explanations media influence

•  Media violence, may lead to aggressive behaviour by removing this anxiety. The more violence a child watches, the more acceptable aggressive behaviour becomes for that child. Someone who becomes desensitised to violence may therefore perceive it as more 'normal’ and be more likely to engage in violence themselves. Desensitisation to media violence typically takes a long time - a result of numerous repeated exposures.
• One indication that desensitisation has occurred is a reduction in physiological arousal (e.g. heart rate) when individuals are exposed to real violence after being exposed to media violence. Other indications are a change in the cognitive and affective reactions that would have occurred in the absence of desensitisation. For example, desensitised individuals are less likely to notice violence in real life, and feel less sympathy for the victims.
• Our ideas of acceptability of harming others are primarily acquired through social transmission, such as moral messages on television and in other media. The justification of violence in the media is how children can infer standards of acceptable behaviour. According to the disinhibition explanation, media may change these standards of what is considered acceptable. Exposure to violent media can legitimise the use of violence by the individual in their own lives because it undermines the social sanctions. It may have an immediate and a long term effect.
• Violence on TV or games triggers physiological arousal, so a greater probability of behaving aggressively. In this state, inhibitions are temporarily suppressed. In the longer term, prolonged exposure to media violence gives the message that violence is a normal part of everyday life. When violence is left unpunished on television, the viewer's guilt or concern about consequences is also reduced.
• The idea of cognitive priming was proposed to explain the short-term effects of media violence. He proposed when people are constantly exposed, this activates thoughts/ideas about violence, which primes other aggressive thoughts. For example, playing a computer game in which the player ‘kills' other characters may prime thoughts of physical fighting, and leads to motivation to harm others.
• A violent film can temporarily lower the threshold for activation of these thoughts, making them accessible for a short time. Frequent activation through prolonged exposure to violent media may result in a lowered activation threshold for these aggressive thoughts, allowing them to be accessed more readily and so used to process and interpret information.

   
• There is research support for the claim that violent computer games produce physiological desensitisation.

  Carnagey 2007 made participants either play a violent or non-violent video game for 20 minutes and then wated a 10-minute film containing scenes of real-life violence while their heart rate and skin conductance response were monitored. The pt who previously played the violent computer game had a lower heart rate and skin conductance response while viewing the film.

  This demonstrated the physiological desensitisation to violence as predicted by the explanation.
• Desensitisation can be adaptive for individuals, but also have worrying consequences.

  Troops can desensitise to horrors they see in combat so can cope better and be more effective in their role. But, desensitisation can be detrimental to society. If individuals are desensitised to violence after exposure to violent media, there are bad consequences. Researchers found that violent media can reduce helping behaviour.

  This suggests that there are good and bad consequences brought from desensitisation, but the negative impact to society as it makes people ‘numb’ and less helpful.

   
• Bushman 1998 provided support for the cognitive priming explanation in a study of 200 male and female undergraduates.

  The pt either watched a 15 minute segment of a violent or a non-violent film. Pt who watched the violent film subsequently had quicker reaction time to violent words than pt who watched the non-violent film. The video content didn’t cause quicker reaction times to non-violent films.

  These findings support the cognitive priming explanation for media-related aggression. The violence causes aggressive thoughts to be more accessible.

   
• Atkin 1983 found that the realism of the film/game is an important factor in the relationship between violent media and aggressive thoughts/behaviours.

  He found higher levels of aggression resulting from the viewing of more realistic violence. Fictional violence may not have the same priming effect of realistic violence.

  This suggests that exposure to more realistic and intense forms of aggression may influence the types and intensity of activated thoughts and ideas.
• The likelihood of disinhibition depends on many factors such as the type of viewer and the context.

  Younger children are more likely to be affected as they are more likely to be drawn into the violent episodes without thinking about consequences. Children who grow up in households which have strong norms against violence are unlikely to experience disinhibition to exhibit aggressive behaviour, the opposite for if a child experiences physical punishment from their parents

  This demonstrates the relationship between media violence and disinhibition isn’t straightforward and mediated by factors.
• Research suggests that disinhibition is less likely in situations where negative consequences of aggressive behaviour are shown.

  For example, Goranson 1969 shows people a film of a boxing match where there were 2 alternate endings. In one, there were no apparent consequences, in the other the loser took a bad beating and ended up dying. The pt who didn’t see the consequence were more likely to behave aggressively after the viewing than those who saw the consequences.

  This supports the suggestion that disinhibition is much more likely in violent media where there are no consequences shown.