a strong association between violent media and violent crimes. This study offered more studies that reveal the short-term and long-term effects of media violence on children, particularly younger ones. Children are at high-risk of developing anti-social and aggressive behaviours by consuming media violence at an early age. Aside from discussing the short and long-term effects of media violence in children, people should also consider that boys tend to be more vulnerable to adapting violent actions because of various social and individual factors. Damar, Gülay, and Seven studied the connection between media choices and aggressive intent of children who were becoming early adolescents. Their participants were 167 children from elementary schools in Turkey. They learned that violent content was linked to aggressive tendencies, which was more widespread for boys than girls. These boys also preferred violent and horror programmes compared to girls (Damar et al. 259). Slotsve et al. reviewed studies which gave evidence that boys were at risk for violence, especially when they watch violent TV shows or films and play violent video games as they grew up (28). Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis noted that in meta-analytic and experimental studies, boys were also more vulnerable to the short-term and long-term effects of media violence on violent cognition and behaviours (704). Boys who watched and/or played violent media also tended to be more aggressive as adolescents and adults than girls (Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis 704). Polman et al. asserted that they found that playing violent video games cause boys more than girls to act violently against others (262). Being a boy may have a distinct effect on media consumption, especially when they are brought up in a society with patriarchal values and expectations that create stereotyped gender norms. In a patriarchal society, men are expected to be aggressive and competitive, while women are nurtured to be passive and non-aggressive. Boys grow up learning from adults and the media that it is alright for them to be violent and to consume aggressive media. The social explanation is only one way that can help understand why boys are more at risk in being violent when exposed to media violence. Beside gender, personality can be an important variable that can mediate the effects of violent media exposure. Aggressive individuals who watch or play violent media may be enhancing their violent tendencies. Saleem et al. learned from their study that trait aggression is an important variable in studying the effects of violent media on violent cognition and actions. They noted that individuals with high trait aggression tend to respond more to the aggressive cues in the media than those with low trait aggression (Saleem et al. 282). They mentioned the work of Bushman in 1995, where findings indicated that trait aggression was positively associated with hurting others (Saleem et al. 282). Arriaga et al. studied the effects of violent computer games on state hostility, state anxiety and arousal. Though they used college students as participants, the study showed that an aggressive personality moderates the impact of playing violent games on state hostility. Kids who are already anti-social or aggressive are more prone to being violent if they consume violent media. Violent media is not providing an outlet for their violence, as some say, but increasing their violence through developing aggressive thoughts and feelings that may soon find expression in real life. To better understand how kids may develop actual aggression through watching or playing violent media, several theories are presented, beginning with the social-cognitive learning theories that assert that input variables affect human internal states and influence learning and behavioural actions (Saleem et al. 281). If children are exposed to violent media, they are consuming negative input variables that can affect how they think and act when facing the same situations as the violent media they are watching or playing. Consuming a behavioural model can have short-term effects that come from the simple mechanism of seeing, and then learning and doing. Social-cognitive learning theories, in addition, can explain violent media’s long-term effects on children’s behaviours. As children practice anti-social behavioural scripts that they get from watching violent media, this can lead to changes in precognitive and cognitive schemas or ways of thinking, such as perception and expectation schemata, beliefs, scripts, and also cognitive-emotional constructs (i.e. attitudes and stereotypes) and affective traits (conditioned emotional responses and hostility) (Saleem et al. 282). Several studies showed that playing violent video games for 3 months or more can cause aggressiveness in real life (Saleem et al. 282). Aggressive kids get into more fights and behave delinquently because they are applying what they are learning from the media (Saleem et al. 282). Society provides the structures that model negative behaviours for kids. Aside from social-cognitive learning theories, another theory that explains the crossover of violence from media violence to actual behaviours is desensitisation theory where repeated exposure to something can lead to being desensitised to the exposed behaviours (Slotsve et al. 28). A decrease in physiological and emotional responses can happen after repeated exposure to violent scenes or actions through the media. This is why soldiers are exposed to violence in their training because they will be desensitised to it, so when the time comes that they are in a war and they need to kill their enemies, they will not show empathy toward the target. Instead, they will be ready to inflict violence on them too. Studies showed that repeated exposure to violence desensitises children and make them think and accept violence as part of real life (Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis 704; Daly and Perez 1). Watching violent TV shows and films repeatedly can make children feel that violence is normal and part of everyday life. In addition, it is possible that desensitisation can create a perception of mean or unsafe world. This is called the “mean world syndrome” or “believing that the world is a dangerous place” (Slotsve et al. 27). Studies showed that watching TV can create perceptions that the world is harmful and unsafe (Slotsve et al. 28). Fearfulness happens, where children, as they become less trusting of other people, become more violent to protect themselves from perceived violence too (Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis 707). It is because that they are fearful that they act violently. When desensitisation happens, children may have aggressive thoughts and emotions that they see as acceptable, which they can show to others, objects or humans. Though these theories provide models of learning and human behaviour, other scholars argue that there is no overwhelming evidence that can support that media violence in itself is a cause for violent actions. Blumberg, Bierwirth, and Schwartz reviewed research on the effects of cartoon violence on how children morally understand and react to the former in their 2008 article. Blumberg et al. say that, based on several studies, researchers found out that children can decide what is good or bad when watching violent TV shows. They know what is good or bad in TV, so they are aware that violence is not something that they can do in real life situations. Blumberg et al. also learned from their own 2004 study of 3-year-old and 4-year-old children that the latter know that both cartoon and real violence are bad and that violent acts deserve punishment. This means that punishment of any form against violence can reduce children’s violent actions. Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis also noted that absence of strong cause-and-effect link between media violence and violence in society. Though violent actions are still widespread in American society, violent crime rates have decreased for the past few decades. These are evidences that while violent media consumption are on the rise, violent criminals or crimes may be fewer than ever. Blumberg et al. is right that children may have enough cognition and morality to know that violence is bad so that they will no longer copy it, but knowing what is moral or not is not enough proof that these kids will not follow violent TV acts in real life in different violent ways or forms. Studies already showed that watching or playing violent media affects how kids see and react to violence or threatening situations (Browne and Hamilton-Giachritsis 704; Daly and Perez 1). They may speak violently or hit objects, and these violent actions may come from watching violent shows. These kids could already know that being violent is bad, but they may not stop these reactions because of violent constructs that are already in their minds due to exposure to violent media. In addition, young kids do not have firmly-formed morality or cognition when it comes to stopping themselves from potentially hostile thoughts and actions. How many young kids nowadays know when to prevent violence when they experience violence themselves? These studies indicate that children learn by seeing and doing and so watching and playing violent media can affect their thoughts, feelings, and actions too. Moreover, it is true that violent crimes are decline in the U.S., but it is not enough to convince people that media violence has nothing to do with violent behaviours among children. Children learn by watching and doing, and some studies already showed that watching TV and films that have violent actions are sometimes copied by these kids (Daly and Perez; Pozios, Kambam, and Bender). Violent media, especially without parental or adult supervision, can be a kind of teacher of learning and behaviours to kids. Violent media is a bad teacher that models bad behaviours to children. Children may copy these violent actions, and when not punished or reprimanded, can further become violent as they grow older. Another study shows that violent media alone cannot explain differences in behaviours across young consumers of media violence. Pozios, Kambam, and Bender explored the studies on media violence and violent behaviours in real life. They confirmed that many studies asserted that media violence can create violent kids. However, they also learned that media violence alone is not the most important determinant of violent personalities and behaviours. Pozios, Kambam, and Bender stressed that other factors matter too, such as gender, socioeconomic status, and IQ. These factors are not controlled or considered when connecting media violence to children’s actions. As a result, these studies may have design weaknesses that can reduce the validity of their claims. Indeed, numerous factors may affect how violence shapes children’s personalities and behaviours, but several studies also showed that even after controlling these factors, media violence can directly impact violent behaviours. One review of literature showed that social factors can be removed from the effects of independent variables. It notes the study from Huesmann and colleagues who showed “that the effects of media violence on children and adolescents persist even when socioeconomic status, intelligence, and parenting are taken into account, suggesting that some of the influence is independent of other factors” (705). Damar et al. confirmed these findings too. It does not matter all the time where children are smart or well-off, but violent media can have a strong way of shaping their minds and emotions that can harm their ability to resist violence in real settings. Children are not necessarily empty shells who cannot know what is wrong or right or choose to do the right thing, but they are vulnerable to what they can learn from violent media. The more they watch or play violent media, the more that they might be learning violent models of behaviours, as well as anti-social thoughts and feelings. Adults should understand that they must be the ones responsible for what their children consume from the media. What they see and do through the media, society might become years from now. Works Cited Anderson, Craig A., and Brad J. Bushman. “Aggressive Behavior, Aggressive Cognition, Aggressive Affect, Physiological Arousal, and Prosocial Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Scientific Literature.” Psychological Science 12.5 (2001): 353-359. Academic Search Premier. Web. 2 Apr. 2014. Arriaga, Patrícia, Esteves, Francisco, Carneiro, Paula, and Maria Benedicta Monteiro. “Violent Computer Games and Their Effects on State Hostility and Physiological Arousal.” Aggressive Behavior 32.4 (2006): 358-371. Academic Search Premier. Web. 19 Apr. 2014. Blumberg, Fran C., Bierwirth, Kristen P., and Allison J. Schwartz. “Does Cartoon Violence Beget Aggressive Behavior in Real Life? An Opposing View.” Early Childhood Education Journal 36.2 (2008): 101-104. ERIC. Web. 22 Mar. 2014. Browne, Kevin D., and Catherine Hamilton-Giachritsis. “The Influence of Violent Media on Children and Adolescents: A Public-Health Approach.” Lancet 365.9460 (19 Feb. 2005): 702-710. Academic Search Premier. Web. 2 Apr. 2014. Daly, Laura A., and Linda M. Perez. “Exposure to Media Violence and Other Correlates of Aggressive Behavior in Preschool Children.” Early Childhood Research & Practice 11.2 (2009): 1-13. ERIC. Web. 22 Mar. 2014. Damar, Mustafa, Gülay, Hülya, and Serdal Seven. “Assessing the Relationship between Television Programme Choices and Aggression Tendencies in Children Going through Early Adolescence.” International Journal of Academic Research 3.4 (2011): 257-261. Academic Search Premier. Web. 2 Apr. 2014. Polman, Hanneke; de Castro, Bram Orobio, and Marcel A.G. van Aken. “Experimental Study of the Differential Effects of Playing Versus Watching Violent Video Games on Childrens Aggressive Behavior.” Aggressive Behavior 34.3 (2008): 256-264. Academic Search Premier. Web. 19 Apr. 2014. Pozios, Vasilis K., Kambam, Praveen R., and H. Eric Bender. “Does Media Violence Lead to the Real Thing?” The New York Times 23 Aug. 2013. Web. 22 Mar. 2014. < http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/25/opinion/sunday/does-media-violence-lead-to-the-real-thing.html?_r=0>. Saleem, Muniba, Anderson, Craig A., and Douglas A. Gentile. “Effects of Prosocial, Neutral, and Violent Video Games on Childrens Helpful and Hurtful Behaviors.” Aggressive Behavior 38.4 (2012): 281-287. Academic Search Premier. Web. 22 Mar. 2014. Slotsve, Tiffany, del Carmen, Alex, Sarver, Mary, and Rita J. Villareal-Watkins. “Television Violence and Aggression: A Retrospective Study.” Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice 5.1 (20085): 22-49. Web. 22 Mar. 2014. . Read More