essay of the influence of media on violence

Tools and Resources
Customer Services
Corrections
Crime, Media, and Popular Culture
Criminal Behavior
Criminological Theory
Critical Criminology
Geography of Crime
International Crime
Juvenile Justice
Prevention/Public Policy
Race, Ethnicity, and Crime
Research Methods
Victimology/Criminal Victimization
White Collar Crime
Women, Crime, and Justice
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Violence, media effects, and criminology.

Nickie D. Phillips Nickie D. Phillips Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, St. Francis College
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.013.189
Published online: 27 July 2017

Debate surrounding the impact of media representations on violence and crime has raged for decades and shows no sign of abating. Over the years, the targets of concern have shifted from film to comic books to television to video games, but the central questions remain the same. What is the relationship between popular media and audience emotions, attitudes, and behaviors? While media effects research covers a vast range of topics—from the study of its persuasive effects in advertising to its positive impact on emotions and behaviors—of particular interest to criminologists is the relationship between violence in popular media and real-life aggression and violence. Does media violence cause aggression and/or violence?

The study of media effects is informed by a variety of theoretical perspectives and spans many disciplines including communications and media studies, psychology, medicine, sociology, and criminology. Decades of research have amassed on the topic, yet there is no clear agreement about the impact of media or about which methodologies are most appropriate. Instead, there continues to be disagreement about whether media portrayals of violence are a serious problem and, if so, how society should respond.

Conflicting interpretations of research findings inform and shape public debate around media effects. Although there seems to be a consensus among scholars that exposure to media violence impacts aggression, there is less agreement around its potential impact on violence and criminal behavior. While a few criminologists focus on the phenomenon of copycat crimes, most rarely engage with whether media directly causes violence. Instead, they explore broader considerations of the relationship between media, popular culture, and society.

media exposure
criminal behavior
popular culture
media violence
media and crime
copycat crimes

Media Exposure, Violence, and Aggression

On Friday July 22, 2016 , a gunman killed nine people at a mall in Munich, Germany. The 18-year-old shooter was subsequently characterized by the media as being under psychiatric care and harboring at least two obsessions. One, an obsession with mass shootings, including that of Anders Breivik who ultimately killed 77 people in Norway in 2011 , and the other an obsession with video games. A Los Angeles, California, news report stated that the gunman was “an avid player of first-person shooter video games, including ‘Counter-Strike,’” while another headline similarly declared, “Munich gunman, a fan of violent video games, rampage killers, had planned attack for a year”(CNN Wire, 2016 ; Reuters, 2016 ). This high-profile incident was hardly the first to link popular culture to violent crime. Notably, in the aftermath of the 1999 Columbine shooting massacre, for example, media sources implicated and later discredited music, video games, and a gothic aesthetic as causal factors of the crime (Cullen, 2009 ; Yamato, 2016 ). Other, more recent, incidents have echoed similar claims suggesting that popular culture has a nefarious influence on consumers.

Media violence and its impact on audiences are among the most researched and examined topics in communications studies (Hetsroni, 2007 ). Yet, debate over whether media violence causes aggression and violence persists, particularly in response to high-profile criminal incidents. Blaming video games, and other forms of media and popular culture, as contributing to violence is not a new phenomenon. However, interpreting media effects can be difficult because commenters often seem to indicate a grand consensus that understates more contradictory and nuanced interpretations of the data.

In fact, there is a consensus among many media researchers that media violence has an impact on aggression although its impact on violence is less clear. For example, in response to the shooting in Munich, Brad Bushman, professor of communication and psychology, avoided pinning the incident solely on video games, but in the process supported the assertion that video gameplay is linked to aggression. He stated,

While there isn’t complete consensus in any scientific field, a study we conducted showed more than 90% of pediatricians and about two-thirds of media researchers surveyed agreed that violent video games increase aggression in children. (Bushman, 2016 )

Others, too, have reached similar conclusions with regard to other media. In 2008 , psychologist John Murray summarized decades of research stating, “Fifty years of research on the effect of TV violence on children leads to the inescapable conclusion that viewing media violence is related to increases in aggressive attitudes, values, and behaviors” (Murray, 2008 , p. 1212). Scholars Glenn Sparks and Cheri Sparks similarly declared that,

Despite the fact that controversy still exists about the impact of media violence, the research results reveal a dominant and consistent pattern in favor of the notion that exposure to violent media images does increase the risk of aggressive behavior. (Sparks & Sparks, 2002 , p. 273)

In 2014 , psychologist Wayne Warburton more broadly concluded that the vast majority of studies have found “that exposure to violent media increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior in the short and longterm, increases hostile perceptions and attitudes, and desensitizes individuals to violent content” (Warburton, 2014 , p. 64).

Criminologists, too, are sensitive to the impact of media exposure. For example, Jacqueline Helfgott summarized the research:

There have been over 1000 studies on the effects of TV and film violence over the past 40 years. Research on the influence of TV violence on aggression has consistently shown that TV violence increases aggression and social anxiety, cultivates a “mean view” of the world, and negatively impacts real-world behavior. (Helfgott, 2015 , p. 50)

In his book, Media Coverage of Crime and Criminal Justice , criminologist Matthew Robinson stated, “Studies of the impact of media on violence are crystal clear in their findings and implications for society” (Robinson, 2011 , p. 135). He cited studies on childhood exposure to violent media leading to aggressive behavior as evidence. In his pioneering book Media, Crime, and Criminal Justice , criminologist Ray Surette concurred that media violence is linked to aggression, but offered a nuanced interpretation. He stated,

a small to modest but genuine causal role for media violence regarding viewer aggression has been established for most beyond a reasonable doubt . . . There is certainly a connection between violent media and social aggression, but its strength and configuration is simply not known at this time. (Surette, 2011 , p. 68)

The uncertainties about the strength of the relationship and the lack of evidence linking media violence to real-world violence is often lost in the news media accounts of high-profile violent crimes.

Media Exposure and Copycat Crimes

While many scholars do seem to agree that there is evidence that media violence—whether that of film, TV, or video games—increases aggression, they disagree about its impact on violent or criminal behavior (Ferguson, 2014 ; Gunter, 2008 ; Helfgott, 2015 ; Reiner, 2002 ; Savage, 2008 ). Nonetheless, it is violent incidents that most often prompt speculation that media causes violence. More specifically, violence that appears to mimic portrayals of violent media tends to ignite controversy. For example, the idea that films contribute to violent crime is not a new assertion. Films such as A Clockwork Orange , Menace II Society , Set it Off , and Child’s Play 3 , have been linked to crimes and at least eight murders have been linked to Oliver Stone’s 1994 film Natural Born Killers (Bracci, 2010 ; Brooks, 2002 ; PBS, n.d. ). Nonetheless, pinpointing a direct, causal relationship between media and violent crime remains elusive.

Criminologist Jacqueline Helfgott defined copycat crime as a “crime that is inspired by another crime” (Helfgott, 2015 , p. 51). The idea is that offenders model their behavior on media representations of violence whether real or fictional. One case, in particular, illustrated how popular culture, media, and criminal violence converge. On July 20, 2012 , James Holmes entered the midnight premiere of The Dark Knight Rises , the third film in the massively successful Batman trilogy, in a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. He shot and killed 12 people and wounded 70 others. At the time, the New York Times described the incident,

Witnesses told the police that Mr. Holmes said something to the effect of “I am the Joker,” according to a federal law enforcement official, and that his hair had been dyed or he was wearing a wig. Then, as people began to rise from their seats in confusion or anxiety, he began to shoot. The gunman paused at least once, several witnesses said, perhaps to reload, and continued firing. (Frosch & Johnson, 2012 ).

The dyed hair, Holme’s alleged comment, and that the incident occurred at a popular screening led many to speculate that the shooter was influenced by the earlier film in the trilogy and reignited debate around the impact about media violence. The Daily Mail pointed out that Holmes may have been motivated by a 25-year-old Batman comic in which a gunman opens fire in a movie theater—thus further suggesting the iconic villain served as motivation for the attack (Graham & Gallagher, 2012 ). Perceptions of the “Joker connection” fed into the notion that popular media has a direct causal influence on violent behavior even as press reports later indicated that Holmes had not, in fact, made reference to the Joker (Meyer, 2015 ).

A week after the Aurora shooting, the New York Daily News published an article detailing a “possible copycat” crime. A suspect was arrested in his Maryland home after making threatening phone calls to his workplace. The article reported that the suspect stated, “I am a [sic] joker” and “I’m going to load my guns and blow everybody up.” In their search, police found “a lethal arsenal of 25 guns and thousands of rounds of ammunition” in the suspect’s home (McShane, 2012 ).

Though criminologists are generally skeptical that those who commit violent crimes are motivated solely by media violence, there does seem to be some evidence that media may be influential in shaping how some offenders commit crime. In his study of serious and violent juvenile offenders, criminologist Ray Surette found “about one out of three juveniles reports having considered a copycat crime and about one out of four reports actually having attempted one.” He concluded that “those juveniles who are self-reported copycats are significantly more likely to credit the media as both a general and personal influence.” Surette contended that though violent offenses garner the most media attention, copycat criminals are more likely to be career criminals and to commit property crimes rather than violent crimes (Surette, 2002 , pp. 56, 63; Surette 2011 ).

Discerning what crimes may be classified as copycat crimes is a challenge. Jacqueline Helfgott suggested they occur on a “continuum of influence.” On one end, she said, media plays a relatively minor role in being a “component of the modus operandi” of the offender, while on the other end, she said, “personality disordered media junkies” have difficulty distinguishing reality from violent fantasy. According to Helfgott, various factors such as individual characteristics, characteristics of media sources, relationship to media, demographic factors, and cultural factors are influential. Overall, scholars suggest that rather than pushing unsuspecting viewers to commit crimes, media more often influences how , rather than why, someone commits a crime (Helfgott, 2015 ; Marsh & Melville, 2014 ).

Given the public interest, there is relatively little research devoted to exactly what copycat crimes are and how they occur. Part of the problem of studying these types of crimes is the difficulty defining and measuring the concept. In an effort to clarify and empirically measure the phenomenon, Surette offered a scale that included seven indicators of copycat crimes. He used the following factors to identify copycat crimes: time order (media exposure must occur before the crime); time proximity (a five-year cut-off point of exposure); theme consistency (“a pattern of thought, feeling or behavior in the offender which closely parallels the media model”); scene specificity (mimicking a specific scene); repetitive viewing; self-editing (repeated viewing of single scene while “the balance of the film is ignored”); and offender statements and second-party statements indicating the influence of media. Findings demonstrated that cases are often prematurely, if not erroneously, labeled as “copycat.” Surette suggested that use of the scale offers a more precise way for researchers to objectively measure trends and frequency of copycat crimes (Surette, 2016 , p. 8).

Media Exposure and Violent Crimes

Overall, a causal link between media exposure and violent criminal behavior has yet to be validated, and most researchers steer clear of making such causal assumptions. Instead, many emphasize that media does not directly cause aggression and violence so much as operate as a risk factor among other variables (Bushman & Anderson, 2015 ; Warburton, 2014 ). In their review of media effects, Brad Bushman and psychologist Craig Anderson concluded,

In sum, extant research shows that media violence is a causal risk factor not only for mild forms of aggression but also for more serious forms of aggression, including violent criminal behavior. That does not mean that violent media exposure by itself will turn a normal child or adolescent who has few or no other risk factors into a violent criminal or a school shooter. Such extreme violence is rare, and tends to occur only when multiple risk factors converge in time, space, and within an individual. (Bushman & Anderson, 2015 , p. 1817)

Surette, however, argued that there is no clear linkage between media exposure and criminal behavior—violent or otherwise. In other words, a link between media violence and aggression does not necessarily mean that exposure to violent media causes violent (or nonviolent) criminal behavior. Though there are thousands of articles addressing media effects, many of these consist of reviews or commentary about prior research findings rather than original studies (Brown, 2007 ; Murray, 2008 ; Savage, 2008 ; Surette, 2011 ). Fewer, still, are studies that specifically measure media violence and criminal behavior (Gunter, 2008 ; Strasburger & Donnerstein, 2014 ). In their meta-analysis investigating the link between media violence and criminal aggression, scholars Joanne Savage and Christina Yancey did not find support for the assertion. Instead, they concluded,

The study of most consequence for violent crime policy actually found that exposure to media violence was significantly negatively related to violent crime rates at the aggregate level . . . It is plain to us that the relationship between exposure to violent media and serious violence has yet to be established. (Savage & Yancey, 2008 , p. 786)

Researchers continue to measure the impact of media violence among various forms of media and generally stop short of drawing a direct causal link in favor of more indirect effects. For example, one study examined the increase of gun violence in films over the years and concluded that violent scenes provide scripts for youth that justify gun violence that, in turn, may amplify aggression (Bushman, Jamieson, Weitz, & Romer, 2013 ). But others report contradictory findings. Patrick Markey and colleagues studied the relationship between rates of homicide and aggravated assault and gun violence in films from 1960–2012 and found that over the years, violent content in films increased while crime rates declined . After controlling for age shifts, poverty, education, incarceration rates, and economic inequality, the relationships remained statistically non-significant (Markey, French, & Markey, 2015 , p. 165). Psychologist Christopher Ferguson also failed to find a relationship between media violence in films and video games and violence (Ferguson, 2014 ).

Another study, by Gordon Dahl and Stefano DellaVigna, examined violent films from 1995–2004 and found decreases in violent crimes coincided with violent blockbuster movie attendance. Here, it was not the content that was alleged to impact crime rates, but instead what the authors called “voluntary incapacitation,” or the shifting of daily activities from that of potential criminal behavior to movie attendance. The authors concluded, “For each million people watching a strongly or mildly violent movie, respectively, violent crime decreases by 1.9% and 2.1%. Nonviolent movies have no statistically significant impact” (Dahl & DellaVigna, p. 39).

High-profile cases over the last several years have shifted public concern toward the perceived danger of video games, but research demonstrating a link between video games and criminal violence remains scant. The American Psychiatric Association declared that “research demonstrates a consistent relation between violent video game use and increases in aggressive behavior, aggressive cognitions and aggressive affect, and decreases in prosocial behavior, empathy and sensitivity to aggression . . .” but stopped short of claiming that video games impact criminal violence. According to Breuer and colleagues, “While all of the available meta-analyses . . . found a relationship between aggression and the use of (violent) video games, the size and interpretation of this connection differ largely between these studies . . .” (APA, 2015 ; Breuer et al., 2015 ; DeCamp, 2015 ). Further, psychologists Patrick Markey, Charlotte Markey, and Juliana French conducted four time-series analyses investigating the relationship between video game habits and assault and homicide rates. The studies measured rates of violent crime, the annual and monthly video game sales, Internet searches for video game walkthroughs, and rates of violent crime occurring after the release dates of popular games. The results showed that there was no relationship between video game habits and rates of aggravated assault and homicide. Instead, there was some indication of decreases in crime (Markey, Markey, & French, 2015 ).

Another longitudinal study failed to find video games as a predictor of aggression, instead finding support for the “selection hypothesis”—that physically aggressive individuals (aged 14–17) were more likely to choose media content that contained violence than those slightly older, aged 18–21. Additionally, the researchers concluded,

that violent media do not have a substantial impact on aggressive personality or behavior, at least in the phases of late adolescence and early adulthood that we focused on. (Breuer, Vogelgesang, Quandt, & Festl, 2015 , p. 324)

Overall, the lack of a consistent finding demonstrating that media exposure causes violent crime may not be particularly surprising given that studies linking media exposure, aggression, and violence suffer from a host of general criticisms. By way of explanation, social theorist David Gauntlett maintained that researchers frequently employ problematic definitions of aggression and violence, questionable methodologies, rely too much on fictional violence, neglect the social meaning of violence, and assume the third-person effect—that is, assume that other, vulnerable people are impacted by media, but “we” are not (Ferguson & Dyck, 2012 ; Gauntlett, 2001 ).

Others, such as scholars Martin Barker and Julian Petley, flatly reject the notion that violent media exposure is a causal factor for aggression and/or violence. In their book Ill Effects , the authors stated instead that it is simply “stupid” to query about “what are the effects of [media] violence” without taking context into account (p. 2). They counter what they describe as moral campaigners who advance the idea that media violence causes violence. Instead, Barker and Petley argue that audiences interpret media violence in a variety of ways based on their histories, experiences, and knowledge, and as such, it makes little sense to claim media “cause” violence (Barker & Petley, 2001 ).

Given the seemingly inconclusive and contradictory findings regarding media effects research, to say that the debate can, at times, be contentious is an understatement. One article published in European Psychologist queried “Does Doing Media Violence Research Make One Aggressive?” and lamented that the debate had devolved into an ideological one (Elson & Ferguson, 2013 ). Another academic journal published a special issue devoted to video games and youth and included a transcript of exchanges between two scholars to demonstrate that a “peaceful debate” was, in fact, possible (Ferguson & Konijn, 2015 ).

Nonetheless, in this debate, the stakes are high and the policy consequences profound. After examining over 900 published articles, publication patterns, prominent authors and coauthors, and disciplinary interest in the topic, scholar James Anderson argued that prominent media effects scholars, whom he deems the “causationists,” had developed a cottage industry dependent on funding by agencies focused primarily on the negative effects of media on children. Anderson argued that such a focus presents media as a threat to family values and ultimately operates as a zero-sum game. As a result, attention and resources are diverted toward media and away from other priorities that are essential to understanding aggression such as social disadvantage, substance abuse, and parental conflict (Anderson, 2008 , p. 1276).

Theoretical Perspectives on Media Effects

Understanding how media may impact attitudes and behavior has been the focus of media and communications studies for decades. Numerous theoretical perspectives offer insight into how and to what extent the media impacts the audience. As scholar Jenny Kitzinger documented in 2004 , there are generally two ways to approach the study of media effects. One is to foreground the power of media. That is, to suggest that the media holds powerful sway over viewers. Another perspective is to foreground the power and heterogeneity of the audience and to recognize that it is comprised of active agents (Kitzinger, 2004 ).

The notion of an all-powerful media can be traced to the influence of scholars affiliated with the Institute for Social Research, or Frankfurt School, in the 1930–1940s and proponents of the mass society theory. The institute was originally founded in Germany but later moved to the United States. Criminologist Yvonne Jewkes outlined how mass society theory assumed that members of the public were susceptible to media messages. This, theorists argued, was a result of rapidly changing social conditions and industrialization that produced isolated, impressionable individuals “cut adrift from kinship and organic ties and lacking moral cohesion” (Jewkes, 2015 , p. 13). In this historical context, in the era of World War II, the impact of Nazi propaganda was particularly resonant. Here, the media was believed to exhibit a unidirectional flow, operating as a powerful force influencing the masses. The most useful metaphor for this perspective described the media as a “hypodermic syringe” that could “‘inject’ values, ideas and information directly into the passive receiver producing direct and unmediated ‘effects’” (Jewkes, 2015 , pp. 16, 34). Though the hypodermic syringe model seems simplistic today, the idea that the media is all-powerful continues to inform contemporary public discourse around media and violence.

Concern of the power of media captured the attention of researchers interested in its purported negative impact on children. In one of the earliest series of studies in the United States during the late 1920s–1930s, researchers attempted to quantitatively measure media effects with the Payne Fund Studies. For example, they investigated how film, a relatively new medium, impacted children’s attitudes and behaviors, including antisocial and violent behavior. At the time, the Payne Fund Studies’ findings fueled the notion that children were indeed negatively influenced by films. This prompted the film industry to adopt a self-imposed code regulating content (Sparks & Sparks, 2002 ; Surette, 2011 ). Not everyone agreed with the approach. In fact, the methodologies employed in the studies received much criticism, and ultimately, the movement was branded as a moral crusade to regulate film content. Scholars Garth Jowett, Ian Jarvie, and Kathryn Fuller wrote about the significance of the studies,

We have seen this same policy battle fought and refought over radio, television, rock and roll, music videos and video games. Their researchers looked to see if intuitive concerns could be given concrete, measurable expression in research. While they had partial success, as have all subsequent efforts, they also ran into intractable problems . . . Since that day, no way has yet been found to resolve the dilemma of cause and effect: do crime movies create more crime, or do the criminally inclined enjoy and perhaps imitate crime movies? (Jowett, Jarvie, & Fuller, 1996 , p. 12)

As the debate continued, more sophisticated theoretical perspectives emerged. Efforts to empirically measure the impact of media on aggression and violence continued, albeit with equivocal results. In the 1950s and 1960s, psychological behaviorism, or understanding psychological motivations through observable behavior, became a prominent lens through which to view the causal impact of media violence. This type of research was exemplified by Albert Bandura’s Bobo Doll studies demonstrating that children exposed to aggressive behavior, either observed in real life or on film, behaved more aggressively than those in control groups who were not exposed to the behavior. The assumption derived was that children learn through exposure and imitate behavior (Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963 ). Though influential, the Bandura experiments were nevertheless heavily criticized. Some argued the laboratory conditions under which children were exposed to media were not generalizable to real-life conditions. Others challenged the assumption that children absorb media content in an unsophisticated manner without being able to distinguish between fantasy and reality. In fact, later studies did find children to be more discerning consumers of media than popularly believed (Gauntlett, 2001 ).

Hugely influential in our understandings of human behavior, the concept of social learning has been at the core of more contemporary understandings of media effects. For example, scholar Christopher Ferguson noted that the General Aggression Model (GAM), rooted in social learning and cognitive theory, has for decades been a dominant model for understanding how media impacts aggression and violence. GAM is described as the idea that “aggression is learned by the activation and repetition of cognitive scripts coupled with the desensitization of emotional responses due to repeated exposure.” However, Ferguson noted that its usefulness has been debated and advocated for a paradigm shift (Ferguson, 2013 , pp. 65, 27; Krahé, 2014 ).

Though the methodologies of the Payne Fund Studies and Bandura studies were heavily criticized, concern over media effects continued to be tied to larger moral debates including the fear of moral decline and concern over the welfare of children. Most notably, in the 1950s, psychiatrist Frederic Wertham warned of the dangers of comic books, a hugely popular medium at the time, and their impact on juveniles. Based on anecdotes and his clinical experience with children, Wertham argued that images of graphic violence and sexual debauchery in comic books were linked to juvenile delinquency. Though he was far from the only critic of comic book content, his criticisms reached the masses and gained further notoriety with the publication of his 1954 book, Seduction of the Innocent . Wertham described the comic book content thusly,

The stories have a lot of crime and gunplay and, in addition, alluring advertisements of guns, some of them full-page and in bright colors, with four guns of various sizes and descriptions on a page . . . Here is the repetition of violence and sexiness which no Freud, Krafft-Ebing or Havelock Ellis ever dreamed could be offered to children, and in such profusion . . . I have come to the conclusion that this chronic stimulation, temptation and seduction by comic books, both their content and their alluring advertisements of knives and guns, are contributing factors to many children’s maladjustment. (Wertham, 1954 , p. 39)

Wertham’s work was instrumental in shaping public opinion and policies about the dangers of comic books. Concern about the impact of comics reached its apex in 1954 with the United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency. Wertham testified before the committee, arguing that comics were a leading cause of juvenile delinquency. Ultimately, the protest of graphic content in comic books by various interest groups contributed to implementation of the publishers’ self-censorship code, the Comics Code Authority, which essentially designated select books that were deemed “safe” for children (Nyberg, 1998 ). The code remained in place for decades, though it was eventually relaxed and decades later phased out by the two most dominant publishers, DC and Marvel.

Wertham’s work, however influential in impacting the comic industry, was ultimately panned by academics. Although scholar Bart Beaty characterized Wertham’s position as more nuanced, if not progressive, than the mythology that followed him, Wertham was broadly dismissed as a moral reactionary (Beaty, 2005 ; Phillips & Strobl, 2013 ). The most damning criticism of Wertham’s work came decades later, from Carol Tilley’s examination of Wertham’s files. She concluded that in Seduction of the Innocent ,

Wertham manipulated, overstated, compromised, and fabricated evidence—especially that evidence he attributed to personal clinical research with young people—for rhetorical gain. (Tilley, 2012 , p. 386)

Tilley linked Wertham’s approach to that of the Frankfurt theorists who deemed popular culture a social threat and contended that Wertham was most interested in “cultural correction” rather than scientific inquiry (Tilley, 2012 , p. 404).

Over the decades, concern about the moral impact of media remained while theoretical and methodological approaches to media effects studies continued to evolve (Rich, Bickham, & Wartella, 2015 ). In what many consider a sophisticated development, theorists began to view the audience as more active and multifaceted than the mass society perspective allowed (Kitzinger, 2004 ). One perspective, based on a “uses and gratifications” model, assumes that rather than a passive audience being injected with values and information, a more active audience selects and “uses” media as a response to their needs and desires. Studies of uses and gratifications take into account how choice of media is influenced by one’s psychological and social circumstances. In this context, media provides a variety of functions for consumers who may engage with it for the purposes of gathering information, reducing boredom, seeking enjoyment, or facilitating communication (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1973 ; Rubin, 2002 ). This approach differs from earlier views in that it privileges the perspective and agency of the audience.

Another approach, the cultivation theory, gained momentum among researchers in the 1970s and has been of particular interest to criminologists. It focuses on how television television viewing impacts viewers’ attitudes toward social reality. The theory was first introduced by communications scholar George Gerbner, who argued the importance of understanding messages that long-term viewers absorb. Rather than examine the effect of specific content within any given programming, cultivation theory,

looks at exposure to massive flows of messages over long periods of time. The cultivation process takes place in the interaction of the viewer with the message; neither the message nor the viewer are all-powerful. (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, Singnorielli, & Shanahan, 2002 , p. 48)

In other words, he argued, television viewers are, over time, exposed to messages about the way the world works. As Gerbner and colleagues stated, “continued exposure to its messages is likely to reiterate, confirm, and nourish—that is, cultivate—its own values and perspectives” (p. 49).

One of the most well-known consequences of heavy media exposure is what Gerbner termed the “mean world” syndrome. He coined it based on studies that found that long-term exposure to media violence among heavy television viewers, “tends to cultivate the image of a relatively mean and dangerous world” (p. 52). Inherent in Gerbner’s view was that media representations are separate and distinct entities from “real life.” That is, it is the distorted representations of crime and violence that cultivate the notion that the world is a dangerous place. In this context, Gerbner found that heavy television viewers are more likely to be fearful of crime and to overestimate their chances of being a victim of violence (Gerbner, 1994 ).

Though there is evidence in support of cultivation theory, the strength of the relationship between media exposure and fear of crime is inconclusive. This is in part due to the recognition that audience members are not homogenous. Instead, researchers have found that there are many factors that impact the cultivating process. This includes, but is not limited to, “class, race, gender, place of residence, and actual experience of crime” (Reiner, 2002 ; Sparks, 1992 ). Or, as Ted Chiricos and colleagues remarked in their study of crime news and fear of crime, “The issue is not whether media accounts of crime increase fear, but which audiences, with which experiences and interests, construct which meanings from the messages received” (Chiricos, Eschholz, & Gertz, p. 354).

Other researchers found that exposure to media violence creates a desensitizing effect, that is, that as viewers consume more violent media, they become less empathetic as well as psychologically and emotionally numb when confronted with actual violence (Bartholow, Bushman, & Sestir, 2006 ; Carnagey, Anderson, & Bushman, 2007 ; Cline, Croft, & Courrier, 1973 ; Fanti, Vanman, Henrich, & Avraamides, 2009 ; Krahé et al., 2011 ). Other scholars such as Henry Giroux, however, point out that our contemporary culture is awash in violence and “everyone is infected.” From this perspective, the focus is not on certain individuals whose exposure to violent media leads to a desensitization of real-life violence, but rather on the notion that violence so permeates society that it has become normalized in ways that are divorced from ethical and moral implications. Giroux wrote,

While it would be wrong to suggest that the violence that saturates popular culture directly causes violence in the larger society, it is arguable that such violence serves not only to produce an insensitivity to real life violence but also functions to normalize violence as both a source of pleasure and as a practice for addressing social issues. When young people and others begin to believe that a world of extreme violence, vengeance, lawlessness, and revenge is the only world they inhabit, the culture and practice of real-life violence is more difficult to scrutinize, resist, and transform . . . (Giroux, 2015 )

For Giroux, the danger is that the normalization of violence has become a threat to democracy itself. In our culture of mass consumption shaped by neoliberal logics, depoliticized narratives of violence have become desired forms of entertainment and are presented in ways that express tolerance for some forms of violence while delegitimizing other forms of violence. In their book, Disposable Futures , Brad Evans and Henry Giroux argued that as the spectacle of violence perpetuates fear of inevitable catastrophe, it reinforces expansion of police powers, increased militarization and other forms of social control, and ultimately renders marginalized members of the populace disposable (Evans & Giroux, 2015 , p. 81).

Criminology and the “Media/Crime Nexus”

Most criminologists and sociologists who focus on media and crime are generally either dismissive of the notion that media violence directly causes violence or conclude that findings are more complex than traditional media effects models allow, preferring to focus attention on the impact of media violence on society rather than individual behavior (Carrabine, 2008 ; Ferrell, Hayward, & Young, 2015 ; Jewkes, 2015 ; Kitzinger, 2004 ; Marsh & Melville, 2014 ; Rafter, 2006 ; Sternheimer, 2003 ; Sternheimer 2013 ; Surette, 2011 ). Sociologist Karen Sternheimer forcefully declared “media culture is not the root cause of American social problems, not the Big Bad Wolf, as our ongoing public discussion would suggest” (Sternheimer, 2003 , p. 3). Sternheimer rejected the idea that media causes violence and argued that a false connection has been forged between media, popular culture, and violence. Like others critical of a singular focus on media, Sternheimer posited that overemphasis on the perceived dangers of media violence serves as a red herring that directs attention away from the actual causes of violence rooted in factors such as poverty, family violence, abuse, and economic inequalities (Sternheimer, 2003 , 2013 ). Similarly, in her Media and Crime text, Yvonne Jewkes stated that U.K. scholars tend to reject findings of a causal link because the studies are too reductionist; criminal behavior cannot be reduced to a single causal factor such as media consumption. Echoing Gauntlett’s critiques of media effects research, Jewkes stated that simplistic causal assumptions ignore “the wider context of a lifetime of meaning-making” (Jewkes, 2015 , p. 17).

Although they most often reject a “violent media cause violence” relationship, criminologists do not dismiss the notion of media as influential. To the contrary, over the decades much criminological interest has focused on the construction of social problems, the ideological implications of media, and media’s potential impact on crime policies and social control. Eamonn Carrabine noted that the focus of concern is not whether media directly causes violence but on “how the media promote damaging stereotypes of social groups, especially the young, to uphold the status quo” (Carrabine, 2008 , p. 34). Theoretically, these foci have been traced to the influence of cultural and Marxist studies. For example, criminologists frequently focus on how social anxieties and class inequalities impact our understandings of the relationship between media violence and attitudes, values, and behaviors. Influential works in the 1970s, such as Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State, and Law and Order by Stuart Hall et al. and Stanley Cohen’s Folk Devils and Moral Panics , shifted criminological critique toward understanding media as a hegemonic force that reinforces state power and social control (Brown, 2011 ; Carrabine, 2008 ; Cohen, 2005 ; Garland, 2008 ; Hall et al., 2013 /1973, 2013/1973 ). Since that time, moral panic has become a common framework applied to public discourse around a variety of social issues including road rage, child abuse, popular music, sex panics, and drug abuse among others.

Into the 21st century , advances in technology, including increased use of social media, shifted the ways that criminologists approach the study of media effects. Scholar Sheila Brown traced how research in criminology evolved from a focus on “media and crime” to what she calls the “media/crime nexus” that recognizes that “media experience is real experience” (Brown, 2011 , p. 413). In other words, many criminologists began to reject as fallacy what social media theorist Nathan Jurgenson deemed “digital dualism,” or the notion that we have an “online” existence that is separate and distinct from our “off-line” existence. Instead, we exist simultaneously both online and offline, an

augmented reality that exists at the intersection of materiality and information, physicality and digitality, bodies and technology, atoms and bits, the off and the online. It is wrong to say “IRL” [in real life] to mean offline: Facebook is real life. (Jurgenson, 2012 )

The changing media landscape has been of particular interest to cultural criminologists. Michelle Brown recognized the omnipresence of media as significant in terms of methodological preferences and urged a move away from a focus on causality and predictability toward a more fluid approach that embraces the complex, contemporary media-saturated social reality characterized by uncertainty and instability (Brown, 2007 ).

Cultural criminologists have indeed rejected direct, causal relationships in favor of the recognition that social meanings of aggression and violence are constantly in transition, flowing through the media landscape, where “bits of information reverberate and bend back on themselves, creating a fluid porosity of meaning that defines late-modern life, and the nature of crime and media within it.” In other words, there is no linear relationship between crime and its representation. Instead, crime is viewed as inseparable from the culture in which our everyday lives are constantly re-created in loops and spirals that “amplify, distort, and define the experience of crime and criminality itself” (Ferrell, Hayward, & Young, 2015 , pp. 154–155). As an example of this shift in understanding media effects, criminologist Majid Yar proposed that we consider how the transition from being primarily consumers to primarily producers of content may serve as a motivating mechanism for criminal behavior. Here, Yar is suggesting that the proliferation of user-generated content via media technologies such as social media (i.e., the desire “to be seen” and to manage self-presentation) has a criminogenic component worthy of criminological inquiry (Yar, 2012 ). Shifting attention toward the media/crime nexus and away from traditional media effects analyses opens possibilities for a deeper understanding of the ways that media remains an integral part of our everyday lives and inseparable from our understandings of and engagement with crime and violence.

Over the years, from films to comic books to television to video games to social media, concerns over media effects have shifted along with changing technologies. While there seems to be some consensus that exposure to violent media impacts aggression, there is little evidence showing its impact on violent or criminal behavior. Nonetheless, high-profile violent crimes continue to reignite public interest in media effects, particularly with regard to copycat crimes.

At times, academic debate around media effects remains contentious and one’s academic discipline informs the study and interpretation of media effects. Criminologists and sociologists are generally reluctant to attribute violence and criminal behavior directly to exposure to violence media. They are, however, not dismissive of the impact of media on attitudes, social policies, and social control as evidenced by the myriad of studies on moral panics and other research that addresses the relationship between media, social anxieties, gender, race, and class inequalities. Scholars who study media effects are also sensitive to the historical context of the debates and ways that moral concerns shape public policies. The self-regulating codes of the film industry and the comic book industry have led scholars to be wary of hyperbole and policy overreach in response to claims of media effects. Future research will continue to explore ways that changing technologies, including increasing use of social media, will impact our understandings and perceptions of crime as well as criminal behavior.

Essay on Media and Violence

Introduction

Research studies indicate that media causes violence and plays a role in desensitization, aggressive behavior, fear of harm, and nightmares. Examples of media platforms include movies, video games, television, and music. Violence in media has also been associated with health concerns. The youth have been the most common victims of media exposure and thus stand higher chances of exposure to violence (Anderson, 2016). In the contemporary world, violence in media platforms has been growing, reaching heightened levels, which is dangerous for society. When you turn on the television, there is violence, social media platforms; there is violence when you go to the movies; there is violence. Studies indicate that an average person in the United States watches videos for nearly five hours in a day. In addition, three-quarters of television content contain some form of violence, and the games being played today have elements of violence. This paper intends to evaluate the concept of media messages and their influence on violent and deviant behaviors. Television networks and video games will be considered.

The Netflix effect involves the behavior of staying home all day, ordering food, and relaxing the couch to watch Netflix programs (McDonald & Smith-Rowsey, 2016). Netflix and binge-watching have become popular among the younger generation and thus are exposed to different kinds of content being aired. Studies indicate that continuous exposure to violent materials has a negative effect on the aggressive behavior of individuals. Netflix is a global platform in the entertainment industry (Lobato, 2019). Although, the company does not have the rights to air in major countries such as China, India, and Japan, it has wide audience. One of the reasons for sanctions is the issues of content being aired by the platform, which may influence the behaviors of the young generation. The primary goal of Netflix is entertainment; it’s only the viewers who have developed specific effects that affect their violent behaviors through imitation of the content.

Television Networks

Television networks focus on feeding viewers with the latest updates on different happenings across the globe. In other instances, they focus on bringing up advertisements and entertainment programs. There is little room for violent messages and content in the networks unless they are airing movie programs, which also are intended for entertainment. However, there has been evidence in the violence effect witnessed in television networks. Studies called the “Marilyn Monroe effect” established that following the airing of many suicidal cases, there has been a growth in suicides among the population (Anderson, Bushman, Donnerstein, Hummer, & Warburton, 2015). Actual suicide cases increased by 2.5%, which is linked to news coverage regarding suicide. Additionally, some coverages are filled with violence descriptions, and their aftermath with may necessitate violent behaviors in the society. For instance, if televisions are covering mass demonstrations where several people have been killed, the news may trigger other protests in other parts of the country.

Communications scholars, however, dispute these effects and link the violent behaviors to the individuals’ perception. They argue that the proportion of witnessing violent content in television networks is minimal. Some acts of violence are associated with what the individual perceives and other psychological factors that are classified into social and non-social instigators (Anderson et al., 2015). Social instigators consist of social rejection, provocation, and unjust treatment. Nonsocial instigators are physical objects present, which include weapons or guns. Also, there are environmental factors that include loud noises, overcrowding, and heat. Therefore, there is more explanation of the causes of aggressive behaviors that are not initiated by television networks but rather a combination of biological and environmental factors.

Video games

Researchers have paid more attention to television networks and less on video games. Children spend more time playing video games. According to research, more than 52% of children play video games and spend about 49 minutes per day playing. Some of the games contain violent behaviors. Playing violent games among youth can cause aggressive behaviors. The acts of kicking, hitting, and pinching in the games have influenced physical aggression. However, communication scholars argue that there is no association between aggression and video games (Krahé & Busching, 2015). Researchers have used tools such as “Competition Reaction Time Test,” and “Hot Sauce Paradigm” to assess the aggression level. The “Hot Sauce Paradigm” participants were required to make hot sauce tor tasting. They were required to taste tester must finish the cup of the hot sauce in which the tester detests spicy products. It was concluded that the more the hot sauce testers added in the cup, the more aggressive they were deemed to be.

The “Competition Reaction Time Test” required individuals to compete with another in the next room. It was required to press a button fast as soon as the flashlight appeared. Whoever won was to discipline the opponent with loud noises. They could turn up the volume as high as they wanted. However, in reality, there was no person in the room; the game was to let individuals win half of the test. Researchers intended to test how far individuals would hold the dial. In theory, individuals who punish their opponents in cruel ways are perceived to be more aggressive. Another way to test violent behaviors for gamer was done by letting participants finish some words. For instance, “M_ _ _ ER,” if an individual completes the word as “Murder” rather than “Mother,” the character was considered to possess violent behavior (Allen & Anderson, 2017). In this regard, video games have been termed as entertainment ideologies, and the determination of the players is to win, no matter how brutal the game might be.

In this paper, fixed assumptions were used to correlate violent behaviors and media objects. But that was not the case with regards to the findings. A fixed model may not be appropriate in the examination of time-sensitive causes of dependent variables. Although the model is applicable for assessing specific entities in a given industry, the results may not be precise.

Conclusion .

Based on the findings of the paper, there is no relationship between violent behaviors and media. Netflix effect does not influence the behavior of individuals. The perceptions of the viewers and players is what matters, and how they understand the message being conveyed. Individuals usually play video games and watch televisions for entertainment purposes. The same case applies to the use of social media platforms and sports competitions. Even though there is violent content, individuals focus on the primary objective of their needs.

Analysis of sources

The sources have been thoroughly researched, and they provide essential information regarding the relationship between violent behaviors and media messages. Studies conducted by various authors like Krahé & Busching did not establish any relationship between the two variables. Allen & Anderson (2017) argue that the models for testing the two variables are unreliable and invalid. The fixed assumptions effect model was utilized, and its limitations have been discussed above. Therefore, the authors of these references have not been able to conclude whether there is a connection between violence and media messages.

Allen, J. J., & Anderson, C. A. (2017). General aggression model. The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects , 1-15.

Anderson, C. A. (2016). Media violence effects on children, adolescents and young adults. Health Progress , 97 (4), 59-62.

Anderson, C. A., Bushman, B. J., Donnerstein, E., Hummer, T. A., & Warburton, W. (2015). SPSSI research summary on media violence. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy , 15 (1), 4-19.

Krahé, B., & Busching, R. (2015). Breaking the vicious cycle of media violence use and aggression: A test of intervention effects over 30 months. Psychology of Violence , 5 (2), 217.

Lobato, R. (2019). Netflix nations: the geography of digital distribution . NYU Press.

McDonald, K., & Smith-Rowsey, D. (Eds.). (2016). The Netflix effect: Technology and entertainment in the 21st century . Bloomsbury Publishing USA.

Cite this page

Similar essay samples.

The Effect of Setting Homework on the Therapeutic Alliance in the CBT ...
Essay on Cancer and Approach to Care
Essay on Police Unions
An intervention to determine the benefit of larval-source management f...
Type 1 Diabetes: an investigation of its causes and pathology.
Market Research Manager Analysis

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Media Violence — Violence in the Media: Understanding its Impact and Influence

Violence in The Media: Understanding Its Impact and Influence

Categories: Media Violence

About this sample

Words: 637 |

Published: Sep 12, 2023

Words: 637 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

The prevalence of media violence, the effects on youth, the role of desensitization, the role of regulation, media violence as a reflection of society, conclusion: a complex and ongoing debate.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

Expert in: Sociology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

7 pages / 3236 words

5 pages / 2318 words

2 pages / 917 words

5 pages / 2086 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Media Violence

Media violence is a topic of growing concern in today's society, with a significant impact on individuals, especially the younger generation. In this essay, we will analyze the effects of media violence, including its potential [...]

Violence has been a pervasive presence in various aspects of my life, leaving lasting impacts on my emotions, perspectives, and relationships. This essay delves into my personal experiences with violence, exploring how [...]

Television, an influential medium that has become an integral part of modern life, has sparked debates about its impact on society. Among the contentious topics is the question of whether television is the leading cause of [...]

“A young man in Alabama in 2003 was charged with murder after shooting three men, including two police officers, a crime he attributed to the violent video game ‘Grand Theft Auto’”. Many children and teenagers watch violent [...]

Can Hollywood’s portrayal of violence on the big screen influence its audience to commit violent acts? After the 2012 mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado, when James Eagan Holmes open fired at a screening of ‘Batman: The Dark [...]

In today's digitally immersed world, where media content is more accessible than ever before, the question of whether media violence causes violent behavior continues to be a topic of intense debate and scrutiny. This essay aims [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

The Effects of Media Violence on People Argumentative Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Despite the fact that there is some evidence that, lengthy exposure to violent media increases aggressive behavior in people, this exposure alone cannot cause people to become violent and aggressive for there is no established connection between violent entertainment and violent behavior.

On the contrary, there is substantial evidence that violent, belligerent, and emotionally delinquent environments lead to aggressive behavior more than watching violent films does. This may be a contentious issue with numerous people linking violent media to aggressive behavior. Nevertheless, there are other people, as the writer, who think that exposure to violent media alone does not lead to increase in aggressive behavior. I strongly refute the claims that exposure to violent media leads to increase in violent behavior.

First, the research methodologies used to study and analyze the link between violent media exposure and aggressive behavior are more than often flawed. According to Gauntlett, mainstream researchers approach the issue of violent media from the perspective that media causes violence (23).

With this ingrained deeply in researchers’ minds, they seek to establish violent reactions only in the context of media consumption. The anticipated results in such a case would obviously place blame increase in aggressive behavior on exposure to violent media. This should not be the case as research should start by focusing on the violence itself; regardless of the cause, and then try to mire its causes.

This approach would work better to produce results that are more credible. Moreover, most of the studies focus on children without using controls like adults. Most of these studies seek to qualify a “barely-concealed conservative ideology” (Gauntlett 45). To complicate the whole issue, what researchers may consider as ‘violent’ in research premises, may not be violent in context of the viewer. Additionally, the research objects are based on former studies that used blemished methodologies not founded on theory.

Supporters of allegations that exposure to violent media leads to aggressive behavior may be quick to point out cases like the media attention generated by Michael Johnson case. It is true that this case attracted much publicity but these critics forget to indicate that this is not always the case.

Human beings are not copycats and they will draw a clear line between what is good and bad. It is true that there are copycat violent acts like murder and suicide among others. However, Barker posits that, these copycat violent acts occur mostly in abnormal fostering (56). Research indicates that, raising people in violent or aggressive environments will have great impact in life than mere watching of given movies or listening to some music. There is enough evidence to show that most of copycat murderers are mentally unstable.

It beats logic to assume that simply because people have seen violent acts, they will go ahead and commit them. Millions of people watch violent movies all over the world; therefore, if exposure to violent media increases aggressive behaviors then we would have millions of aggressive people world allover.

This is not the case and research indicates that, only few people engage in aggressive behaviors as a direct result of watching violent movies. Moreover, people who watch these movies in their childhood grow up to be normal responsible people (Ward 87). Therefore, to claim that exposure to violent media leads to increased aggressive behavior hold no substance to qualify it.

People like Elizabeth Newson have drawn a strong link between violent media and violent lifestyle. For instance, in 1994, Elizabeth made reported that the movie Child’s Play 3 caused two boys, aged 10, to murder James Bulger. Nevertheless, in response to these allegations, Barker indicates that, Elizabeth’s accounts relied greatly on opinions and press instead of relying on results from an independent research (63).

This points out how flawed research on media violence can be. In the murder of James Bulger, there was no evidence that the two boys had watched the alleged film. Unfortunately, after something pops into the media, people accept it without taking a step further to investigate the credibility of the information. Ward posits that, many researches on violent media have failed to establish adverse effects and that most of the hypotheses have proved to be null (12).

There are cases whereby people have reacted violently even without watching violent scenes in the media. For instance, after watching the evening news, a father kills his entire family using a gun; he is arrested and brought before the judge; he explains that his actions emanated from the ‘bad’ news he watched.

He claims that, the news was too bad that he saw no need of anyone living. Is this case different from any other violent behaviors arising from violent media? The answer is of course no! In this incidence, the man must have been abnormal and his actions cannot be explained entirely under the pretext of ‘bad news’ he watched.

Similarly, the few cases of violent behavior arising from watching violent films cannot be explained by the fact that the assailant had watched a violent film. There has to be something more than watching violent films and this is where researchers fail in their work.

According to Barker, there are other factors as socio-cultural issues in criminal cases. These factors cannot be dictated by watching of violent media only. “We must look beyond a specific film to think about the specific context in which it has been consumed, and the wider social background of the people” (29).

We cannot explicitly say that this issue on media can cause or cannot cause aggressive behavior. The best thing is to probe what other factors as social issues make some people perceive and use media in a way that will bring aggression to them. The bottom line is; influence from violent media alone cannot lead to increase in aggressive behavior.

To cap it all, the research on violent media is minimal and often utilizes flawed methodologies. Questioning the credibility of these methodologies, Ward said, “The real puzzle is that anyone looking at the research evidence in this field could draw any conclusions about the pattern let alone argue with such confidence and even passion that it demonstrates the harm of violence on television, in film and in video games” (34).

According to Barker, if exposure to violent media leads to increase in aggressive behavior, then America would be a violent state (68) because in contemporary times, the media is littered with violent scenes of sundry and diversity. In the US, crime up surged between 1965 and 1980 and this was attributed to violent media. The authorities responded appropriately and crime rates leveled around 1992. Since then, violent media is allover and there is no equal increase in crime rates.

The way out of this long-standing misconception about violent media is to conduct more conclusive research works. Research should be independent and should use credible sources not just opinions and sentiments from the press.

Most of the films that are violent have political themes and this may explain in part why many people do not like them. Nevertheless, people should be informed about what is happening around them. In this regard, we should not criminalize some informative and entertaining sentiments in the media like violent films or movies.

Therefore, we can see that, although evidence suggests prolonged exposure to violent media increases aggressive behavior in people, that exposure alone does not cause people to become violent and aggressive for two main reasons. First, there is no established connection between violent entertainment and violent behavior. Additionally, there is enough evidence to show that violent environment leads to violent behaviors more than violent media does.

Works Cited

Barker, Mitchell. The Newson Report: a Case Study in Common Sense in III Effects in The Media /Violence Debate. London: Routledge, 2001.

Gauntlett, Dean. Ten Things Wrong with the ‘Effects Model’, Approaches to Audiences – A Reader , 1998. Web.

Ward, Michael. Video games, Crime & Violence, 2007. Web.

“Mind over Mass Media” Steven Pinker Article in New York Times
Mass Media Impact on Society
Soldier Treatment in "Regeneration" by Pat Barker
Marketing: Main Categories of Private Brands
Competitive Rivalry in Rental Housing
ESPN Sports Media Social Response
The Impact of Media on Society
Role of Media in Society
Media and Celebrity Influence on Society
Animation Problems
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, October 10). The Effects of Media Violence on People. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effects-of-media-violence-on-people/

"The Effects of Media Violence on People." IvyPanda , 10 Oct. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/the-effects-of-media-violence-on-people/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'The Effects of Media Violence on People'. 10 October.

IvyPanda . 2018. "The Effects of Media Violence on People." October 10, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effects-of-media-violence-on-people/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Effects of Media Violence on People." October 10, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effects-of-media-violence-on-people/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Effects of Media Violence on People." October 10, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effects-of-media-violence-on-people/.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
HHS Author Manuscripts
PMC10177625

Violent Media in Childhood and Seriously Violent Behavior in Adolescence and Young Adulthood

Michele l. ybarra.

Center for Innovative Public Health Research, San Clemente, California

Kimberly J. Mitchell

Crimes against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire

Jay Koby Oppenheim

Independent Consultant, New York, New York

Associated Data

To quantify the relative odds of self-reported seriously violent behavior in adolescence and young adulthood given one’s self-reported violent media diet in childhood.

Baseline data were collected nationally online from 1,586 youth 10–15 years of age in 2006. Follow-up data were collected in 2010–2011 and 2016. Children reported the amount of music, video games, television, websites with real people, and cartoons that depicted “physical fighting, hurting, shooting, or killing.” Seriously violent behavior was assessed 5 and 10 years later.

887 adolescents completed the survey at baseline and 5-year follow-up. The relative odds of reporting seriously violent behavior over time were 2.45-fold higher ( P <.001) with each incremental increase in one’s baseline violent media diet. After adjusting for other potentially influential characteristics, results persisted (aOR = 1.70, P =.01). The relative odds also were elevated for those frequently exposed to violence in music (aOR = 3.28, p=0.03), television (aOR = 3.51, p<0.001), and video games (aOR = 3.27, p=0.02). 760 young adults completed measures at baseline and 10-year follow-up. The relative odds of seriously violent behavior increased 2.18-fold ( P =.001) with each incremental increase in one’s baseline violent media diet. After adjusting for other factors, the association persisted (aOR = 1.72, P=.03). Frequent exposure to violence in video games (aOR = 3.28, p=0.03) and television (aOR = 3.14, p=0.02) also were implicated.

Discussion:

Exposure to violent media in childhood may be one modifiable influence on seriously violent behavior in adolescence and adulthood, even for those who have other risk factors.

Youth violence is a significant public health issue that negatively affects individuals, families, and communities. 1 , 2 Estimated costs associated with youth violence in the United States is more than $20 billion anually. 3 Although juvenile arrests in 2019 were down 58% since 2010, 4 youth nonetheless account for a sizable proportion of perpetrators: 9% of all violent crimes were committed by juveniles, and 21% by 18–24-year-olds. 5

No single risk factor causes violent behavior. Instead, an accumulation of exposures increases one’s risk at each level of the social ecology (e.g., exposure to spousal abuse). 2 , 6 – 9 Because it could easily be modified, exposure to violent media has been researched for decades as a potential contributor to aggressive behavior. Cross-sectional and laboratory research frequently document linkages. 10 – 12 Studies that measure violent behaviors report similar effect sizes to those that measure aggression. 10 Although fewer in number, longitudinal studies also report linkages: Huesmann and Eron found that adult criminal and violent behavior was associated with exposure to television violence 15 years prior. 13 Findings were replicated in a Finnish sample. 14 Further, Anderson and colleagues found that frequent violent video game play predicted physical aggression three to six months later for children and adolescents in three separate cohorts, two from Japan and one from the United States. 15 Some exceptions are noted. 16 Coyne and colleagues looked at longer term associations between externalizing behavior and violent video game play and did not find a linkage over the 5-year observation period. 17 This may be because the measure reflecting externalizing behavior included items that did meet the definition of aggression.

Youth media use is nearly ubiquitous 18 : Music is by far the most widely used medium in adolescence: 82% listen to music daily. 19 Most - 83% of adolescent girls and 97% of boys 13–17 years of age – also play video games; 95% own or have access to a smartphone, and 85% say they go online and exchange content. 20 Cross-sectional research by Ybarra and colleagues suggests that one’s general media violence diet may explain the increased odds of engaging in seriously violent behavior. 21 As such, it is important not just to examine the association that specific media may have but also the association that one’s violent media ‘diet’ across media may have with violent behavior over time.

The current study aims to fill noted research gaps. First, while extant research examines exposure to violence on television and in video games, exposures through other media, such as music, are less well studied yet constitute a large part of youth media diets. Second, much of the literature focuses on aggressive rather than violent behavior. Aggression is any behavior enacted by someone who intends to harm the other person when the other person does not want to be harmed. 22 , 23 Violence is a more severe type of aggression that carries with it the possibility of serious physical harm to the other individual. All violent behaviors are aggressive, whereas not all aggressive behaviors are violent. Third, few studies examine these linkages longitudinally, particularly between 5 and 10 years postexposure. Based on previous literature, we posit that violent media will predict violent behavior over time and that this will be particularly true for a general media diet as it reflects an accumulation of exposures.

Growing up with Media is a longitudinal study designed to study the association between violent media exposure in childhood and adolescence - particularly exposures to new media, including the Internet and seriously violent behavior. The survey protocol was reviewed and approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Institutional Review Board (IRB) for Waves 1–3 and by Chesapeake IRB for Waves 4–7 (subsequently acquired by Advarra IRB). Parents provided informed consent for their participation and permission for their child’s participation, and youth provided informed assent by reading the assent information and then clicking either “Yes, I want to take the survey” or “No, I do not want to take the survey.”

In 2006, 1,586 child-caregiver pairs were recruited through an email sent to randomly identified adult Harris Poll OnLine (HPOL) panel members who reported having a child living in their household. HPOL was the largest online panel at the time of recruitment, including four million members. Members were recruited through online advertising, advertising at conferences and events, and referrals.

Eligible adult caregivers reported having a child 10–15 years of age living in the household, speaking English, and being equally or more knowledgeable than other adults living in the household about their youth’s daily activities. Eligible youth participants were 10–15-year-olds who read English, lived in the household at least 50% of the time, and had used the Internet at least once in the last six months. Recruitment was balanced on youth age and sex; once a demographic ‘bin’ was filled (e.g., for 10–12-year-old girls), subsequent youth who met those criteria were marked ineligible.

Seriously violent behavior.

Seriously violent behavior, as defined by the US Department of Justice, 24 includes murder, aggravated assault, robbery, and sexual violence. Youth were coded as having engaged in past-year seriously violent behavior if they endorsed any of the following five behaviors: (1) behaviors that would likely result in murder (i.e., stabbing or shooting someone); (2) aggravated assault (i.e., threatening someone with a weapon; attacking someone resulting in the need for medical care); (3) robbery (i.e., using a knife or gun or some other kind of weapon like a bat to get something from someone else); and (4) sexual assault (kissing, touching, or doing anything sexual with another person when it was not wanted by that person). This last item was written to be developmentally appropriate for 10–15-year-olds. Because it may include behaviors that extend beyond rape, a sensitivity analysis was conducted to examine the results when this measure of sexual assault was excluded.

Exposure to violent media.

Youth reported the amount of violence they were exposed to across five different types of media: Television, computer and video games, music, websites of real people, and websites of cartoons. A similar question format was used for each medium: “When you [engage with media type], how many of them [show/talk about] physical fighting, hurting, shooting, or killing?” 25 Response options were captured on a four-point Likert scale [1 (almost none/none of them) – 4 (almost all / all of them)].

To reflect a general violent media diet, a factor score that included all five media, was estimated using maximum likelihood [Eigenvalue = 1.69, factor loadings ranged from .47 - .69, α = 0.70, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin ranges from 0.71 – 0.78].

For specific mediums, a categorical measure was created based upon data distributions to reflect those who reported that: (1) none/almost none, (2) some, or (3) many or almost all/all of each of the medium they consumed depicted violence. Because of low cell stability, for all longitudinal analyses, baseline exposure to violence on television was dichotomized to compare none/almost none or some versus many or almost all/all; baseline exposures to real people engaging in violence online was dichotomized to none/almost none versus some, many, almost all/all. Wave 7 longitudinal analyses included a measure of baseline exposures to cartoons engaging in violence online dichotomized to none/almost none versus some, many, almost all/all.

Background variables.

Youth age and sex were reported by caregivers; race and ethnicity were reported by youth. At the individual level, because trait anger can be increased by media violence 26 , we include youths’ self-reported baseline propensity to respond with anger, measured by the 10-item State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI-CA) T-Anger scale (α = 0.86). 27 At the peer level, baseline exposure to externalizing peers was measured by asking youth the number of close friends they had who “have been arrested or done things that could get them in trouble with the police.” 28 At the family level, youth were asked if: “Ever, in real life, have you seen one of your parents get hit, slapped, punched, or beat up by your other parent, or their boyfriend or girlfriend?” 29

Randomly identified adults were emailed a link to a brief online survey that assessed their eligibility. Ineligible adults were thanked for their participation; eligible adults were invited to complete a longer 5-minute survey after obtaining informed consent. They then forwarded their survey link to their child, who provided assent and completed the, on average, 21-minute survey. Youth were encouraged to return to the survey later if they were not in a space where their responses could be kept private from others, including their caregiver.

Data were collected online in 2006 (Wave 1), 2007–2008 (Wave 2), 2008 (Wave 3), 2010–2011 (Wave 4), 2011–2012 (Wave 5), 2012–2013 (Wave 6), and 2016 (Wave 7). In this paper, we examine data from baseline (Wave 1) and five years later (Wave 4, n=887); and baseline and 10 years later (Wave 7, n=779). Incentives were $10 in Wave 1 and increased to $40 in Wave 7. The Wave 1 survey response rate (31%) is consistent with well-conducted surveys using online panels at the time of baseline recruitment. The response rate at Wave 4 was 56% (i.e., 887/1586), and at Wave 7, 49% (i.e., 779/1586).

As the recruitment target, data were weighted statistically to reflect the population of adults with children ages 10 to 15 years old in the United States according to adult age, sex, race/ethnicity, region, education, household income, and child age and sex. Using data collected from random digit dial samples, propensity score weighting also was applied to adjust for adult respondents’ propensity to be online. The weight also adjusted for nonresponse across waves.

Plan of analysis

Rates of within-wave missingness were very low: Race (1.2%) had the highest rate of declination to answer. For all dichotomous variables, “decline to answer” was recoded as “symptom absent” (e.g., not having been in a physical fight). Those who declined to answer the question about race were coded as White, the majority race. For continuous variables, “decline to answer” was recoded to the cohort mean. As a sensitivity analysis, models also were estimated with missing data imputed. Youth who did not respond to Wave 4 or Wave 7, respectively, were excluded from that specific longitudinal analysis.

Analyses were conducted using Stata 15. 30 First, co-relations of violent exposure across media were explored using a correlation matrix and Cronbach’s alpha, which reflects the inter-relatedness of the items. We also examined the percent of youth who reported varying patterns of exposure across media types. Next, to understand the long-term association between media violence and later violent behavior, we first estimated direct, unadjusted logistic regression odds (Model 1). We then estimated logistic regression odds that adjusted for baseline levels of seriously violent behavior, one’s propensity to respond to stimuli with anger, exposure to externalizing peers, exposure to caregiver spousal abuse, sex, age, race, ethnicity, and self-reported dishonesty in answering survey questions (Model 2). For each time point, six unadjusted and adjusted models were estimated: One for violent media diet and five for each of the specific types of violent media of interest.

On average, youth were 12.6 years of age (SE: 0.05) at baseline, 16.7 years of age (SE: 0.07) at 5-year and 22.1 years of age (SE: 0.07) at 10-year follow-up. As shown in Table 1 , those who completed Waves 4 and 7, respectively, versus those who did not, respectively, generally had similar baseline demographic characteristics; exposure to externalizing peers was of exception.

Responses at Wave 1 (baseline) for completers and noncompleters of Wave 4 (5 years) and Wave 7 (10 years), respectively; weighted data

Youth characteristics at baseline	Baseline All youth n=1586	Cohort 5 years later			Cohort 10 years later
Youth characteristics at baseline	Baseline All youth n=1586	Non-Completer n=699	completer n=887	p-value	Non-Completer n=807	completer n=779	p-value

		M(SE)	M(SE)		M(SE)	M(SE)
Violent media diet (a factor score; M:SE)	0.02 (0.03)	.06 (.05)	−0.02 (0.04)	0.17	0.05 (0.04)	−0.02 (0.04)	0.26
Amount of violence in TV shows consumed		% (n)	% (n)	0.03	% (n)	% (n)	0.36
None / almost none or some	69.9% (1079)	66.1% (446)	72.8% (634)		68.5% (545)	71.4% (534)
Many / almost all / all	30.1% (465)	33.9% (229)	27.2% (237)		31.5% (251)	28.6% (214)
Amount of violence in music listened to				0.21			0.42
None/almost none	43.1% (665)	43.4% (293)	42.8% (372)		41.1% (327)	45.2% (338)
Some	43.0% (664)	40.6% (274)	44.9% (391)		44.0% (350)	42.0% (314)
Many / almost all / all	14.0% (215)	16.1% (108)	12.3% (107)		15.0% (119)	12.9% (96)
Amount of violence in games played				0.38			0.10
None / almost none	35.2% (543)	33.0% (222)	36.9% (321)		31.8% (253)	38.7% (290)
Some	39.8% (615)	42.2% (285)	37.9% (330)		42.1% (335)	37.4% (280)
Many / almost all / all	25.0% (387)	24.8% (167)	25.2% (219)		26.1% (208)	23.9% (179)
Amount of violence seen in websites that show real people				0.53			0.79
None/almost none	85.3% (1317)	84.4% (569)	86.0% (748)		85.0% (677)	85.6% (641)
Some / many / almost all / all	14.7% (227)	15.6% (105)	14.0% (122)		15.0% (120)	14.4% (108)
Amount of violence seen in websites that show cartoons				0.68			0.56
None / almost none	57.7% (891)	57.6% (388)	57.8% (503)		56.8% (452)	58.7% (439)
Some	32.8% (507)	32.0% (216)	33.5% (291)
Many / almost all / all	9.5% (146)	10.4% (70)	8.7% (76)		43.3% (344)	41.3% (309)
Any seriously violent behavior	4.8% (74)	4.7% (31)	4.9% (43)	0.84	5.5% (44)	4.1% (31)	0.32
Propensity to respond to stimuli with anger (M:SE)	18.8 (0.2)	18.8 (0.2)	18.7 (0.2)	0.81	18.8 (0.2)	18.7 (0.2)	0.93
Exposure to caregiver spousal abuse	9.0% (140)	10.8% (73)	7.7% (67)	0.12	10.9% (86)	7.1% (53)	0.06
Externalizing peers	16.6% (257)	19.6% (132)	14.3% (125)	0.03	20.6% (164)	12.5% (93)	0.00
Age (M:SE)	12.6 (0.05)	12.7 (0.1)	12.5 (0.1)	0.18	12.6 (0.07)	12.6 (0.08)	0.60
Female	48.0% (741)	49.0% (330)	47.2% (411)	0.61	46.8 % (373)	49.2 % (368)	0.48
Race				0.51			0.92
White	71.2% (1099)	71.6% (483)	70.9% (617)		71.6% (570)	70.8% (530)
Black	12.5% (193)	10.8% (73)	13.9% (121)		11.8% (94)	13.2% (99)
Mixed	8.1% (125)	8.7% (59)	7.7% (67)		8.5% (68)	7.7% (58)
All other	8.2% (127)	9.0% (60)	7.6% (66)		8.1% (64)	8.3% (62)
Hispanic ethnicity	17.5% (271)	17.6% (119)	17.5% (152)	0.95	16.7% (133)	18.4% (138)	0.55
Dishonesty in answering the questions	5.1% (78)	5.6% (38)	4.7% (40)	0.54	5.3% (43)	4.8% (36)	0.70

Co-relation of violence exposure across media

The five indicators of exposure to violence in specific media were interrelated: Cronbach’s alpha, Wave 1 = 0.70 (unweighted data given the computation ability of Stata). As shown in Supplemental Table 1 , all media were significantly interrelated. The strongest correlations were noted for violence exposure in television and video games (0.46), and television and music (0.44). Although still significantly interrelated, violence exposure in video games and websites with real people was the least correlated (0.22).

As shown in Figure 1 , more than half (56%) of youth said that none of the media they consumed was mostly violent (i.e., many, almost all, or all of it depicted physical violence).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-1790148-f0001.jpg

The percent of youth who reported a specific amount of exposure to physical fighting, shooting, or killing across media types for 10–15-year-olds in the United States (n = 1,586). Different colored bars denote the number of media to which a youth were exposed to a certain level of violence. Five media were aggregated: television, video games, music, websites with real people, and websites with cartoon figures.

Relative odds of seriously violent behavior five years after exposure to youth’s general violent media diet

A factor score was estimated to reflect one’s “violent media diet,” that is, the intensity within and across youth exposures to violent content in five mediums. As shown in Table 2 and Supplemental Figure 1 , the relative odds of reporting seriously violent behavior five years later were 2.45-fold higher ( p <0.001) with each incremental increase in one’s baseline violent media diet. After adjusting for other potentially influential characteristics, the relative odds of seriously violent behavior five years later rose 1.70-fold ( p =0.01) with each incremental increase in one’s violent media diet at baseline.

The relative odds of seriously violent behavior 5 years after exposure to violence by media type and overall media diet, weighted data (n=887)

Exposure to media violence at baseline	Seriously violent behavior 5 years later
	Did not report seriously violent behavior	Reported seriously violent behavior	Unadjusted logistic regression model		Adjusted logistic regression model
	% (n)	% (n)	OR (95% CI)	p-value	aOR (95% CI)	p-value

Violent media diet (M:SE)	−0.07 (0.03)	0.60 (0.15)
Amount of violence in TV shows consumed at baseline
None / almost none or some	75.5% (606)	40.5% (27)	1.0 (RG)		1.0 (RG)
Many / almost all / all	24.5% (197)	59.1% (39)
Amount of violence in music listened to at baseline
None / almost none	44.9% (361)	16.9% (11)	1.0 (RG)		1.0 (RG)
Some	43.8% (352)	58.0% (39)
Many / almost all / all	11.3% (90)	25.1% (17)
Amount of violence in video games played at baseline
None / almost none	39.0% (314)	10.9% (7)	1.0 (RG)		1.0 (RG)
Some	37.4% (300)	44.6% (30)
Many / almost all / all	23.6% (190)	44.5% (30)
Amount of violence seen in websites that show real people at baseline
None/almost none	40.5% (27)	73.7% (49)	1.0 (RG)		1.0 (RG)
Some / many / almost all / all	13.0% (105)	26.3% (18)			1.19 (0.53, 2.67)	0.68
Amount of violence seen in websites that show cartoons at baseline
None / almost none	59.3% (476)	27.0% (40)	1.0 (RG)		1.0 (RG)
Some	32.8% (264)	41.4% (28)			1.30 (0.56, 3.03)	0.54
Many / almost all / all	7.9% (64)	18.1% (12)			1.46 (0.53, 4.05)	0.46

OR: Odds ratio; aOR: Adjusted odds ratio. Models are adjusted for youth age, sex, race, ethnicity; and baseline seriously violent behavior and exposure to caregiver spousal abuse, propensity to respond to stimuli with anger, externalizing peers, and self-reported honesty in answering survey questions. Bolded text denotes p<0.05; italicized text denotes p<0.20.

Specific types of media also were implicated: Frequent childhood exposure to violence in television (OR = 4.44, p<0.001), music (OR = 5.91, p<0.001), video games (OR=6.73, p<0.001), websites with real people (OR = 2.39, p=0.03) and websites with cartoons (OR = 3.35, p=0.03) each was associated with significantly elevated odds of seriously violent behavior in adolescence. Findings persisted for music (aOR = 3.28, p=0.03), television (aOR = 3.51, p<0.001) and video games (aOR = 3.27, p=0.02) even after adjusting for other childhood influences on violent behavior. Importantly, too, “some” exposure in childhood was associated with seriously violent behavior in adolescence for both music (aOR = 2.34, p=0.05) and video games (aOR = 2.72, p=0.02).

Longitudinal associations a decade later

As shown in Table 3 and Supplemental Figure 1 , the relative odds of seriously violent behavior 10 years after one’s exposure in childhood increased 2.18-fold ( p =0.001) with each incremental increase in one’s violent media diet. After adjusting for other factors, the association persisted (aOR = 1.72, p=0.03). As with adolescence, frequent childhood exposure to violence in music (OR = 4.48, p=0.008), television (OR = 4.26, p=0.001) and video games (OR = 5.38, p=0.001) each were associated with seriously violent behavior in adulthood. This longitudinal association persisted for video games (aOR = 3.28, p=0.03) and television (OR = 3.14, p=0.02) even after taking into account other potentially influential factors; violence depicted in music also was implicated (aOR = 2.85, p=0.13).

The relative odds of seriously violent behavior 10 years after exposure to violence by media type, weighted data (n=760)

Exposure to media violence at baseline	Seriously violent behavior 10 years later
	Did not report seriously violent behavior	Reported seriously violent behavior	Unadjusted logistic regression model		Adjusted logistic regression model
	% (n)	% (n)	OR (95% CI)	p-value	aOR (95% CI)	p-value

Violent media diet (M: SE)	−0.06 (0.04)	0.63 (0.28)
Amount of violence in TV shows consumed at baseline
None / almost none or some	73.5% (516)	39.4% (18)	1.0 (RG)		1.0 (RG)
Many / almost all / all	26.5% (186)	60.6% (28)
Amount of violence in music listened to at baseline
None / almost none	46.4% (326)	26.2% (12)	1.0 (RG)		1.0 (RG)
Some	41.9% (294)	44.1% (20)	1.87 (0.68, 5.10)	0.22	1.72 (0.63, 4.68)	0.29
Many / almost all / all	11.8% (83)	29.8% (14)
Amount of violence in video games played at baseline
None / almost none	40.3% (283)	14.2% (6)	1.0 (RG)		1.0 (RG)
Some	37.0% (260)	43.0% (20)
Many / almost all / all	22.7% (159)	42.8% (20)
Amount of violence seen in websites that show real people at baseline
None/almost none	86.4% (607)	73.9% (34)	1.0 (RG)		1.0 (RG)
Some / many / almost all / all	13.6% (96)	26.1% (12)			1.43 (0.43, 4.79)	0.56
Amount of violence seen in websites that show cartoons at baseline
None / almost none	58.4% (410)	63.8% (29)	1.0 (RG)		1.0 (RG)
Some / many / almost all / all	41.6% (292)	36.2% (17)	0.80 (0.33, 1.91)	0.61

RG: Reference group; OR: Odds ratio; aOR: Adjusted odds ratio. Models are adjusted for youth age, sex, race, ethnicity, baseline seriously violent behavior, concurrent propensity to respond to stimuli with anger and self-reported honesty in answering survey questions. Bolded text denotes p<0.05; italicized text denotes p<0.20.

Contrary to other trends observed, exposure to violent websites that depicted cartoons at baseline was associated with lower odds of seriously violent behavior a decade later (aOR = 0.48, p=0.09). Given that this is in the opposite direction of other violent media exposures examined, it seems likely that this may be a statistical anomaly.

Findings were replicated when seriously violent behavior was defined without the measure of sexual assault ( Supplemental Table 2 ), and when missing data were imputed ( Supplemental Table 3 ).

In this national, longitudinal study of children initially 10–15 years of age, findings suggest that exposure to violence in specific mediums and a general diet of violent media across media in childhood are associated with seriously violent behavior in adolescence and adulthood. Measured both in intensity and diversity of exposure, as one’s violent media diet increases incrementally, so too do the odds of seriously violent behavior by 70%, over time. The increased odds are evident even after taking into account other factors that could explain violent behavior later in life, such as one’s violent behaviors in childhood, exposure to caregiver spousal abuse, one’s propensity to respond with anger, and association with peers who engage in activities that could get them in trouble with the police. Pediatricians should work with parents to identify a media consumption plan for their children that is realistic and associated with the least amount of violence as possible across the online, television, game, and music content they consume. Efforts to co-view content and talk with youth about what they are being exposed to in the media they are consuming also are likely useful. 31

Youth do not experience media in a vacuum: Exposure to violence in one medium correlates highly with exposure in another medium. This saturation of messaging may be reinforcing the idea that violence is an appropriate and common tool to address situational anger across environments and stimuli. Understanding how individual types of media are affecting youth behavior is important. Current findings suggest that it may be equally important to understand how influences across media together are affecting behavior. Findings further suggest that early, intense exposure to violence in specific media, namely music, video games, and television, may be related to seriously violent behavior in adolescence and adulthood. There appears to be a stepwise association such that those who report “some” exposure in childhood are differentially at risk than those with more intense (i.e., many, almost all/all) exposures. This suggests that if parents are unable to eliminate their children’s violent media exposure entirely, pediatricians could encourage them to reduce their exposure as much as possible, and that this may still have a positive impact.

Much of the research on exposure to violent media has focused on visual media, such as television, movies, and video games; 17 , 32 , 33 or aggregated exposure across types. 34 Less is known about aural influences, like violent music, although studies exist: In one longitudinal study of adolescents, listening to aggression in music was associated with increased aggression one year later. 35 The current study builds upon this nascent research by noting associations at 5- and 10-years post-exposure, and suggests that more research attention could be focused on the content of the music to which adolescents are listening. Given the ease of digital download of music combined with the widespread ownership of smart phones among today’s adolescents, this exposure may be more hidden and require additional effort by adults to co-experience and manage their children’s consumption.

Limitations

Self-report is a less rigorous measure than objective measures of exposure to violent media. Given the length of the survey and the multitude of questions and topics queried however, it seems unlikely that youth were able to determine the study hypotheses, thereby introducing demand characteristics. Additionally, youth report the intensity of exposure to, and not the amount of time spent with, violent media. For example, some youth who primarily play violent video games may do so for 2 hours a week, whereas others may do so for 40 hours a week. This may result in an underestimate of the association between exposure and behavior. 36

Although community-based research facilitates a wider view into youth behavior than other sources, such as juvenile justice data, self-report is vulnerable to misreporting, particularly of behaviors deemed undesirable. Efforts were made to increase the validity of self-report (e.g., surveying youth online vs in person or over the telephone, reminding them their answers were private, adjusting for self-reported dishonesty in answering survey questions). The inclusion of a social desirability scale might have facilitated a more direct examination of the prevalence and impact of misreporting in the data. That said, one in twenty youth (5%) reported at least one of the seriously violent behaviors queried at baseline. This is generally consistent with base rates observed in other large self-reported surveys, 37 suggesting that under-reporting may not have been an issue in the present study.

Additionally, the multivariate models may be over-adjusting for confounders and report artificially attenuated effect sizes. 38 For example, trait anger can be increased by media violence exposure, 26 and is therefore likely interrelated with media violence exposure. Including trait anger in the multi-variate model, therefore, partially controls for prior effects that this exposure has had on behavior. Also, controlling for prior violent behavior also essentially adjusts for prior predictors of violent behavior. Moreover, youth who consume high levels of media violence may be more likely to spend time with externalizing peers. If true, then the current models may underestimate the association between media violence and violent behavior given that youth who were associating with such peers at baseline were less likely to participate in subsequent waves.

Moreover, although the data are national, they may not be representative. Survey weights were applied to adjust for this possibility. The national reach nonetheless affords a broader view of youth experiences than might not have been observed in a local setting. Moreover, given the study’s focus on mechanism, internal validity is more important than external validity. Finally, rates of attrition are suboptimal, although differential attrition generally was not apparent.

Implications

Since 2006, when baseline data were collected, technology has changed dramatically. A growing body of literature suggests that newer, peer-to-peer, and immersive technologies may positively affect health behavior change. 39 , 40 It stands to reason that a similar learning effect could be observed if content encouraged unhealthy behaviors, including violence. The current study supports this hypothesis with older technology. Future research should both replicate the current study and examine whether newer technologies are associated with an enhanced learning effect.

During childhood, exposure to violence across a variety of media, operationalized as one’s violent media “diet,” appears to be related to engaging in seriously violent behavior in adolescence and adulthood, even beyond one’s propensity to respond to situations with anger, having peers who are engaging in behaviors that could get them in trouble with the police, being exposed to caregiver spousal abuse, and engaging in violent behaviors as a child. Specific exposures to video games and television also appear to be associated with violent behavior over time; similar linkages are suggested for music. While findings should be replicated in other community-based samples, it seems reasonable to suggest that pediatricians might work with parents to identify a media consumption plan that minimizes children’s exposure to violence across media types and is realistic within the family milieu.

Implications and Contribution

In this national, longitudinal study, exposure to violent media at 10–15 years-old was associated with increased odds of seriously violent behavior 5 and 10 years later, adjusting for aggression, externalizing peers, and caregiver spousal abuse. This was true for a general ‘violent media diet;’ and video games, television and music.

Supplementary Material

Acknowledgements:.

We would like to thank the entire Growing up with Media study team from the Center for Innovative Public Health Research, Princeton Survey Research Associates International, Harris Interactive, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who contributed to different parts of the planning and implementation of the study. Finally, we thank the families and youth for their time and willingness to participate in this study.

Funding/support

Research reported in this publication was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01HD083072, and by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention under Award Numbers U49 CE000206; R01 CE001543. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Neither funder was involved in data analysis or manuscript preparation.

Conflict of interest disclosure:

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Contributor Information

Michele L. Ybarra, Center for Innovative Public Health Research, San Clemente, California.

Kimberly J. Mitchell, Crimes against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire.

Jay Koby Oppenheim, Independent Consultant, New York, New York.

Essay on Media Influence On Violence

Students are often asked to write an essay on Media Influence On Violence in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Media Influence On Violence

Introduction to media and violence.

Media, like TV and video games, often shows a lot of action and fighting. Some people worry that seeing too much of this can make others think it’s okay to act violently. It’s important to know if watching these things really does make people more likely to be violent.

Studies on Media Effects

Age matters.

Young minds are still growing and learning what’s right and wrong. When kids see a lot of violent acts on TV or in games, they might not understand it’s not real. This can confuse them and possibly lead them to act out what they see.

Parents’ Role

Parents have a big job to make sure their kids understand what they see on screens isn’t real. They can talk to their kids about the difference between right and wrong actions. This can help kids not to copy the violence they see in the media.

250 Words Essay on Media Influence On Violence

Media like TV, movies, and video games show a lot of violent scenes. People often argue about whether watching these scenes makes real people act violently. This essay talks about how media can affect the way we think about violence.

Seeing Violence on Screens

When we see a lot of fighting or hurting on screens, it can change the way we see the world. For young people, especially, seeing violent acts in movies or games might make them think it’s okay to act that way in real life. It’s like when someone watches a lot of cooking shows and then wants to cook more; watching violence can make some people feel like it’s normal.

Copycat Actions

There’s a thing called “copycat” behavior. This is when someone sees something in a movie or game and then does the same thing in real life. For example, if a kid sees a superhero fighting bad guys, they might play-fight with their friends. But sometimes, they might not understand the difference between play-fighting and real fighting, which can lead to real harm.

The Role of Parents and Teachers

Parents and teachers play a big role in teaching kids what’s right and wrong. They can help by watching what kids see on screens and talking to them about the difference between real life and what they see in media. It’s also important for them to teach kids to be kind and solve problems without violence.

In conclusion, media can influence how we think about violence. It’s important for everyone to understand that what we see on screens is not always good to do in real life. By talking about these things and teaching kindness, we can help stop violence from spreading.

500 Words Essay on Media Influence On Violence

What the studies say.

Many researchers have tried to find out if media violence really leads to people becoming more violent. They have found that after watching or playing violent media, some people may act more aggressively. This does not mean they will go out and harm someone, but they might feel more okay with the idea of violence. It’s like planting a small seed in their mind that could grow over time.

Sometimes, when a person watches a lot of violence in movies or TV shows, they might copy what they see. This is more likely to happen if the person thinks the violent character is cool or gets away with their actions. Young people, who are still learning about the world, might not always understand that what works in a fictional story doesn’t work the same way in real life.

Video Games and Aggression

Desensitization to violence, parental guidance and education.

Parents can play a big role in helping their kids understand media violence. They can watch shows with their children and talk about what they see. This helps kids learn that what happens in media is not real and that violence is not a good way to solve problems. Schools can also teach students about the effects of media violence and how to handle it.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

Create a new collection
Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

Search in PubMed
Search in NLM Catalog
Add to Search

The Influence of Media Violence on Youth

Affiliations.

1 Department of Psychology, Iowa State University [email protected].
2 Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin.
3 College of Social & Behavioral Sciences, University of Arizona.
4 Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.
5 Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina-Wilmington.
6 Department of Communication and Law and Society Program, University of California, Santa Barbara.
7 Department of Communication/Speech, University of California, Los Angeles.
8 College of Communication, University of Texas at Austin.
PMID: 26151870
DOI: 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2003.pspi_1433.x

Research on violent television and films, video games, and music reveals unequivocal evidence that media violence increases the likelihood of aggressive and violent behavior in both immediate and long-term contexts. The effects appear larger for milder than for more severe forms of aggression, but the effects on severe forms of violence are also substantial (r = .13 to .32) when compared with effects of other violence risk factors or medical effects deemed important by the medical community (e.g., effect of aspirin on heart attacks). The research base is large; diverse in methods, samples, and media genres; and consistent in overall findings. The evidence is clearest within the most extensively researched domain, television and film violence. The growing body of video-game research yields essentially the same conclusions. Short-term exposure increases the likelihood of physically and verbally aggressive behavior, aggressive thoughts, and aggressive emotions. Recent large-scale longitudinal studies provide converging evidence linking frequent exposure to violent media in childhood with aggression later in life, including physical assaults and spouse abuse. Because extremely violent criminal behaviors (e.g., forcible rape, aggravated assault, homicide) are rare, new longitudinal studies with larger samples are needed to estimate accurately how much habitual childhood exposure to media violence increases the risk for extreme violence. Well-supported theory delineates why and when exposure to media violence increases aggression and violence. Media violence produces short-term increases by priming existing aggressive scripts and cognitions, increasing physiological arousal, and triggering an automatic tendency to imitate observed behaviors. Media violence produces long-term effects via several types of learning processes leading to the acquisition of lasting (and automatically accessible) aggressive scripts, interpretational schemas, and aggression-supporting beliefs about social behavior, and by reducing individuals' normal negative emotional responses to violence (i.e., desensitization). Certain characteristics of viewers (e.g., identification with aggressive characters), social environments (e.g., parental influences), and media content (e.g., attractiveness of the perpetrator) can influence the degree to which media violence affects aggression, but there are some inconsistencies in research results. This research also suggests some avenues for preventive intervention (e.g., parental supervision, interpretation, and control of children's media use). However, extant research on moderators suggests that no one is wholly immune to the effects of media violence. Recent surveys reveal an extensive presence of violence in modern media. Furthermore, many children and youth spend an inordinate amount of time consuming violent media. Although it is clear that reducing exposure to media violence will reduce aggression and violence, it is less clear what sorts of interventions will produce a reduction in exposure. The sparse research literature suggests that counterattitudinal and parental-mediation interventions are likely to yield beneficial effects, but that media literacy interventions by themselves are unsuccessful. Though the scientific debate over whether media violence increases aggression and violence is essentially over, several critical tasks remain. Additional laboratory and field studies are needed for a better understanding of underlying psychological processes, which eventually should lead to more effective interventions. Large-scale longitudinal studies would help specify the magnitude of media-violence effects on the most severe types of violence. Meeting the larger societal challenge of providing children and youth with a much healthier media diet may prove to be more difficult and costly, especially if the scientific, news, public policy, and entertainment communities fail to educate the general public about the real risks of media-violence exposure to children and youth.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

A-Z Publications

Annual Review of Public Health

Volume 27, 2006, review article, the role of media violence in violent behavior.

L. Rowell Huesmann 1 , and Laramie D. Taylor 1
View Affiliations Hide Affiliations Affiliations: 1 Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106-1248; email: [email protected] 2 Communication Department, University of California, Davis, California 95616; email: [email protected]
Vol. 27:393-415 (Volume publication date April 2006) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.26.021304.144640
© Annual Reviews

Media violence poses a threat to public health inasmuch as it leads to an increase in real-world violence and aggression. Research shows that fictional television and film violence contribute to both a short-term and a long-term increase in aggression and violence in young viewers. Television news violence also contributes to increased violence, principally in the form of imitative suicides and acts of aggression. Video games are clearly capable of producing an increase in aggression and violence in the short term, although no long-term longitudinal studies capable of demonstrating long-term effects have been conducted. The relationship between media violence and real-world violence and aggression is moderated by the nature of the media content and characteristics of and social influences on the individual exposed to that content. Still, the average overall size of the effect is large enough to place it in the category of known threats to public health.

Article metrics loading...

Full text loading...

Literature Cited

Abelson RP . 1985 . A variance explanation paradox: when a little is a lot. Psychol. Bull. 97 : 129– 33 [Google Scholar]
Alvarez MM , Huston AC , Wright JC . 1988 . Gender differences in visual attention to television form and content. J . Appl. Dev. Psychol. 9 :( 4 ) 459– 75 [Google Scholar]
Anderson CA . 1997 . Effects of violent movies and trait irritability on hostile feelings and aggressive thoughts. Aggress. Behav. 23 : 161– 78 [Google Scholar]
Anderson CA , Bushman BJ . 2001 . Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: a meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychol. Sci. 12 : 353– 59 [Google Scholar]
Anderson CA , Bushman BJ . 2002 . Human aggression. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 53 : 27– 51 [Google Scholar]
Anderson CA , Carnagey NL , Flanagan M , Benjamin AJ , Eubanks J , Valentine JC . 2004 . Violent video games: specific effects of violent content on aggressive thoughts and behavior. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology ed. M Zanna New York: Academic [Google Scholar]
Anderson CA , Dill KE . 2000 . Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78 : 772– 90 [Google Scholar]
Anderson CA , Huesmann LR . 2003 . Human aggression: a social-cognitive view. In Handbook of Social Psychology ed. MA Hogg, J Cooper pp. 296– 323 London: Sage [Google Scholar]
Atkin C . 1983 . Effects of realistic TV violence vs. fictional violence on aggression. Journal. Q. 60 : 615– 21 [Google Scholar]
Bandura A . 1977 . Social Learning Theory Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall [Google Scholar]
Bandura A . 1986 . Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall [Google Scholar]
Bandura A . 1994 . Social cognitive theory of mass communication. In Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research ed. J Bryant, D Zillmann pp. 61– 90 Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
Bandura A , Ross D , Ross SA . 1963 . A comparative test of the status envy, social power, and secondary reinforcement theories of identificatory learning. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 67 : 527– 34 [Google Scholar]
Bandura A , Ross D , Ross SA . 1963 . Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 67 : 3– 11 [Google Scholar]
Bandura A , Ross D , Ross SA . 1963 . Vicarious reinforcement and imitative learning. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 67 : 601– 7 [Google Scholar]
Bartholow BD , Anderson CA . 2002 . Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior: Potential sex differences. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 38 : 283– 90 [Google Scholar]
Berkowitz L . 1965 . Some aspects of observed aggression. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2 : 359– 69 [Google Scholar]
Berkowitz L . 1993 . Aggression: Its Causes, Consequences, and Control New York: McGraw-Hill [Google Scholar]
Berkowitz L , Alioto JT . 1973 . The meaning of an observed event as a determinant of its aggressive consequences. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 28 : 206– 17 [Google Scholar]
Berkowitz L , Geen RG . 1967 . Stimulus qualities of the target of aggression: a further study. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 5 : 364– 68 [Google Scholar]
Berkowitz L , LePage A . 1967 . Weapons as aggression-eliciting stimuli. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 7 : 202– 7 [Google Scholar]
Berkowitz L , Macaulay J . 1971 . The contagion of criminal violence. Sociometry 34 : 238– 60 [Google Scholar]
Berkowitz L , Powers PC . 1979 . Effects of timing and justification of witnessed aggression on the observers' punitiveness. J. Res. Pers. 13 : 71– 80 [Google Scholar]
Bjorkqvist K . 1985 . Violent Films, Anxiety, and Aggression Helsinki: Finn. Soc. Sci. Lett. [Google Scholar]
Bryant J , Zillmann D . 1979 . Effect of intensification of annoyance through unrelated residual excitation on substantially delayed hostile behavior. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 15 :( 5 ) 470– 80 [Google Scholar]
Bushman BJ . 1995 . Moderating role of trait aggressiveness in the effects of violent media on aggression. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69 : 950– 60 [Google Scholar]
Bushman BJ , Geen RG . 1990 . Role of cognitive-emotional mediators and individual differences in the effects of media violence on aggression. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 58 : 156– 63 [Google Scholar]
Bushman BJ , Huesmann LR . 2001 . Effects of televised violence on aggression. In Handbook of Children and the Media ed. D Singer, J Singer pp. 223– 54 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
Butterworth G . 1999 . Neonatal imitation: existence, mechanisms and motives. In Imitation in Infancy ed. J Nadel, G Butterworth pp. 63– 88 New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
Calvert SL , Tan S . 1994 . Impact of virtual reality on young adults' physiological arousal and aggressive thoughts: interaction versus observation. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 15 : 125– 39 [Google Scholar]
Cantor J . 1994 . Confronting children's fright responses to mass media. In Media, Children, and the Family: Social Scientific, Psychodynamic, and Clinical Perspectives ed. D Zillmann, J Bryant pp. 139– 50 Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
Cantor J . 2002 . Fright reactions to mass media. In Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research ed. J Bryant, D Zillmann pp. 287– 306 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
Cline VB , Croft RG , Courrier S . 1973 . Desensitization of children to television violence. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 27 :( 3 ) 360– 65 [Google Scholar]
Comstock G , Paik H . 1991 . Television and the American Child San Diego, CA: Academic [Google Scholar]
Dodge KA . 1980 . Social cognition and children's aggressive behavior. Child Dev. 51 :( 1 ) 162– 70 [Google Scholar]
Dodge KA . 1985 . Attributional bias in aggressive children. In Advances in Cognitive-Behavioral Research and Therapy ed. PC Kendall 4 73– 110 San Diego, CA: Academic [Google Scholar]
Dodge KA , Pettit GS , Bates JE , Valente E . 1995 . Social information-processing patterns partially mediate the effect of early physical abuse on later conduct problems. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 104 :( 4 ) 632– 43 [Google Scholar]
Dorr A , Kovaric P . 1980 . Some of the people some of the time—but which people? Televised violence and its effects. In Children and the Faces of Television ed. EL Palmer, A Dorr pp. 183– 99 New York: Academic [Google Scholar]
Eron LD , Huesmann LR , Lefkowitz MM , Walder LO . 1972 . Does television violence cause aggression. Am. Psychol. 27 : 253– 63 [Google Scholar]
Fenigstein A . 1979 . Does aggression cause a preference for viewing media violence. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37 : 2307– 17 [Google Scholar]
Feshbach S . 1972 . Reality and fantasy in filmed violence. In Television and Social Behavior: A Technical Report to the Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior: Vol. 3. Television and Adolescent Aggressiveness ed. GA Comstock, EA Rubinstein pp. 318–45. DHEW Publ. No. HSM 72–9058 Washington, DC: U.S. Gov. Print. Off. [Google Scholar]
Friedrich LK , Stein AH . 1973 . Aggressive and prosocial television programs and the natural behavior of preschool children. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child 38 :( 4 ) 1– 63 [Google Scholar]
Geen RG , O'Neal EC . 1969 . Activation of cue-elicited aggression by general arousal. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 11 :( 3 ) 289– 92 [Google Scholar]
Geen RG , Stonner R . 1973 . Context effects in observed violence. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 25 : 145– 50 [Google Scholar]
Gentile DA , Lynch PL , Linder JR , Walsh DA . 2004 . The effects of violent video game habits on adolescent hostility, aggressive behaviors, and school performance. J. Adolesc. 27 :( 1 ) 5– 22 [Google Scholar]
Gerbner G , Gross L , Morgan M , Signorielli N . 1994 . Growing up with television: the cultivation perspective. See Ref. 12 pp. 17– 41
Guerra NG , Huesmann LR , Hanish L . 1995 . The role of normative beliefs in children's social behavior. In Social Development ed. N Eisenberg pp. 140– 58 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
Guerra NG , Huesmann LR , Spindler AJ . 2003 . Community violence exposure, social cognition, and aggression among urban elementary-school children. Child Dev. 74 :( 5 ) 1561– 76 [Google Scholar]
Guerra NG , Huesmann LR , Tolan PH , VanAcker R , Eron L . 1995 . Stressful events and individual beliefs as correlates of economic disadvantage and aggression among urban children. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 63 :( 4 ) 518– 28 [Google Scholar]
Gunter B . 1983 . Do aggressive people prefer violent television. Bull. Br. Psychol. Soc. 36 : 166– 68 [Google Scholar]
Haninger K , Thompson KM . 2004 . Content and ratings of teen-rated video games. JAMA 291 :( 7 ) 856– 65 [Google Scholar]
Hansen CH , Hansen RD . 1990 . Rock music videos and antisocial behavior. Basic Appl . Soc. Psychol. 11 :( 4 ) 357– 69 [Google Scholar]
Hapkiewicz WG , Stone RD . 1974 . The effect of realistic versus imaginary aggressive models on children's interpersonal play. Child Study J. 4 :( 2 ) 47– 58 [Google Scholar]
Harrison K , Cantor J . 1999 . Tales from the screen: enduring fright reactions to scary media. Media Psychol. 1 :( 2 ) 97– 116 [Google Scholar]
Huesmann LR . 1988 . An information processing model for the development of aggression. Aggress. Behav. 14 : 13– 24 [Google Scholar]
Huesmann LR . 1998 . The role of social information processing and cognitive schema in the acquisition and maintenance of habitual aggressive behavior. In Human Aggression: Theories, Research, and Implications for Social Policy ed. RG Geen, E Donnerstein pp. 73– 109 New York: Academic [Google Scholar]
Huesmann LR , Eron LD . eds. 1986 . Television and the Aggressive Child: A Cross-National Comparison Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
Huesmann LR , Eron LD , Dubow EF . 2003 . Childhood predictors of adult criminality: Are all risk factors reflected in childhood aggressiveness. Crim. Behav. Mental Health 12 : 185– 208 [Google Scholar]
Huesmann LR , Guerra NG . 1997 . Children's normative beliefs about aggression and aggressive behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 72 :( 2 ) 408– 19 [Google Scholar]
Huesmann LR , Lagerspetz K , Eron LD . 1984 . Intervening variables in the TV violence-aggression relation: evidence from two countries. Dev. Psychol. 20 : 746– 75 [Google Scholar]
Huesmann LR , Miller LS . 1994 . Long-term effects of repeated exposure to media violence in childhood. In Aggressive Behavior: Current Perspectives ed. LR Huesmann pp. 153– 83 New York: Plenum [Google Scholar]
Huesmann LR , Moise JF , Podolski CL . 1997 . The effects of media violence on the development of antisocial behavior. In Handbook of Antisocial Behavior ed. DM Stoff, J Breiling, JD Maser pp. 181– 93 New York: Wiley [Google Scholar]
Huesmann LR , Moise-Titus J , Podolski CL , Eron LD . 2003 . Longitudinal relations between children's exposure to TV violence and their aggressive and violent behavior in young adulthood: 1977–1992. Dev. Psychol. 39 : 201– 21 [Google Scholar]
Huesmann LR , Taylor LD . 2003 . The case against the case against media violence. In Media Violence and Children ed. DA Gentile pp. 107– 30 Westport, CT: Praeger [Google Scholar]
Ihori N , Sakamoto A , Kobayashi K , Kimura F . 2003 . Does video game use grow children's aggressiveness? Results from a panel study. In Social Contributions and Responsibilities of Simulation and Gaming ed. K Arai pp. 221– 30 Tokyo: Jap. Assoc. Simul. Gaming [Google Scholar]
Irwin AR , Gross AM . 1995 . Cognitive tempo, violent video games, and aggressive behavior in young boys. J. Family Violence 10 : 337– 50 [Google Scholar]
Johnson JD , Adams MS , Ashburn L , Reed W . 1995 . Differential gender effects of exposure to rap music on African American adolescents' acceptance of teen dating violence. Sex Roles 33 : 597– 605 [Google Scholar]
Johnson JD , Jackson LA , Gatto L . 1995 . Violent attitudes and deferred academic aspirations: deleterious effects of exposure to rap music. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 16 :( 1–2 ) 27– 41 [Google Scholar]
Johnson JG , Cohen P , Smailes EM , Kasen S , Brook JS . 2002 . Television viewing and aggressive behavior during adolescence and adulthood. Science 295 : 2468– 71 [Google Scholar]
Josephson WL . 1987 . Television violence and children's aggression: testing the priming, social script, and disinhibition predictions. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 53 : 882– 90 [Google Scholar]
Kirsh SJ . 1998 . Seeing the world through Mortal Kombat-colored glasses: violent video games and the development of a short-term hostile attribution bias. Childhood 5 : 177– 84 [Google Scholar]
Kirwil L , Huesmann LR . 2003 . The relation between aggressiveness and emotional reactions to observed violence Presented at Annu. Meet. Midwest. Psych. Assoc., Chicago [Google Scholar]
Lando HA , Donnerstein EI . 1978 . The effects of a model's success or failure on subsequent aggressive behavior. J. Res. Pers. 12 : 225– 34 [Google Scholar]
Leyens JP , Picus S . 1973 . Identification with the winner of a fight and name mediation: their differential effects upon subsequent aggressive behavior. Br. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 12 : 374– 77 [Google Scholar]
Lord CG , Ross L , Lepper MR . 1979 . Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: the effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37 :( 11 ) 2098– 109 [Google Scholar]
Malamuth NM , Check JVP . 1983 . Sexual arousal to rape depictions: individual differences. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 92 :( 1 ) 55– 67 [Google Scholar]
Malamuth NM , Check JVP . 1985 . The effects of aggressive pornography on beliefs in rape myths: individual differences. J. Res. Personal. 19 : 299– 320 [Google Scholar]
Meltzoff AN , Moore MK . 2000 . Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates: resolving the debate about early imitation. In Infant Development: The Essential Readings ed. D Muir, A Slater pp. 167– 81 Malden, MA: Blackwell [Google Scholar]
Milavsky JR , Kessler R , Stipp H , Rubens WS . 1982 . Television and aggression: results of a panel study. In Television and Behavior: Ten Years of Scientific Progress and Implications for the Eighties: Vol. 2. Technical Reviews ed. D Pearl, L Bouthilet, J Lazar pp. 138– 57 DHHS Publ. No. ADM 82–1196 Washington, DC: U.S. Gov. Print. Off. [Google Scholar]
Moffitt TE , Caspi A , Harrington H , Milne BJ . 2002 . Males on the life-course-persistent and adolescence-limited antisocial pathways: follow-up at age 26 years. Dev. Psychopathol. 14 :( 1 ) 179– 207 [Google Scholar]
Moise-Titus J . 1999 . The role of negative emotions in the media violence-aggression relation Unpubl. PhD diss., Univ. Mich. [Google Scholar]
Nathanson AI . 1999 . Identifying and explaining the relationship between parental mediation and children's aggression. Commun. Res. 26 : 124– 43 [Google Scholar]
Neely JJ , Hechel RV , Leichtman HM . 1973 . The effect of race of model and response consequences to the model on imitation in children. J. Soc. Psychol. 89 : 225– 31 [Google Scholar]
O'Neal EC , Taylor SL . 1989 . Status of the provoker, opportunity to retaliate, and interest in video violence. Aggress. Behav. 15 : 171– 80 [Google Scholar]
Paik H , Comstock G . 1994 . The effects of television violence on antisocial behavior: a meta-analysis. Commun. Res. 21 : 516– 46 [Google Scholar]
Peterson DL , Pfost KS . 1989 . Influence of rock videos on attitudes of violence against women. Psychol. Rep. 64 : 319– 22 [Google Scholar]
Phillips DP . 1979 . Suicide, motor vehicle fatalities, and the mass media: evidence toward a theory of suggestion. Am. J. Sociol. 84 : 1150– 74 [Google Scholar]
Phillips DP . 1982 . The impact of fictional television stories on U.S. adult fatalities: new evidence on the effect of the mass media on violence. Am. J. Sociol. 87 : 1340– 59 [Google Scholar]
Phillips DP . 1983 . The impact of mass media violence on U.S. homicides. Am. Sociol. Rev. 48 : 560– 68 [Google Scholar]
Potts R , Huston AC , Wright JC . 1986 . The effects of television form and violent content on boys' attention and social behavior. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 41 : 1– 17 [Google Scholar]
Prinz J . 2005 . Emotional Perception New York: Oxford Univ. Press In press [Google Scholar]
Rizzolati G , Fadiga L , Gallese V , Fogassi L . 1996 . Premotor cortex and the recognition of motor actions. Cogn. Brain Res. 3 : 131– 41 [Google Scholar]
Roberts DF , Foehr UG , Rideout VJ . 2005 . Generation M: Media in the Lives of 8–18 Year-Olds Menlo Park, CA: Henry J. Kaiser Family Found. [Google Scholar]
Rosenthal R . 1986 . Media violence, antisocial behavior, and the social consequences of small effects. J. Soc. Issues 42 :( 3 ) 141– 54 [Google Scholar]
Simon A . 1979 . Violence in the mass media: a case of modeling. Percept. Mot. Skills 48 : 1081– 82 [Google Scholar]
Singer JL , Singer DG . 1986 . Family experiences and television viewing as predictors of children's imagination, restlessness, and aggression. J. Soc. Issues 42 :( 3 ) 107– 24 [Google Scholar]
Singer JL , Singer DG . 1986 . Television-viewing and family communication style as predictors of children's emotional behavior. J. Child. Contemp. Soc. 17 : 75– 91 [Google Scholar]
Slater MD , Henry KL , Swaim RC , Anderson LL . 2003 . Violent media content and aggressiveness in adolescents: a down ward spiral model. Commun. Res. 30 :( 6 ) 713– 36 [Google Scholar]
Stack S . 1989 . The effect of publicized mass murders and murder-suicides on lethal violence, 1968–1980: A research note. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemol. 24 : 202– 8 [Google Scholar]
Stack S . 2000 . Media impacts on suicide: a quantitative review of 293 findings. Soc. Sci. Q. 81 :( 4 ) 957– 71 [Google Scholar]
Thompson KM , Haninger K . 2001 . Violence in E-rated video games. JAMA 286 :( 5 ) 591– 98 [Google Scholar]
Valentino NA , Traugott M , Hutchings V . 2002 . Group cues and ideological constraint: A replication of political advertising effects studies in the lab and in the field. Polit. Commun. 19 : 29– 48 [Google Scholar]
Walters RH , Parke RD . 1964 . Influence of response consequences to a social model on resistance to deviation. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 1 : 269– 80 [Google Scholar]
Wilson BJ , Kunkel D , Linz D , Potter J , Donnerstein E . et al. 1997 . Violence in television programming overall: University of California, Santa Barbara study. In National Television Violence Study ed. M Seawall 1 3– 184 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
Wyrwicka W . 1996 . Imitation in Human and Animal Behavior New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction [Google Scholar]
Zajonc RB , Murphy ST , Inglehart M . 1989 . Feeling and facial efference: implications of the vascular theory of emotion. Psychol. Rev. 96 : 395– 416 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

Article Type: Review Article

Most Read This Month

Most cited most cited rss feed, review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health, nature and health, measuring social class in us public health research: concepts, methodologies, and guidelines, the epidemiology of depression across cultures, acute respiratory effects of particulate air pollution, racism and health: evidence and needed research, the social determinants of health: coming of age, the role of behavioral science theory in development and implementation of public health interventions, mediation analysis: a practitioner's guide, the prescription opioid and heroin crisis: a public health approach to an epidemic of addiction.

Violence in the Media: What Effects on Behavior?

"You turn on the television, and violence is there. You go to a movie, and violence is there."

essay of the influence of media on violence

Tango Without Touching: Defusing Pediatric PTSD in the Emergency Department

How to Talk to Teenagers About Substance Use

Stress and Substance Use Among Drag Performers

5 Personality Traits of Olympic Athletes

OX124 for Opioid Overdose Reversal Receives FDA Complete Response Letter

The Assassination Attempt on Past President Trump: Is Sudden Personal Change Possible?

2 Commerce Drive Cranbury, NJ 08512

609-716-7777

Violence in the media: Psychologists study potential harmful effects

Early research on the effects of viewing violence on television—especially among children—found a desensitizing effect and the potential for aggression. Is the same true for those who play violent video games?

Video Games

Television and video violence

Virtually since the dawn of television, parents, teachers, legislators, and mental health professionals have wanted to understand the impact of television programs, particularly on children. Of special concern has been the portrayal of violence, particularly given psychologist Albert Bandura’s work in the 1970s on social learning and the tendency of children to imitate what they see.

As a result of 15 years of “consistently disturbing” findings about the violent content of children’s programs, the Surgeon General’s Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior was formed in 1969 to assess the impact of violence on the attitudes, values, and behavior of viewers. The resulting report and a follow-up report in 1982 by the National Institute of Mental Health identified these major effects of seeing violence on television:

Children may become less sensitive to the pain and suffering of others.
Children may be more fearful of the world around them.
Children may be more likely to behave in aggressive or harmful ways toward others.

Research by psychologists L. Rowell Huesmann, Leonard Eron, and others starting in the 1980s found that children who watched many hours of violence on television when they were in elementary school tended to show higher levels of aggressive behavior when they became teenagers. By observing these participants into adulthood, Huesmann and Eron found that the ones who’d watched a lot of TV violence when they were 8 years old were more likely to be arrested and prosecuted for criminal acts as adults.

Interestingly, being aggressive as a child did not predict watching more violent TV as a teenager, suggesting that TV watching could be a cause rather than a consequence of aggressive behavior. However, later research by psychologists Douglas Gentile and Brad Bushman, among others, suggested that exposure to media violence is just one of several factors that can contribute to aggressive behavior.

Other research has found that exposure to media violence can desensitize people to violence in the real world and that, for some people, watching violence in the media becomes enjoyable and does not result in the anxious arousal that would be expected from seeing such imagery.

Video game violence

The advent of video games raised new questions about the potential impact of media violence, since the video game player is an active participant rather than merely a viewer. 97% of adolescents age 12–17 play video games—on a computer, on consoles such as the Wii, Playstation, and Xbox, or on portable devices such as Gameboys, smartphones, and tablets. A Pew Research Center survey in 2008 found that half of all teens reported playing a video game “yesterday,” and those who played every day typically did so for an hour or more.

Many of the most popular video games, such as “Call of Duty” and “Grand Theft Auto,” are violent; however, as video game technology is relatively new, there are fewer empirical studies of video game violence than other forms of media violence. Still, several meta-analytic reviews have reported negative effects of exposure to violence in video games.

A 2010 review by psychologist Craig A. Anderson and others concluded that “the evidence strongly suggests that exposure to violent video games is a causal risk factor for increased aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, and aggressive affect and for decreased empathy and prosocial behavior.” Anderson’s earlier research showed that playing violent video games can increase a person’s aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior both in laboratory settings and in daily life. “One major conclusion from this and other research on violent entertainment media is that content matters,” says Anderson.

Other researchers, including psychologist Christopher J. Ferguson, have challenged the position that video game violence harms children . While his own 2009 meta-analytic review reported results similar to Anderson’s, Ferguson contends that laboratory results have not translated into real world, meaningful effects. He also claims that much of the research into video game violence has failed to control for other variables such as mental health and family life, which may have impacted the results. His work has found that children who are already at risk may be more likely to choose to play violent video games. According to Ferguson, these other risk factors, as opposed to the games, cause aggressive and violent behavior.

APA launched an analysis in 2013 of peer-reviewed research on the impact of media violence and is reviewing its policy statements in the area.

Anderson, C.A., Ihori, Nobuko, Bushman, B.J., Rothstein, H.R., Shibuya, A., Swing, E.L., Sakamoto, A., & Saleem, M. (2010). Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in Eastern and Western countries: A Meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin , Vol. 126, No. 2.

Anderson, C. A., Carnagey, N. L. & Eubanks, J. (2003). Exposure to violent media: The effects of songs with violent lyrics on aggressive thoughts and feelings. Journal of Personality and Social Psycholog y, Vol. 84, No. 5.

Anderson, C. A., & Dill, K. E. (2000). Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , Vol. 78, No. 4.

Ferguson, C.J. (2011). Video games and youth violence: A Prospective analysis in adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence , Vol. 40, No. 4.

Gentile, D.A., & Bushman, B.J. (2012). Reassessing media violence effects using a risk and resilience approach to understanding aggression. Psychology of Popular Media Culture , Vol. 1, No. 3.

Huesmann, L. R., & Eron, L. D. (1986). Television and the aggressive child: A cross-national comparison. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Huesmann, L. R., Moise-Titus, J., Podolski, C. L., & Eron, L. D. (2003). Longitudinal relations between children’s exposure to TV violence and their aggressive and violent behavior in young adulthood: 1977–1992. Developmental Psychology , Vol. 39, No. 2, 201–221.

Huston, A. C., Donnerstein, E., Fairchild, H., Feshbach, N. D., Katz, P. A., Murray, J. P., Rubinstein, E. A., Wilcox, B. & Zuckerman, D. (1992). Big world, small screen: The role of television in American society. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Krahe, B., Moller, I., Kirwil, L., Huesmann, L.R., Felber, J., & Berger, A. (2011). Desensitization to media violence: Links with habitual media violence exposure, aggressive cognitions, and aggressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , Vol. 100, No. 4.

Murray, J. P. (1973). Television and violence: Implications of the Surgeon General’s research program. American Psychologist , Vol. 28, 472–478.

National Institute of Mental Health (1982). Television and behavior: Ten years of scientific progress and implications for the eighties, Vol. 1. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The Facts on Media Violence

By Vanessa Schipani

Posted on March 8, 2018

In the wake of the Florida school shooting, politicians have raised concern over the influence of violent video games and films on young people, with the president claiming they’re “shaping young people’s thoughts.” Scientists still debate the issue, but the majority of studies show that extensive exposure to media violence is a risk factor for aggressive thoughts, feelings and behaviors.

The link between media violence and mass shootings is yet more tenuous. Compared with acts of aggression and violence, mass shootings are relatively rare events, which makes conducting conclusive research on them difficult.

President Donald Trump first raised the issue during a meeting on school safety with local and state officials, which took place a week after the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. The shooter, 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz, reportedly obsessively played violent video games.

Trump, Feb. 22: We have to look at the Internet because a lot of bad things are happening to young kids and young minds, and their minds are being formed. And we have to do something about maybe what they’re seeing and how they’re seeing it. And also video games. I’m hearing more and more people say the level of violence on video games is really shaping young people’s thoughts. And then you go the further step, and that’s the movies. You see these movies, they’re so violent.

Trump discussed the issue again with members of Congress on Feb. 28 during another meeting on school safety. During that discussion, Tennessee Rep. Marsha Blackburn claimed mothers have told her they’re “very concerned” that “exposure” to entertainment media has “desensitized” children to violence.

Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley also said during the meeting: “[Y]ou see all these films about everybody being blown up. Well, just think of the impact that makes on young people.”

The points Trump and members of Congress raise aren’t unfounded, but the research on the subject is complex. Scientists who study the effect of media violence have taken issue with how the popular press has portrayed their work, arguing that the nuance of their research is often left out.

In a 2015 review of the scientific literature on video game violence, the American Psychological Association elaborates on this point.

APA, 2015: News commentators often turn to violent video game use as a potential causal contributor to acts of mass homicide. The media point to perpetrators’ gaming habits as either a reason they have chosen to commit their crimes or as a method of training. This practice extends at least as far back as the Columbine massacre (1999). … As with most areas of science, the picture presented by this research is more complex than is usually depicted in news coverage and other information prepared for the general public.

Here, we break down the facts — nuance included — on the effect of media violence on young people.

Is Media Violence a Risk Factor for Aggression?

The 2015 report by the APA on video games is a good place to start. After systematically going through the scientific literature, the report’s authors “concluded that violent video game use has an effect on aggression.”

In particular, the authors explain that this effect manifests as an increase in aggressive behaviors, thoughts and feelings and a decrease in helping others, empathy and sensitivity to aggression. Though limited, evidence also suggests that “higher amounts of exposure” to video games is linked to “higher levels of aggression,” the report said.

The report emphasized that “aggression is a complex behavior” caused by multiple factors, each of which increases the likelihood that an individual will be aggressive. “Children who experience multiple risk factors are more likely to engage in aggression,” the report said.

The authors came to their conclusions because researchers have consistently found the effect across three different kinds of studies: cross-sectional studies, longitudinal studies and laboratory experiments. “One method’s limits are offset by another method’s strengths,” the APA report explains, so only together can they be used to infer a causal relationship.

Cross-sectional studies find correlations between different phenomena at one point in time. They’re relatively easy to conduct, but they can’t provide causal evidence because correlations can be spurious . For example, an increase in video game sales might correlate with a decrease in violent crime, but that doesn’t necessarily mean video games prevent violent crime. Other unknown factors might also be at play.

Longitudinal panel studies collect data on the same group over time, sometimes for decades. They’re used to investigate long-term effects, such as whether playing video games as a child might correlate with aggression as an adult. These studies also measure other risk factors for aggression, such as harsh discipline from parents, with the aim of singling out the effect of media violence. For this reason, these studies provide better evidence for causality than cross-sectional studies, but they are more difficult to conduct.

Laboratory experiments manipulate one phenomenon — in this case, exposure to media violence — and keep all others constant. Because of their controlled environment, experiments provide strong evidence for a causal effect. But for the same reason, laboratory studies may not accurately reflect how people act in the real world.

This brings us to why debate still exists among scientists studying media violence. Some researchers have found that the experimental evidence backing the causal relationship between playing video games and aggression might not be as solid as it seems.

Last July, Joseph Hilgard , an assistant professor of psychology at Illinois State University, and others published a study in the journal Psychological Bulletin that found that laboratory experiments on the topic may be subject to publication bias. This means that studies that show the effect may be more likely to be published than those that don’t, skewing the body of evidence.

After Hilgard corrected for this bias, the effect of violent video games on aggressive behavior and emotions did still exist, but it was reduced, perhaps even to near zero. However, the effect on aggressive thoughts remained relatively unaffected by this publication bias. The researchers also found that cross-sectional studies weren’t subject to publication bias. They didn’t examine longitudinal studies, which have shown that youth who play more violent video games are more likely to report aggressive behavior over time.

Hilgard looked at a 2010 literature review by Craig A. Anderson , the director of the Center for the Study of Violence at Iowa State University, and others. Published in Psychological Bulletin, this review influenced the APA’s report.

In response, Anderson took a second look at his review and found that the effect of violent video games on aggression was smaller than he originally thought, but not as small as Hilgard found. For this reason, he argued the effect was still a “societal concern.”

To be clear, Hilgard is arguing that there’s more uncertainty in the field than originally thought, not that video games have no effect on aggression. He’s also not the first to find that research on video games may be suffering from publication bias.

But what about movies and television? Reviews of the literature on these forms of media tend to be less recent, Kenneth A. Dodge , a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Duke University, told us by email.

Dodge, also one of the authors of the 2015 APA study, pointed us to one 1994 review of the literature on television published in the journal Communication Research that concluded that television violence also “increases aggressiveness and antisocial behavior.” Dodge told us he’s “confident” the effect this analysis and others found “would hold again today.”

Dodge also pointed us to a 2006 study that reviewed the literature on violent video games, films, television and other media together. “Most contemporary studies start with the premise that children are exposed [to violence] through so many diverse media that they start to group them together,” said Dodge.

Published in JAMA Pediatrics , the review found that exposure to violent media increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior, thoughts and feelings. The review also found media decreases the likelihood of helping behavior. All of these effects were “modest,” the researchers concluded.

Overall, most of the research suggests media violence is a risk factor for aggression, but some experts in the field still question whether there’s enough evidence to conclusively say there’s a link.

Is Violent Media a Risk Factor for Violence?

There’s even less evidence to suggest media violence is a risk factor for criminal violence.

“In psychological research, aggression is usually conceptualized as behavior that is intended to harm another,” while, “[v]iolence can be defined as an extreme form of physical aggression,” the 2015 APA report explains . “Thus, all violence is aggression, but not all aggression is violence.”

The APA report said studies have been conducted on media violence’s relationship with “criminal violence,” but the authors “did not find enough evidence of sufficient utility to evaluate whether” there’s a solid link to violent video game use.

This lack of evidence is due, in part, to the fact that there are ethical limitations to conducting experiments on violence in the laboratory, especially when it comes to children and teens, the report explains. That leaves only evidence from cross-sectional studies and longitudinal studies. So what do those studies say?

One longitudinal study , published in the journal Developmental Psychology in 2003, found that, out of 153 males, those who watched the most violent television as children were more likely 15 years later “to have pushed, grabbed, or shoved their spouses, to have responded to an insult by shoving a person” or to have been “to have been convicted of a crime” during the previous year. Girls who watched the most violent television were also more likely to commit similar acts as young women. These effects persisted after controlling for other risk factors for aggression, such as parental aggression and intellectual ability.

A 2012 cross-sectional study that Anderson, at Iowa State, and others published in the journal Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice did find that the amount of violent video games juvenile delinquents played correlated with how many violent acts they had committed over the past year. The violent acts included gang fighting, hitting a teacher, hitting a parent, hitting other students and attacking another person.

However, a 2008 review of the literature published in the journal Criminal Justice and Behavior concluded that “ the effects of exposure to media violence on criminally violent behavior have not been established.” But the authors clarify: “Saying that the effect has not been established is not the same as saying that the effect does not exist.”

In contrast to the APA report, Anderson and a colleague argue in a 2015 article published in American Behavioral Scientist that “research shows that media violence is a causal risk factor not only for mild forms of aggression but also for more serious forms of aggression, including violent criminal behavior.”

Why did Anderson and his colleagues come to different conclusions than the APA? He told us that the APA “did not include the research literature on TV violence,” and excluded “several important studies on video game effects on violent behavior published since 2013.”

In their 2015 article, Anderson and his colleague clarify that, even if there is a link, it “does not mean that violent media exposure by itself will turn a normal child or adolescent who has few or no other risk factors into a violent criminal or a school shooter.” They add, “Such extreme violence is rare, and tends to occur only when multiple risk factors converge in time, space, and within an individual.”

Multiple experts we spoke with did point to one factor unique to the United States that they argue increases the risk of mass shootings and lethality of violence in general — access to guns.

For example, Anderson told us by email: “There is a pretty strong consensus among violence researchers in psychology and criminology that the main reason that U.S. homicide rates are so much higher than in most Western democracies is our easy access to guns.”

Dodge, at Duke, echoed Anderson’s point.”The single most obvious and probably largest difference between a country like the US that has many mass shootings and other developed countries is the easy access to guns,” he said.

So while scientists disagree about how much evidence is enough to sufficiently support a causal link between media violence and real world violence, Trump and other politicians’ concerns aren’t unfounded.

Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is also based at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center. Hilgard, now at Illinois State, was a post doctoral fellow at the APPC.

What happened in the Kolkata rape case that triggered doctors’ protests?

Activists and doctors in India demand better safeguarding of women and medical professionals after a trainee medic was raped and murdered in Kolkata.

Following a murder of a 31 year old post-graduate trainee (PGT) doctor by rape and torture inside a government hospital, activists of different humanitarian and political organisations and medical professionals participate in a rally with posters and torches demanding adequate intervention of the ruling government and exemplary punishment of the culprits, in Kolkata, India, Tuesday, Aug. 13, 2024.

Activists and doctors across India continued to protest on Wednesday to demand justice for a female doctor, who was raped and murdered while on duty in a hospital in the eastern city of Kolkata.

Feminist groups rallied on the streets in protests titled “Reclaim the Night” in Kolkata overnight on Wednesday – on the eve of India’s independence day – in solidarity with the victim, demanding the principal of RG Kar Medical College resign. Some feminist protesters also marched well beyond Kolkata, including in the capital Delhi.

Keep reading

Doctors across india protest rape and murder of medic in kolkata, india supreme court to monitor investigations into manipur sexual violence, goals not guns: how a girls football team in india’s manipur beats violence, four arrested after spanish blogger on india motorcycle tour gangraped.

While the protests were largely peaceful, a small mob of men stormed the medical college and vandalised property. This group was dispersed by the police.

This comes after two days of nationwide protests by doctors following the incident at RG Kar Medical College in West Bengal’s capital city. “Sit-in demonstrations and agitation in the hospital campus will continue,” one of the protesting doctors, identified as Dr Mridul, told Al Jazeera.

Services in some medical centres were halted indefinitely, and marches and vigils shed light on issues of sexual violence, as well as doctors’ safety in the world’s most populous nation.

What happened to the doctor in Kolkata?

A 31-year-old trainee doctor’s dead body, bearing multiple injuries, was found on August 9 in a government teaching hospital in Kolkata.

The parents of the victim were initially told “by hospital authorities that their daughter had committed suicide,” lawyer and women’s rights activist Vrinda Grover told Al Jazeera. But an autopsy confirmed that the victim was raped and killed.

Grover has appeared for victims in sexual violence cases in India in the past, including Bilkis Bano , a Muslim woman who was gang-raped during the 2002 Gujarat riots, and Soni Sori, a tribal activist based in Chhattisgarh state.

Thousands of doctors marched in Kolkata on Monday, demanding better security measures and justice for the victim.

On Tuesday, the Kolkata High Court transferred the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

The Federation of Resident Doctors Association (FORDA) called for a nationwide halting of elective services in hospitals starting on Monday. Elective services are medical treatments that can be deferred or are not deemed medically necessary.

Doctors hold posters to protest the rape and murder of a young medic from Kolkata, at the Government General Hospital in Vijayawada on August 14

On Tuesday, FORDA announced on its X account that it is calling off the strike after Health Minister Jagat Prakash Nadda accepted protest demands.

One of these demands was solidifying the Central Protection Act, intended to be a central law to protect medical professionals from violence, which was proposed in the parliament’s lower house in 2022, but has not yet been enacted.

FORDA said that the ministry would begin working on the Act within 15 days of the news release, and that a written statement from the ministry was expected to be released soon.

Press release regarding call off of strike. In our fight for the sad incident at R G Kar, the demands raised by us have been met in full by the @OfficeofJPNadda , with concrete steps in place, and not just verbal assurances. Central Healthcare Protection Act ratification… pic.twitter.com/OXdSZgM1Jc — FORDA INDIA (@FordaIndia) August 13, 2024

Why are some Indian doctors continuing to protest?

However, other doctors’ federations and hospitals have said they will not back down on the strike until a concrete solution is found, including a central law to curb attacks on doctors.

Those continuing to strike included the Federation of All India Medical Associations (FAIMA), Delhi-based All India Institute Of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) and Indira Gandhi Hospital, local media reported.

Ragunandan Dixit, the general secretary of the AIIMS Resident Doctors’ Association, said that the indefinite strike will continue until their demands are met, including a written guarantee of the implementation of the Central Protection Act.

Medical professionals in India want a central law that makes violence against doctors a non-bailable, punishable offence, in hopes that it deters such violent crimes against doctors in the future.

Those continuing to protest also call for the dismissal of the principal of the college, who was transferred. “We’re demanding his termination, not just transfer,” Dr Abdul Waqim Khan, a protesting doctor told ANI news agency. “We’re also demanding a death penalty for the criminal,” he added.

“Calling off the strike now would mean that female resident doctors might never receive justice,” Dr Dhruv Chauhan, member of the National Council of the Indian Medical Association’s Junior Doctors’ Network told local news agency Press Trust of India (PTI).

Which states in India saw doctors’ protests?

While the protests started in West Bengal’s Kolkata on Monday, they spread across the country on Tuesday.

The capital New Delhi, union territory Chandigarh, Uttar Pradesh capital Lucknow and city Prayagraj, Bihar capital Patna and southern state Goa also saw doctors’ protests.

Interactive_India_doctor_rape_protests_August14_2024

Who is the suspect in the Kolkata rape case?

Local media reported that the police arrested suspect Sanjoy Roy, a civic volunteer who would visit the hospital often. He has unrestricted access to the ward and the police found compelling evidence against him.

The parents of the victim told the court that they suspect that it was a case of gang rape, local media reported.

Why is sexual violence on the rise in India?

Sexual violence is rampant in India, where 90 rapes were reported on average every day in 2022.

Laws against sexual violence were made stricter following a rape case in 2012, when a 22-year-old physiotherapy intern was brutally gang-raped and murdered on a bus in Delhi. Four men were hanged for the gang rape, which had triggered a nationwide protests.

But despite new laws in place, “the graph of sexual violence in India continues to spiral unabated,” said Grover.

She added that in her experience at most workplaces, scant attention is paid to diligent and rigorous enforcement of the laws.

“It is regrettable that government and institutions respond only after the woman has already suffered sexual assault and often succumbed to death in the incident,” she added, saying preventive measures are not taken.

In many rape cases in India, perpetrators have not been held accountable. In 2002, Bano was raped by 11 men, who were sentenced to life imprisonment. In 2022, the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi authorised the release of the men, who were greeted with applause and garlands upon their release.

However, their remission was overruled and the Supreme Court sent the rapists back to jail after public outcry.

Grover believes that the death penalty will not deter rapists until India addresses the deeply entrenched problem of sexual violence. “For any change, India as a society will have to confront and challenge, patriarchy, discrimination and inequality that is embedded in our homes, families, cultural practices, social norms and religious traditions”.

What makes this case particularly prominent is that it happened in Kolkata, Sandip Roy, a freelance contributor to NPR, told Al Jazeera. “Kolkata actually prided itself for a long time on being really low in the case of violence against women and being relatively safe for women.”

A National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) report said that Kolkata had the lowest number of rape cases in 2021 among 19 metropolitan cities, with 11 cases in the whole year. In comparison, New Delhi was reported to have recorded 1, 226 cases that year.

Prime Minister Modi’s governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has called for dismissing the government in West Bengal, where Kolkata is located, led by Mamata Banerjee of All India Trinamool Congress (AITC). Banerjee’s party is part of the opposition alliance.

Rahul Gandhi, the leader of the opposition in parliament, also called for justice for the victim.

“The attempt to save the accused instead of providing justice to the victim raises serious questions on the hospital and the local administration,” he posted on X on Wednesday.

Roy spoke about the politicisation of the case since an opposition party governs West Bengal. “The local government’s opposition will try to make this an issue of women’s safety in the state,” he said.

Have doctors in India protested before?

Roy explained to Al Jazeera that this case is an overlap of two kinds of violence, the violence against a woman, as well as violence against “an overworked medical professional”.

Doctors in India do not have sufficient workplace security, and attacks on doctors have started protests in India before.

In 2019, two junior doctors were physically assaulted in Kolkata’s Nil Ratan Sircar Medical College and Hospital (NRSMCH) by a mob of people after a 75-year-old patient passed away in the hospital.

Those attacks set off doctors’ protests in Kolkata, and senior doctors in West Bengal offered to resign from their positions to express solidarity with the junior doctors who were attacked.

More than 75 percent of Indian doctors have faced some form of violence, according to a survey by the Indian Medical Association in 2015.

What happens next?

The case will now be handled by the CBI, which sent a team to the hospital premises to inspect the crime scene on Wednesday morning, local media reported.

According to Indian law, the investigation into a case of rape or gang rape is to be completed within two months from the date of lodging of the First Information Report (police complaint), according to Grover, the lawyer.

The highest court in West Bengal, which transferred the case from the local police to the CBI on Tuesday, has directed the central investigating agency to file periodic status reports regarding the progress of the investigation.

The FIR was filed on August 9, which means the investigation is expected to be completed by October 9.

Bengal women will create history with a night long protest in various major locations in the state for at 11.55pm on 14th of August’24,the night that’ll mark our 78th year as an independent country. The campaign, 'Women, Reclaim the Night: The Night is Ours', is aimed at seeking… pic.twitter.com/Si9fd6YGNb — purpleready (@epicnephrin_e) August 13, 2024

X's handling of UK riots could influence EU probe

Medium Text

Anti-immigration protests continue to take place around the UK

Reporting by Martin Coulter; Editing by Kirsten Donovan

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Undated picture shows Jack Douglas Teixeira who was arrested by the FBI, over the leaks online of classified documents

Court blocks key part of California law on children's online safety

A U.S. appeals court on Friday left intact a key part of an injunction blocking a California law meant to shield children from online content that could harm them mentally or physically.

Supported by

Britain’s Violent Riots: What We Know

Officials had braced for more unrest on Wednesday, but the night’s anti-immigration protests were smaller, with counterprotesters dominating the streets instead.

Share full article

A handful of protesters, two in masks, face a group of riot police officers with shields. In the background are a crowd, a fire and smoke in the air.

By Lynsey Chutel

After days of violent rioting set off by disinformation around a deadly stabbing rampage, the authorities in Britain had been bracing for more unrest on Wednesday. But by nightfall, large-scale anti-immigration demonstrations had not materialized, and only a few arrests had been made nationwide.

Instead, streets in cities across the country were filled with thousands of antiracism protesters, including in Liverpool, where by late evening, the counterdemonstration had taken on an almost celebratory tone.

Over the weekend, the anti-immigration protests, organized by far-right groups, had devolved into violence in more than a dozen towns and cities. And with messages on social media calling for wider protests and counterprotests on Wednesday, the British authorities were on high alert.

With tensions running high, Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s cabinet held emergency meetings to discuss what has become the first crisis of his recently elected government. Some 6,000 specialist public-order police officers were mobilized nationwide to respond to any disorder, and the authorities in several cities and towns stepped up patrols.

Wednesday was not trouble-free, however.

In Bristol, the police said there was one arrest after a brick was thrown at a police vehicle and a bottle was thrown. In the southern city of Portsmouth, police officers dispersed a small group of anti-immigration protesters who had blocked a roadway. And in Belfast, Northern Ireland, where there have been at least four nights of unrest, disorder continued, and the police service said it would bring in additional officers.

But overall, many expressed relief that the fears of wide-scale violence had not been realized.

Here’s what we know about the turmoil in Britain.

Where arrests have been reported

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

Want all of The Times? Subscribe .

IMAGES

⇉The Effects of Mass Media on Violence Essay Example
≫ Negative Effect of Media Violence Free Essay Sample on Samploon.com
Media Violence and Its Impact on Behavior Free Essay Example
The Impact of Media Violence on Adolescent Behavior: [Essay Example
(PDF) THE INFLUENCE OF MEDIA VIOLENCE ON YOUTH
The History of Media Violence (400 Words)

COMMENTS

(PDF) The Influence of Media Violence on Youth
the short term, exposure to media violence causes increases in. children's, adolescents', and young adults' physically and ver-. bally aggressive behavior, as well as in aggression-related ...
Violence, Media Effects, and Criminology
There have been over 1000 studies on the effects of TV and film violence over the past 40 years. Research on the influence of TV violence on aggression has consistently shown that TV violence increases aggression and social anxiety, cultivates a "mean view" of the world, and negatively impacts real-world behavior. (Helfgott, 2015, p.
Essay on Media and Violence
Published: 2021/11/16. Number of words: 1311. Introduction. Research studies indicate that media causes violence and plays a role in desensitization, aggressive behavior, fear of harm, and nightmares. Examples of media platforms include movies, video games, television, and music. Violence in media has also been associated with health concerns.
Violence in The Media: Understanding Its Impact and Influence
Violence in the media has been a subject of concern and debate for decades. With the proliferation of television, movies, video games, and digital media, the portrayal of violence has become increasingly prevalent in our daily lives.This essay explores the phenomenon of violence in the media, delving into its impact on individuals, society, and the ongoing discussion surrounding its influence.
The Effects of Media Violence on People Argumentative Essay
Get a custom essay on The Effects of Media Violence on People. On the contrary, there is substantial evidence that violent, belligerent, and emotionally delinquent environments lead to aggressive behavior more than watching violent films does. This may be a contentious issue with numerous people linking violent media to aggressive behavior.
The Impact of Electronic Media Violence: Scientific Theory and Research
Secondly, the effect size of media violence is the same or larger than the effect size of many other recognized threats to public health. In Figure 1 from Bushman and Huesmann , the effect sizes for many common threats to public health are compared with the effect that media violence has on aggression. The only effect slightly larger than the ...
PDF Is the Influence of Media Violence Exposure on Adolescent
Media violence is typically defined as visual. portrayals of acts of aggression by a human or human-like character against another. (Huesmann, 2007), with the intent of causing physical or emotional pain (Berkowitz, 1993). While a large body of research has identified a positive association between media.
Media violence and youth aggression
An emerging field of media violence research is youth communication on social media, where real-world trauma often plays out online and online aggression can trigger real-world violence, noted Desmond Patton (Columbia University, New York, NY, USA). "Social media is creating a space for young people to cope with, process, and respond to their ...
The Influence of Media Violence on Youth
Other studies have focused on the influence of media violence on aggressive emotions—that is, on emotional reactions, such as anger, that are related to aggressive behavior. It is important to keep these three types of outcome variables (behavior, thoughts, emotions) separate, and to reserve the labels "aggression" and "violence" for ...
Violent Media in Childhood and Seriously Violent Behavior in
Youth violence is a significant public health issue that negatively affects individuals, families, and communities. 1,2 Estimated costs associated with youth violence in the United States is more than $20 billion anually. 3 Although juvenile arrests in 2019 were down 58% since 2010, 4 youth nonetheless account for a sizable proportion of perpetrators: 9% of all violent crimes were committed by ...
2023 A Systematic Review and Analysis on the Influence of Media on Violence
a andviolence, each crim. could have been committed for different reasons. It is important to betterunderstand the underlying factors that ultimat. ly resulted in each of these incidents to prevent future violent off. nding. If media exposure is a key contributing factor to violent acts, thenlimit.
The influence of violent media on children and adolescents: a public
Google Scholar. The aim of this review is to consider research evidence on the effects of violent media on children and adolescents from a public-health perspective. WHO has emphasised the necessity of adopting a public-health approach to the prevention of violence and the reduction of mortality and morbidity in societies. 17.
The Impact of Media Violence on Child and Adolescent Aggression
As a result, children and adolescents frequently encounter violence in the media. in a variety of forms, which has an effect on their behavior. Previous research has found that. exposure to media ...
Violent media use and aggression: Two longitudinal network studies
Violent media and aggression. In 2015, the American Psychological Association published a press release stating that playing violent video games is linked to aggression (APA, Citation 2015).This decision proved controversial, as some believe that there is no link between violent media and aggression (Ferguson et al., Citation 2020).In particular, it has been argued that experimental studies of ...
Essay on Media Influence On Violence
500 Words Essay on Media Influence On Violence Introduction to Media and Violence. When we turn on the TV, browse the internet, or play video games, we often see scenes of fighting, shooting, and other kinds of harm. This is called violence, and it's a common sight in many forms of media. Media includes things like television shows, movies ...
The long-term effect of media violence exposure on aggression of
In Study 1, we found that long-term exposure to violent media increased the level of proactive aggression in both irritation situations and reactive aggression in low-irritation situation. Based on these results, Study 2 explored the causes of aggressive behavior in media violence from the perspective of anger.
The Influence of Media Violence on Youth
Furthermore, many children and youth spend an inordinate amount of time consuming violent media. Although it is clear that reducing exposure to media violence will reduce aggression and violence, it is less clear what sorts of interventions will produce a reduction in exposure. The sparse research literature suggests that counterattitudinal and ...
The Role of Media Violence in Violent Behavior
Abstract Media violence poses a threat to public health inasmuch as it leads to an increase in real-world violence and aggression. Research shows that fictional television and film violence contribute to both a short-term and a long-term increase in aggression and violence in young viewers. Television news violence also contributes to increased violence, principally in the form of imitative ...
Violence in the Media: What Effects on Behavior?
In a 2009 Policy Statement on Media Violence, the American Academy of Pediatrics said, "Extensive research evidence indicates that media violence can contribute to aggressive behavior, desensitization to violence, nightmares, and fear of being harmed." 3. This year, the Media Violence Commission of the International Society for Research on ...
(PDF) Violent Media Effects: Theory and Evidence
The influence of media violence on youth. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4, 81 ... Media violence poses a threat to public health inasmuch as it leads to an increase in real-world ...
Violence in the media: Psychologists study potential harmful effects
The advent of video games raised new questions about the potential impact of media violence, since the video game player is an active participant rather than merely a viewer. 97% of adolescents age 12-17 play video games—on a computer, on consoles such as the Wii, Playstation, and Xbox, or on portable devices such as Gameboys, smartphones, and tablets.
The Facts on Media Violence
The Facts on Media Violence. In the wake of the Florida school shooting, politicians have raised concern over the influence of violent video games and films on young people, with the president ...
The Influence Of Media Violence On The Youth Media Essay
The Influence Of Media Violence On The Youth Media Essay. Aggression in the media has been under a lot of scrutiny in recent times. It has resurfaced as the pinnacle of countless debates among politicians, parents and educators despite the fact that it is a current trend. The youth are increasingly becoming more hostile.
Examining the Influence of Generalized Trust on Life Satisfaction
On the other hand, under the influence of distrust, related information carrying similar values will likely be rejected quickly. In a high-violence social environment (treated as an infosphere), a high level of generalized trust means that one is more open and susceptible to information coming from other people in society, including strangers.
What happened in the Kolkata rape case that triggered doctors' protests
Laws against sexual violence were made stricter following a rape case in 2012, when a 22-year-old physiotherapy intern was brutally gang-raped and murdered on a bus in Delhi.
PDF THE INFLUENCE OF MEDIA VIOLENCE ON YOUTH
For more than five decades, Americans have been concerned about the frequent depiction of violence in the mass media and. Address correspondence to Craig A. Anderson, Department of Psychology, W112 Lagomarcino Hall, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-3180; e-mail: [email protected].
The Impact of Media Violence Essays
The Impact of Media Violence Essays. Decent Essays. 1146 Words. 5 Pages. Open Document. Media Violence and its negative impact has been discussed and debated for many years As children grow into teens they encounter as vast amount of violence in the media, negatively impacting today's youth. Teenagers who are exposed to media violence will ...
X's handling of UK riots could influence EU probe
An ongoing European Commission investigation into social media platform X could take its handling of harmful content related to the recent UK riots into account, a spokesperson said.
Riots Break Out Across UK: What to Know
Britain adopted a law last year that requires social media companies to introduce protections for child safety and to prevent and quickly remove illegal content like terrorism propaganda and ...
Media Violence Essay
Media violence is believed to be causing aggression in today's youth and society. This paper will examine the potential reasons on how media violence is causing aggression Review of Literature In a study conducted, media psychologists, mass communication scientists, pediatricians, and parents all completed an anonymous online survey that ...