MEDIA INFLUENCES ON SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
To read up on media influences on social behaviour, refer to pages 551–567 of Eysenck’s A2 Level
Psychology.
Ask yourself
 Do you think violent films are the cause of some “copy cat” killings? If so,
should they be banned?
 Can the media be a force for good?
 What effect does playing video games have on the players?
What you need to know
EXPLANATIONS OF MEDIA
INFLUENCES ON PRO- AND ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR (two is the
minimum you need to know)








Social Learning Theory
Disinhibition
Desensitisation
Cognitive priming
Stereotypes and counterstereotypes
Stimulation hypothesis
Findings of research on pro-social
behaviour
Findings of research on anti-social
behaviour
EFFECTS OF VIDEO GAMES AND
COMPUTERS ON YOUNG PEOPLE




Effects of violent video games and
the general aggression model
Effects of other types of games
Research evidence
Evaluation
Explanations of Media Influences on Pro- and Anti-Social Behaviour
Media refers to any medium of communication. This includes books, newspapers, magazines, music, the
internet, CDs, DVDs, videotapes, films, television. In this section we are considering its influence on prosocial and anti-social behaviour and looking at explanations for why the media influences people in either
or both of these directions.
Social Learning Theory
Social learning involves learning by observation and imitation of models. We are likely to imitate models
with the following characteristics:
 They are admired.
 They are successful.
 They are similar to us.
 They are reinforced for their actions.
 They are characters with whom we identify.
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
 Bandura carried out a series of studies on the effect of watching violence. In
the original studies (Bandura, 1961, 1977; see A2 Level Psychology page 552),
children observed an adult being aggressive towards a Bobo doll. The
research demonstrated that young children imitated the model, especially if
it was the same sex as them. In later research, Bandura (1965) showed
children films of people being aggressive in which the aggression was
rewarded, punished, or not shown to have any consequences. Children
copied the rewarded and no-consequence models but were unlikely to copy
the punished model.
Disinhibition
Most of the time anti-social behaviour and violent behaviour is inhibited. However, if large amounts of
violence or other anti-social behaviour is shown in the media then it may be viewed as acceptable. That is,
disinhibition occurs.
With respect to pro-social behaviour, inhibition is less likely to be present initially as we tend to encourage
this behaviour, but sometimes it occurs perhaps due to embarrassment of providing help. If, therefore, the
media portrays people being altruistic in circumstances in which people are normally reluctant to act this
way then disinhibition may occur.
Desensitisation
Desensitisation involves reducing our sensitivity to violent acts. It therefore refers to anti-social behaviour,
not pro-social behaviour. This reduced sensitivity occurs if people repeatedly view violent acts and can be
empirically shown by reduced physiological arousal in those who have previously viewed violence as
compared to those who have not seen it.
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
 Thomas et al. (1977, see A2 Level Psychology page 553) demonstrated that
children who had previously seen a violent videotaped programme became
less aroused by an aggressive videotape than those who had not seen the
programme.
Cognitive Priming
This explanation states that cues associated with aggression and other anti-social behaviour, as presented in
the media, may trigger anti-social thoughts and feelings, especially of violence. The sight of guns, a
stabbing, a fight—all may prime someone to act aggressively.
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
 Josephson (1987, see A2 Level Psychology page 553) showed that boys who
were “primed” to associate aggression with a walkie-talkie were more
aggressive when they were given instructions via a walkie-talkie than if a
tape recorder was used.
Stereotypes and counter-stereotypes
The media can influence behaviour through the use of stereotypes. As presented in the media, these can
lead to the expectation that certain groups will behave in certain ways.
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
 Mulac, Bradac, and Mann (1985, see A2 Level Psychology page 554) found
strong gender stereotyping in children’s TV programmes. These can be antisocial if they create or maintain prejudices. They can be pro-social if they
break down existing prejudices by, for example, going against a prevailing
negative stereotype. These are referred to as counter-stereotypes.
Stimulation hypothesis
This hypothesis proposes that the media has enormous potential for education in many ways, including
providing suitable role models for children to imitate. The most effective way of promoting pro-social
behaviour is placing role models in everyday situations and providing pro-social ways of dealing with
them.
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
 Johnson and Ettema (1986, see A2 Level Psychology page 555) reported on
the effect of a TV programme, Freestyle, in which characters find ways of
dealing pro-socially with different anti-social situations and are rewarded for
doing so. For example, they might step in to prevent bullying. However, the
danger of such programmes is that children imitate some of the anti-social
behaviour that occurs during the programme but not the pro-social solution.
Research findings on media effects on Pro-social Behaviour
 Friedrich and Stein (1973, see A2 Level Psychology page 555) found that
American preschool children who watched episodes of pro-social TV
programme called Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood were more helpful and cooperative than children who had not seen the programmes.
 Sprafkin, Liebert, and Poulos (1975, see A2 Level Psychology page 555)
studied the effect of watching certain episodes of Lassie, comparing children
who had seen episodes in which Lassie helps others with those who had seen
Lassie programmes without that content and those who watched a neutral
programme. The first group of children gave more time to helping distressed
puppies than either of the other groups.
 Baran, Chase, and Courtright (1979, see A2 Level Psychology page 556) found
that older children, aged 8–10, were more helpful after watching pro-social
episodes of The Waltons than those who had not watched the programmes.
 Rosenkoetter (1999, see A2 Level Psychology page 556) argued that prosocial television will only influence children if they understand the moral
message behind it.
 Rauterberg (2004, see A2 Level Psychology page 556) reviewed many studies
of the effects of pro-social behaviour and came to the following conclusions:
o Children exposed to pro-social TV programmes have more positive
social interactions, more self-control, and show more altruistic
behaviour.
o The effects on pro-social behaviour are stronger when the programme
is followed by discussion.
o The effects on pro-social behaviour are stronger on very young
children (aged 3–10) than on adolescents.
 Hearold (1986, see A2 Level Psychology page 556) reviewed over 100 studies
and commented that, although most studies showed an effect on pro-social
behaviour, most of them only looked at short-term effects so we have little
knowledge of long-term effects.
 Wiegman, Kuttschreuter, and Baarda (1992) carried out a longitudinal study
on the effect of viewing pro-social behaviour on TV and found no effects on
subsequent pro-social behaviour.
 O’Connor (1980, see A2 Level Psychology page 556), however, did find some
long-term effects of rather different behaviour. Children who normally
avoided playing with other children did play with others after watching a
programme modelling this behaviour and the effects were long term.
EVALUATION OF MEDIA EFFECTS ON PRO-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
 Findings are consistent. Research on the effect of the media on pro-social
behaviour shows consistently there are short-term beneficial effects on
altruistic behaviour and positive interactions.
 There is no evidence of long-term benefits.
 The media have an effect on young children.
There is little evidence of any effect on older children (adolescents).
The research has limitations. Different research has focused on very
different pro-social behaviours so it is difficult to obtain an overall picture of
its effectiveness. Most research focuses on short-term effects.
Research findings on media effects on anti-social behaviour
 Gerbner (1994, see A2 Level Psychology page 557) pointed out that there is a
huge amount of violence shown in the media. The average 16-year-old has
seen 13,000 violent murders on TV.
 The National Television Violence Study (1997, see A2 Level Psychology page
557) reported that on American TV people were not seen to suffer physical
injury and the majority did not show pain during fights. In children’s
programmes, 66% show violence as amusing; only 5% depict it as having
long-term adverse effects.
 Leyens et al. (1975, see A2 Level Psychology page 558) demonstrated, in a
field experiment in a institution for juvenile delinquents, that those exposed
to a week of violent films were more aggressive afterwards than those
exposed to exciting non-violent films. These effects were stronger in the
short term than in the long term.
 Coyne, Archer, and Eslea (2004, see A2 Level Psychology page 558) pointed
out there has been little research done on indirect aggression (e.g. spreading
rumours). They found that in 11- to 14-year-olds, the children copied the
type of aggression they witnessed, as predicted by SLT.
 Eron (1982) and Huesmann, Lagerspetz, and Eron (1984, see A2 Level
Psychology page 558), working in collaboration on very long-term research
into the effects of media violence on behaviour, have consistently found a
positive correlation between the amount of violent TV watched and
aggression. They found that 30-year-olds exposed to violent TV showed more
anti-social behaviour in general, some of it criminal, with a general lack of
consideration for others.
 Johnson and Young (2002, see A2 Level Psychology page 558) conducted a 17year longitudinal study of 700 American children and found a consistent
relationship between viewed violence and aggression. For example, children
who, at age 14, had watched more than 3 hours of TV daily were, as older
teenagers, five times more likely to commit aggressive acts than those who
had not. This supports both the desensitisation and the disinhibition
hypotheses.
 Wood, Wong, and Chachere (1991, see A2 Level Psychology page 559), in a
meta-analysis of 28 laboratory and field studies, found that exposure to
media violence led to more aggressive behaviour towards others, including
friends.
 Charlton (1998, see A2 Level Psychology page 560), in a natural experiment,
looked at the effect of the introduction of TV onto the island and St Helena
and found no increase in any anti-social behaviour in young children. The
main factors thought to prevent television violence from influencing the
children were: having a stable home, school, and community situation.



Zillman and Weaver (1997, see A2 Level Psychology page 561) have
demonstrated what many other researchers have found: that there are large
individual differences in the effect of violence, and on the whole it is those
high in aggressive tendencies to start with who are most affected by media
violence.
It is worth pointing out that many other forms of anti-social behaviour, such as prejudice, are seen in the
media. It is also worth noting that there are many forms of the media. Several newspapers regularly carry
stories that can be seen to inflame prejudiced attitudes. In addition, the limited portrayal of ethnic
minorities and inter-ethnic interaction means that children develop stereotypical views of society. The
effect of the media on anti-social behaviours other than aggression has not been well researched.
EVALUATION OF MEDIA EFFECTS ON ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
 Findings are consistent. Most of the evidence consistently indicates that
media violence increases anti-social behaviour. Generally, the findings are
stronger for short-term effects but studies over a long period of time do
indicate long-term effects as well.
 Findings have helped identify factors that are important in determining
strength of effects of media violence. The main factors appear to show that
anti-social behaviour is most common when a violent person is rewarded for
behaving violently, when the depiction of violence is realistic, and when the
victim’s suffering isn’t shown.
 Failure to distinguish between different types of aggression. There is a
vast difference between cartoon violence and factual violence but research
does not always distinguish between them.
 Much research is correlational so cause and effect cannot be
established.
 Laboratory studies lack ecological validity and show only short-term
effects.
 Longitudinal studies do show long-term effects. Although most
longitudinal studies are correlational, the weight of the evidence does
indicate a long-term cumulative effect of media violence on anti-social
behaviour.
 Most research based on US and Britain. There is relatively little research
done in other cultures but what there is does seem to indicate that findings
do apply to other countries.
 There are large individual differences in the effects. It is therefore
difficult to make generalisations on the effects of the media on aggressive
behaviour.
 Ethical concerns with research. Much of the research on media violence
involves children’s existing watching habits but there are ethical issues
surrounding research in which children and young adults watch media
violence since this can have negative and damaging effects on the
participants.
Effects of Video Games and Computers on Young People
Effects of violent video games
Anderson and Dill (2000, see A2 Level Psychology pages 563–564) put forward a four-stage general
aggression model to explain the conditions under which playing video games may lead to aggressive
behaviour. It covers both short- and long-term effects: When aggressive people play a violent video game
this arouses feelings of anger and bodily arousal. This leads to aggressive thoughts, possible involving
revenge. The individual then goes through an appraisal process in which he or she interprets the situation
and the consequences of behaving aggressively. The individual then decides whether to behave
aggressively or non-aggressively.
Notice that it is usually aggressive individuals who respond with aggression. These people have cognitions
(thoughts) that encourage violent reactions and believe that the best way of solving problems is through
using aggression.
This model suggests that every time an aggressive person plays a violent video game it reinforces the
following:
o Watchfulness for enemies.
o Aggressive action against others.
o Expectations that others will behave aggressively (hostile expectation bias).
o Positive attitudes towards the use of violence.
o Beliefs that violent solutions are effective and appropriate.
Effects of other types of video games
Video games tend to reinforce unfortunate stereotypes about gender and race. However, Jansz and Martis
(2007, see A2 Level Psychology page 563) found female characters appearing as often as males in leading
roles in 12 recent videos. Nevertheless, there was an emphasis on the sexuality of the females characters
(e.g. a focus on breasts) and all the characters were white.
Gentile and Anderson (2003, see A2 Level Psychology page 563) point out the positive effects of some
video games in encouraging learning and education. They can also help in young children’s socialisation
processes. Children who do not play them may become socially isolated.
RESEARCH EVIDENCE ON THE EFFECTS OF VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES
 Anderson and Bushman (2001, see A2 Level Psychology pages 563–564)
conducted a meta-analysis of the effects of violent video games and came to
the following conclusions, all of which support their model:
o Situational cues provided by violent video games (e.g. guns, knives)
are associated with aggressive behaviour. The effect was just as
strong in males and females, young and old.
o Exposure to violent video games increases aggressive thoughts.
o Exposure to violent video games produces feelings (emotions) of
aggression and bodily arousal.
 Unsworth, Devilly, and Ward (2007, see A2 Level Psychology page 564) found
that participants with aggressive personalities prone to aggression were
most likely to have increased anger ratings when playing a violent video
game (other participants either decreased in anger ratings or stayed the
same).
 Bushman and Anderson (2002, see A2 Level Psychology page 564) exposed
participants to violent or non-violent video games and found that those
exposed to violent games expected characters to act aggressively even when
their actions were ambiguous. This is known as a hostile expectation bias.
 Carnagey and Anderson (2005, see A2 Level Psychology page 564) found that
rewarding violence in a video game increased hostile emotion, aggressive
thinking, and aggressive behaviour. Punishing it also led to increased hostile
emotion but did not increase aggressive thinking or aggressive behaviour.
 Ferguson (2007, see A2 Level Psychology page 565) carried out a metaanalysis of violent video games, looking particularly at the year in which they
were produced. He found that they increased aggressive behaviour,
aggressive thoughts, aggressive emotions, and physiological responses but
no more in later than in earlier video games. The effects were greater in older
than in younger people.
 Persky and Blascovich (2007, see A2 Level Psychology page 565) found the
effects of violent video games were greater if played in a realistic
environment (a virtual world) than on a computer.
 Barlett, Harris, and Baldassaro (2007, see A2 Level Psychology page 565)
showed that the more people play these games the more they show
aggression and hostility.
 Grusser, Thalemann, and Griffiths (2007, see A2 Level Psychology page 565)
demonstrated a 12% rate of addiction to video games in a large sample of
adolescents but the addicts were no more aggressive in real life.
EVALUATION
 Research findings have revealed significant information:
o The effects of playing violent video games depend on the situation and
the personality of the player.
o It has several effects: increased arousal, hostile emotions, and
aggressive behaviour.
o It can lead to a hostile expectation bias.
o The effects are greater when the graphics are more realistic.
o There is evidence of addiction but it is not clear if it leads to more
aggressive behaviour.
 There are several limitations to the research:
o It shows only short-term effects.
o Effects on behaviour other than free play after playing the games have
not been investigated.
o A lot of studies are correlational and therefore do not show cause and
effect. It is possible that aggressive individuals are drawn to very
violent games and their responses are a result of their personality, not
the games.
o There are ethical considerations with playing these games even under
controlled conditions. They may encourage anti-social behaviour.
So What Does This Mean?
There has been a huge amount of research done on the effect of the media on anti-social behaviour and the
findings have been extremely controversial. On the one hand we have those who say that the media is a
convenient scapegoat for the ills of society; a whipping horse that has been cynically blamed for a variety
of horrific killings, from Jamie Bulger to the Columbine School massacre. It helps, so this argument goes,
to detract attention away from the real causes of social ills—society itself and families in particular. On the
other side we have those who believe passionately that we are steadily corrupting our children with the
constant exposure we allow them to violence in all forms of the media, but especially through films,
television, and violent video games, and that we would be well advised to censor these heavily.
Far less attention, in the media and therefore in the psychological world, has been paid to the possible
benefits of the media. Most research has been focused on a few, rather dated, children’s programmes that
have been especially written to promote pro-social behaviour. On the whole these have proved reasonably
successful but limited in their influence. There have also been a few small-scale and mainly privately
funded initiatives (such as “kicking racism out of football”) that have delivered a powerful message, which
challenges discrimination, but they have not been part of the mass media and little research has been done
on their effectiveness. Perhaps the mass media is missing out on a golden opportunity to be used for this
purpose. Or perhaps those behind the media see its role as one of entertainment and, if this is better served
by the use of violence, then this is not their problem.
Over to You
1. Describe and evaluate research into the effects of the media on either pro-social or anti-social behaviour.
(25 marks)