The Effects of Television Violence on Children

Through the miracle of TV, our children can witness war, murder, rape, hate, prejudice, sexual promiscuity, and a host of other inappropriate behaviors before they are even allowed to cross the street alone (Mueller 125).
In spite of research studies, the perception continues that the effects of television violence are unclear, even contradictory. This perception is false. While many negative effects have been attributed to "antisocial" television programming, this paper is restricted to proving the negative effects of televised violence upon children.

Frequency and Content of TV Violence
According to Ron Kaufman, a child's focus and gaze cannot be broken when placed in front of a television. The images - color, sudden flashes, and movements - captivate the child's attention. It is a rare child who finds the television completely uninteresting (1).
Kaufman also cites a UCLA report which concluded that in incidences of televised violence:
1.Perpetrators of violent acts go unpunished 73 percent of the time.
2.About 25 percent of violent acts involve handguns.
3.Forty-seven percent of violent situations present no harm to the victims and 58 percent depict no pain.

4.Only 4 percent of violent programs show nonviolent alternatives to solve problems.
5.Premium movie channels such as Time Warner's HBO and Viacom's Showtime had the highest proportion (85 percent) of violent programming. The broadcast networks had a much lower percentage of violence (44 percent).
John P. Murray, Ph.D., Professor and Director of the School of Family Studies and Human Services at Kansas State University, quotes audience rating surveys and other research conducted, which indicate the American household watches T.V. for more than seven hours each day and children, aged 2-11, watch television for an average of 28 hours per week. He further points to studies which show that in broadcast television, acts of violence average five per hour during prime time and increase to 20 to 25 violent acts per hour on children's Saturday morning programs.
Dr. Murray also points out that in a study conducted in Washington, D.C., 1,846 violent scenes appeared in one broadcast day. Of the total, 497 of the most violent scenes were broadcast between 6:00 and 9:00 a.m. (165.7 per hour). Approximately 609 violent scenes appeared between 2:00 and 5:00 p.m. He reminds the reader that both of these time periods are prime viewing time for children and youth.
In his book, Families in Danger: Protecting Your Family in an X-Rated World, Randal A. Wright states that ". . . by the time a child has graduated from high school, he will have witnessed some 150,000 violent episodes, including an estimated 25,000 deaths, on television." (53).
The body of research available tends to categorize the effects of television violence into five general themes:
1.Desensitization.
2.Aggression.
3.Imitation.
4.Problem-Solving.
5.Unrealistic Fear.

Desensitization
As the incidence of viewing violence goes up, the child becomes immune to it and loses the ability to feel compassion and concern.
An online publication by the American Psychological Association points to studies in which children who watched a violent, rather than nonviolent, program were slower to call for help or to intervene when they later witnessed children fighting (1).
Victor B. Cline, Professor of Psychology at the University of Utah, also conducted studies on this subject:
In my own university research laboratories, we measured the emotional responses of young boys, from age five to age fourteen, who belonged to two groups. One [group] had been saturated with TV violence, the other had seen little or none of this kind of material for the past two years. We showed both groups an exciting and violent film, hooked up to a physiograph. This is an electronic machine which carefully measures heart, breathing, and galvanic skin (sweat) responses - all indicators of emotional arousal. The results clearly showed that the boys who had been heavily saturated with images of TV violence tended to be turned off and significantly less responsive emotionally than the more tender, non-exposed group. The over-exposed group could calmly watch scenes that should have disturbed them. Desensitization in the presence of repeated exposure to violent images clearly occurs, both in the laboratory and in real life (How to Make 219).
Psychiatrist Fredric Werther points out that children have an inborn capacity for sympathy. He suggests that feelings of compassion are stifled at an early age from TV violence before they even have a chance to develop.

Aggression
Television violence tends to make children more aggressive - more willing to commit acts of hostility, without provocation, toward others. It is no coincidence that aggression in our society increases with the increased incidence of televised violence. The following information from the Statistical Abstract of the United States, when compared with statistics regarding the increased incidence of TV violence mentioned earlier, documents this trend well:
Table 1
Incidences of Violence: 1960-1985

<< Conversion error >>

Source: Statistical Abstract of the United States (Washington, D.C.: U. S. Bureau of the Census, 1986).
Experimental Studies. Several studies placing children in a controlled environment with controlled content have proven that children who view aggression are more likely to hurt other children than those children who did not watch violent episodes. In 1963, A. Bandura and his colleagues exposed a young child to a film (presented through a television screen) wherein a model kicked and punished a doll. The child's aggressive behavior was then recorded when removed to a playroom setting. The study concluded that those children who had been exposed to the film were more aggressive than children who were not exposed.
Those who take exception to the above findings point out that the study was not conducted in a realistic manner, nor was the content typical of real-life television programming.
Field Studies. To prove that an artificial setting and content make no difference in the results, numerous field studies have been conducted. In a field study, the researcher presents television violence in an everyday setting and observes the results where they naturally occur.
In a field study by A. H. Stein and L. K. Friedrich for the U. S. Surgeon General's project, 97 preschool children were separated into three groups. One group was given a steady diet of "antisocial" television programming (12 episodes of Batman and Superman cartoons). The second group received "pro-social" programs (12 episodes of Mister Roger's Neighborhood), while the last group viewed neutral television (programs described as neither antisocial or pro-social). The setting was their natural preschool environment. After three weeks of pre-viewing observation, four weeks of television, and two weeks of post-viewing follow-up, it was found that those children who exhibited aggressive tendencies prior to the television exposure were significantly more aggressive after the antisocial viewing. Those children who viewed the pro-social episodes were less aggressive and more willing to cooperate and share with other children. This study also showed that cartoon violence produces aggression as well as a more realistic scene does.
Critics of these types of field studies indicated that there was no proof of long-term effects.
Longitudinal Studies. Several studies have been conducted to prove long-term negative effects of TV violence on children.
In one such study, children and their viewing habits were observed at age eight. They were followed up at age eighteen, and again at age thirty. At age eighteen, it was found that violent television programming is one factor in the production of aggressive behavior at a later age. At the age thirty follow-up, there was significant correlation between the viewing of violence at age eight and serious criminal behavior at age 30.
In another study, a list of violent television shows was compiled from British telecasts from the years of 1959 to 1971. The programs had been rated by a BBC viewing panel as to the quality and type of exposure to violence. The 1,565 boys involved (aged 13 to 17) were questioned as to their past viewing habits, then evaluated as to their present level of aggression. The levels were based upon self-evaluations in which each boy reported his level of activity in each of 53 categories of violent behavior over a six-month period. The results of the study proved that those boys who had more exposure to television violence exhibited higher levels of aggressive behavior.
It is clear that research studies lend validity to the concept that increased incidences of televised violence increase aggression in children. This is true in both controlled environments and in the child's natural surroundings, whether the programs are unrealistic, as in cartoons, or in more realistic settings. Furthermore, this aggression continues into adulthood.

Imitation
Children who watch repeated acts of violence tend to imitate some of the more violent behaviors. Imitation can range from such seemingly "harmless" acts as the numerous little boys who don Moms' dish cloths and jump from the living room sofa in imitation of Superman to full fledged, sinister acts of violence. One need only listen to the ten o'clock news or read the newspaper for the latest updates on child and adolescent copycat crimes.

From the Cincinnati Post, October 9, 1993.
A five-year-old boy set his home on fire, killing his two-year old sister, following a Beavis and Butt-head episode. The boy's mother described him as "addicted to Beavis and Butt-head," two moronic pre-adolescent MTV cartoon characters who enjoy fire-setting and other antisocial acts (Levine 19).

From Newsday, August 10, 1992
Serial killer, Nathaniel White, described how he killed his first female victim while imitating a scene from the movie, Robocop II: "I seen him cut somebody's throat then take the knife and slit down the chest to the stomach and leave the body in a certain position. With the first person I killed I did exactly what I saw in the movie." (Levine 5)
From the San Jose Mercury News, October 2, 1993
An adolescent boy was killed by a car and several of his friends seriously injured while imitating a scene from the movie, The Program. The scene shows young men attempting to prove their courage by lying down along the center divider of a busy road, between lanes of cars (Levine 19).
From Newsday, August 10, 1992
Nine-year-old Olivia Niemi was sexually assaulted with a discarded beer bottle on a deserted beach in San Francisco. The four girls who took part in the attack said they were imitating a scene from Born Innocent, an NBC television movie they watched three days before committing the crime. The movie, which takes place in a girls' reform school, shows a new inmate cornered by four girls and graphically raped with the handle of a plummer's [sic.] helper (Levine 6).
It is evident that the stimulation of copycat crimes is not limited to scenes of realistic gore, nor is the imitation limited to one age group of viewers.

Problem-Solving
Along with the problem of increased aggression, comes a similar problem - that of solving problems in a violent manner. Children with prolonged exposure to television violence view violence as the first and only alternative in situations of conflict.
In 1979, the research team of Atkin, Greenberg, Corzenny, and McDermott, posed hypothetical situations of conflict to nine- to thirteen year-olds and then gave them multiple choices of ways to resolve them. Along with verbal and physical aggression choices were options to reduce or avoid conflict. One such scenario described the child riding on his bicycle when another child comes up and pushes him down. Among those children who were heavy TV violence watchers, 45 percent selected physical or verbal aggression responses, while light watchers of violence selected this option 21 percent of the time.
In a similar study by psychologists Ronald Drabman and Margaret Thomas in 1974, third and fourth-graders were randomly divided into two viewing groups. One group watched a violent program, the other did not. Later, the children were told that they were responsible for monitoring the behavior of younger children shown on a video. The video showed younger children playing together, quietly at first, but the children on the video became progressively more angry and destructive with each other. Fifty-eight percent of the children who had not seen the violent program were more likely to seek adult intervention for the video children before the video children began physically hurting one another. However, only 17 percent of the children who were exposed to the initial violent program sought intervention for the video children before physical violence broke out on the video. The research team came to the conclusion that not only do children become desensitized with increased violence viewing, but that they may be more likely to consider fighting a normal way to resolve conflict.
Thomas Lickona, in his book, Raising Good Children, describes middle childhood (ages 6, 7 and 8) as the stage of "looking out for number one." This further complicates the issue of TV violence viewing among this age group. He points to an example:
A third grade teacher asked her class what would be a fair punishment for a group of teenagers who broke into the zoo in Syracuse, New York, one summer night and killed more than a dozen animals. "Shoot 'em," said several children. "Same as they did to the animals." (Lickona 140).
These studies clearly show that when it comes time to resolve problems, the pervasive influence of TV violence leads our children to settle conflicts with violence as their first choice. Further, children also believe this is a normal or acceptable method of problem solving and are often not aware of other options.

Unrealistic Fear
Children who watch a lot of television violence are more likely to think that the world is a mean and dangerous place. They develop unrealistic fears about the world. In a study by researchers J. Cantor and B. L. Omdahl, one group of children were exposed to housefires and drownings which ended fatally. The other group watched neutral programs involving water and fire (those which did not end fatally). The video footage was taken from popular television programs and movies. As a result, the children who viewed the fatal footage became more fearful of fire and water than those who watched the neutral programming. Additionally, the fearful children overestimated the probability of such events taking place (384-401).
In her book, Levine mentions the research findings of Jerome L. and Dorothy G. Singer, which points out that heavy viewers of television violence experience the world as a particularly frightening and unfriendly place (144). The Singers indicate that:
Our data provide some indication that, even when various controls are taken into account, heavy TV viewing is significantly associated with elementary school children's later aggressive behavior, restlessness, and belief in a "mean and scary world."
The unconditional belief by the young child in the violent images he sees on the screen creates an unrealistic fear of personal harm and the notion that such incidences occur frequently.

Solutions for Parents
Despite the seemingly overwhelming negative effects, parents do have options. Children can survive the onslaught with parental help.
Familiarize Yourself with Your Child's Viewing Habits. Take note of what your children are watching and under what circumstances (is it for relaxation? to relieve boredom? for background noise?). Once you become familiar with your child's viewing habits, you will be in a better position to make future viewing plans for him.
Watch Television with Your Child. Research has shown that watching television with your child and actively discussing and explaining what he is viewing increases his comprehension of television content (i.e., sorting fantasy from reality or recognizing stereotypical views of people as being false). This is particularly effective as a child approaches the age of seven when his ability to think logically begins to develop. Discussion also increases prosocial behavior (Levine 49, 205-206).
Limit Television Viewing in Both Content and Duration. Singer and Singer recommend no more than one hour of television viewing per day for preschoolers. During elementary school, the daily diet can be increased to two hours, accompanied by lots of parental discussion of content.
Does the program encourage worthwhile ideas, values, and beliefs? Does the program stimulate constructive activities (i.e., to learn more? to be creative? to solve problems without violence? to live in harmony with others?). Is watching any particular TV program the best use of one's time? Don't be afraid to turn off the television if you find the program does not meet content criteria.
Teach Children to Watch with a Purpose. Levine recommends that parents draw an analogy between using the television with using other household appliances. The hair dryer is not left on after the hair is dry, nor is the toaster left on once the toast pops up. She recommends sitting down with your children and a reliable television guide and making selections for a week in advance. This teaches, she says: ". . . that television is not a device that we passively allow to fill up dead space; rather, it is a source of entertainment and education that we actively pursue." (209)
Provide Alternatives. Teach your children that television is but one source of information. Provide alternatives such as opera, ballet, theatre, museums, and most importantly, reading. In fact, insist on reading. Television tends to displace reading because it is a faster source for entertainment, boredom relief, and increasing knowledge.
Become Proactive in Securing Non-Objectionable TV Content. Write short, logically reasoned letters to the network producing the objectionable material. Boycott those products whose manufacturers sponsor objectionable programs. Write to any and everyone who may influence television content - your local legislator, congressman, or senator; government agencies; and advocacy groups. Both Klein (How to Make 225-226) and Levine (231-236) provide lists and addresses.
Pressure Local Schools to Provide Classes in Media Literacy. Media literacy courses explain how the media exploit and manipulate their audiences. It helps children to understand what they are seeing, thus making them less susceptible to manipulation (Levine 214).
Pull the Plug. When children are hopelessly "hooked" on television, Klein recommends (as a last resort) pulling the plug for a time (six months to a year), then gradually re-introducing television after having parent/child discussions regarding length and content of television viewing. He also points out that during the intervening, TV-free months, families will have developed many fulfilling alternatives, making the return to restricted television viewing easier to accomplish (How to Make 220-221).
However, it should be remembered that as powerful a medium television is for showing antisocial material, it is equally powerful, when used properly, for promoting pro-social values. There are a multitude of quality programs of value to families. By pulling the plug entirely, children miss the opportunity to develop parent-directed skills in discrimination and we risk throwing out the baby with the bathwater. NOTES