Media Violence and Violent Behavior

Media Violence and Violent Behavior

The notion that violent media -- especially violent film, television, and video games -- plays a role in contributing to violent and criminal behavior in children and youths of all ages is an idea that has long been a topic of controversial discourse. Is there a link between media violence and violent or criminal behavior? Huesemann and Moise (1996), authors of "Media violence: Demonstrated public health threat to children," posit that there is absolutely a direct correlation between violent media exposure and violent and/or criminal behavior in children and youths. They make a strong case for their position by using examples from over 100 studies that have taken place over the last 40 years -- all around the globe. America has been devastated by a handful of violently fatal school shootings: kids killing kids with guns and kids killing teachers with guns. Many Americans simply throw their hands up in the air and blame it on the changing times. But have kids changed -- or have we changed our kids with the advent of horrifically violent media in the forms of TV, film, video games and music? While these shootings are utterly deplorable, Anderson, Gentile and Buckley (2007) state that the one and only positive outcome of the horrifying epidemic of schools shootings by youths with a history of playing violent video games is the public attention the topic has received. In 2002, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation included "fascination with violence-filled entertainment" as one of the warning signs characteristic of school shooters" (O'Toole, 2000). In direct reference to video games, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation's report stated that the high-risk child or youth spends inordinate amounts of time playing video games with violent themes, and seems more interested in the violent images than in the game itself. On the Internet, the student regularly searches for Web sites involving violence, weapons, and other disturbing subjects" (O'Toole, 2000).

The research that is out there on the correlation between violent video games and violent behavior does reveal -- nearly unequivocally -- that media violence increases the likelihood of aggressive and violent behavior in both immediate and long-term contexts (Anderson, Gentile & Buckley, 2003). The effects have been seen as larger for milder rather than severe forms of violence or aggression, but Anderson et al. (2003) notes that the effects for severe forms of aggression and/or violence are still very significant when compared with effects of other violence risk factors or medical effects seen as important by the medical population (for example, the effects of aspirin on heart attacks) (2003).

Short-term exposure to violent media increases the likelihood of physically and verbally aggressive behavior, aggressive thoughts, and aggressive emotions. Anderson et al. (2003) reveals that large-scale longitudinal studies offer converging evidence linking frequent exposure to violent media in childhood with aggression later on in life -- including physical assaults and spousal abuse. Extremely violent criminal behaviors -- such as rape, murder and aggravated assault -- are considered not very common, so longitudinal studies with bigger samples are needed in order to approximate correctly how much customary childhood exposure to media violence increases the risk for extreme violence.

Frequent associations with violent crimes do not -- in themselves -- constitute a strong scientific evidence that exposure to violent video games is a contributing causal factor in violent behavior; however, the scientific debate about whether exposure to media violence causes increases in aggressive behavior is over and should have been over 30 years ago (Anderson et al. 2007).

This study will attempt to show the direct and immediate correlation between media violence and aggressive behavior. The hope of this study is to see the immediate reaction that children and older youths have to a limited exposure of violent media. Through the use of what is considered "violent" media (films and video games), which can be purchased in stores for certain age groups, the children and youths in this study will be exposed to violent media and then examined afterward while each are interacting with another child or youth. Because much research has been done on the effects of habitual exposure to media violence (the Columbine School shooters had a history of spending inordinate amounts of time playing violent video games), the study would like to inform us as to the immediate results of violent media exposure in a random sampling of children and youths.

Problem statement.

This research paper will investigate the immediate effects of violent media on children and youths ages 6 through 17-years of age.

Purpose and objectives of the study.

The purpose of this study is to show how children and older youths are negatively affected by the watching of violent media and/or participating in violent video games as well as how violent media may "desensitize" them so that they are more likely to act aggressively to others.

In recent years, American society has been plagued by various troubling events related to children and youth violence -- such as the Columbine High School massacre in Littleton, Colorado, in the spring of 1999. Many Americans were confounded by the reality that two teenagers were able to murder their peers and teachers in cold blood -- and then turn the guns on themselves. In a furious quest for answers, commentators were led to the explosion of media violence portrayed in films, television and video games. In order to find a rationale as to why two American youths would pursue violence as opposed to more conventional pursuits of youths that age, critics of media violence pointed their fingers at the pervasiveness of graphic imagery in every medium aforementioned (and including music).

While many of the studies related to media violence and violent behavior has focused on long-term effects, there is reason to believe that even minimal exposure can trigger aggressive behavior in children and youths on a variety of levels as the violent images and sounds work to "desensitize conscious and concern" causing indifference for human well-being and life (Anderson, Berkowitz, Donnerstein, Huesmann, & Johnson, 2003).

The immediate effects of children's exposure to violent media is being examined because of the lack of research in this area. We now know that the killers of the Columbine massacre enjoying playing violent video games and that their participation in violent video games went on for some time, which has been linked to their violent behavior. We do not know exactly how influential minimal exposure to violent media can affect a child or youth's immediate behavior or thoughts.

It is hoped that this study will offer some valid evidence that will contribute towards a better understanding of how violent media can -- even very minimal exposure -- can lead to desensitization in children and youths, causing them to act aggressively toward others.

Rationale of the study.

Social learning theorists have given an abundance of experimental evidence to support the notion that exposure to media violence can significantly influence the behavior of young people. A social learning perspective is the most rationale means of understanding the link between violent media and violent behavior. According to social learning theorists, people acquire new responses by imitating the behavior of another individual. Huesmann and Moise (1997) contend that there is a definite and clear link between violence and children's watching of media violence. They specify five well-validated theoretical explanations for the association: (1) children imitate what they see others do; (2) media violence encourages and stimulates aggression by "desensitizing" children; (3) children view violent media portrayals in an attempt to rationalize their own aggression; (4) the observation of aggression results in cognitive priming, or the activation of existing aggressive thoughts; and, (5) children become physiologically stimulated in reaction to watching violence (1997).

Definition of terms.

Social Learning Theory: The social learning theory suggests that through the process of modeling and imitative learning, individuals and their behavior can be influenced by violence witnessed on the television or film screen.

Desensitization: The process of reducing sensitivity.

Limitations of the study.

Methods of data collection included video-taped interactions between the sample of children and older youths after they had each been exposed to 30 minutes of violent media either in the form of film viewing or participating in a violent video game. The choice of what type of media was decided based on the age of the child and youth. Because the media type chosen by researchers was based on what is age-appropriate (based on manufacturer's listing), some games may be more violent than others. However, this method of choosing games was chosen because it is most likely what parents look at when they buy their children games or movies to play or watch. This can be considered a limitation as there was not the means -- time or money -- to research all of the video games that are out there for children to play -- or movies to watch. The research simply has to be based, therefore, on the notion that parents often don't research games but rather trust that the manufacturers will list the age appropriateness correctly.

Because there was not the time or means to get a very diverse population of individuals, there may be some limitations when it comes to social class as well as previous levels of aggression in the children and youths. There are only two girls compared with the eight boys. This may be considered a limitation as well, but more parents of boys answered the ad and this may be because the parents are already aware that their boys are participating in violent video games or watching violent movies. In general, it could be assumed that boys have a tendency to be drawn toward violent media -- much more so than girls. But again, this may be considered a limitation.

Another limitation was that there were not means to hire a doctor to take heartbeat or pulses before the children went in to watch the violent media and after they had watched the violent media. This would have given more insight into exactly what is happening to the child physiologically speaking. However, it must be noted that this isn't a major part of the research. What the researcher wanted to reveal is whether or not the children and youths reacted aggressively (or in other negative ways) immediately after watching the violent media.

Theoretical Framework.

Minimal exposure to media violence (even small increments as little as 30 minutes) leads to immediate desensitization, which subsequently causes aggressive behavior in children and youths. Aggressive behavior may result, as may fear, suspicion, frustration and/or anger.

Research hypotheses.

The playing of violent video games or watching violent movies increases the propensity for violent behavior in children and older youths. Film, television and video games desensitize aggressive and/or violent acts. (Thus it can be surmised that this may lead to criminal behavior.) It can be suggested that violent video games and media affect the overall crime rate if, indeed, children and youths are negatively affected by violent media, causing them to become violent and aggressive. It may also be hypothesized that children and youth who already have an "aggressive nature" may feed that aggressiveness, creating even more aggression and violence in a child or youth.

Chapter II:

Literature Review.

Cline, Croft and Courrier (1973) researched the desensitization of children to violence in television and film over 30 years ago. Measures of autonomic response (skin conductance and blood volume pulse amplitude) were taken prior to and during their exposure to a violent film (which this research did not do). The high-television-exposure subjects were found to be dramatically less aroused autonomically speaking, which suggested a limited but still definite and measurable desensitization to violence in film and television. Since the subjects did not have any exposure to the particular film beforehand, the results of the research study suggested the possibility of a generalizing effect for the desensitization that occurred (1973). The researchers posit that if one were to combine the effects of desensitization, which can potentially reduce the effects of conscious, with the effects of modeling, which provides (through our media entertainments) the explicit cognitive formulations and mechanics for committing violence, it may not be very surprising then to see that there is not only a dramatic increase in acts of personal aggression in our society, but also a growing attitude of indifference and unconcern for the victims by the aggressor (1973).

While Cline et al. (1973) found there to be a definite link between media violence and desensitization over 30 years ago, Huesmann and Moise (1997) go on to add to that research by stating that children and youths who watch media violence on a very consistent basis, behave more aggressively and accept aggression more readily as a way to solve their everyday problems.

Huesmann and Moise (1997) posit that violence stimulates aggression by desensitizing children to the effects of violence -- just as Cline et al. found in 1973. The basic assumptions is that the more violence a child or youth is exposed to, the more acceptable aggressive behavior becomes for that child or youth (1997). Additionally, children and youths who view violent media or participate in violent media (e.g. video games) become suspicious of others and expect others to act in aggressive and/or violent ways -- "an attributional bias that promotes aggressive behavior" (1997). (This will be exemplified in this research study as well as many of the children and youths appeared anxious and suspicious after watching or participating in violent media).

Huesmann and Moise (1997) also suggest that justification is a process by which media violence stimulates aggression. "A child who has behaved aggressively watches violent television shows to relieve guilt and justify the aggression. The child then feels less inhibited about aggressing pain" (1997).

Another process Huesmann and Moise (1997) discuss is cognitive priming or "cueing": the activation of existing aggressive thoughts, feelings and behavior. This might explain why children and youths watch one kind of aggressive behavior in a form of violent media and then commit another kind of aggressive act afterward. "Even an innocuous object that has been associated with aggression may later stimulate violence," according to Huesmann and Moise (1997). This could be exemplified in certain types of hate crimes, for example. Violence takes place when aggression cues another part of the mind that doesn't like something or somebody. This could be considered a "cue."

Finally, the last process Huesmann and Moise (1997) discuss is the numbing effect of media violence. They states that boys who are habitual television watchers exhibit lower than average physiological arousal in response to new scenes of violence" (1997). The arousal stimulated by watching violence is not pleasing at first, but children and youths who habitually watch violent media become "habituated," and their emotional and physiological responses decrease (1997). This is exactly what is meant by the word "desensitization" when it comes to media violence. After viewing violence over and over again, the violence loses its power.

Another aspect to consider when it comes to understanding the impacts of media violence is reinforcement. Social learning theorist Albert Bandura proposed that people receive vicarious reinforcement when they identify with a person whom they observe being reinforced. Therefore, if a boy watches a violent guy in a movie get attention and praise from other individuals, he may be encouraged to participate in similar behaviors on the argument that such adulation will also be given to him.

Bandura conducted some of the earliest research on television violence in the 1960s in a series of classic experiments. Bandura observed the behavior of nursery-school children in a playroom that was filled with toys -- among them a Bobo doll (a punching bag with a sand-filled base and a red nose that squeaked). The purpose of the experiments was to investigate the conditions under which children would learn and model new aggressive behaviors. To test modeling (or imitation), children usually watched the following filmed sequence on a television before they were allowed to participate in play time.

The film began with a scene in which [an adult male] model walked up to an adult-size Bobo doll and ordered him to clear the way. After glaring for a moment at the noncompliant antagonist the model exhibited four novel aggressive responses, each accompanied by a distinctive verbalization. First, the model laid the Bobo doll on its side, sat on it, and punched it in the nose while remarking, "Pow, right in the nose, boom, boom." The model then raised the doll and pummeled it on the head with a mallet. Each response was accompanied by the verbalization, "Sockeroo…stay down." Following the mallet aggression, the model kicked the doll about the room and these responses were interspersed with the comment, "Fly away." Finally, the model threw rubber balls at the Bobo doll, each strike punctuated with "Bang." This sequence of physically and verbally aggressive behavior was repeated twice (Bandura, 1965).

Bandura (1965) varied the endings to this film across different experiments. In one study, for example, children were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (a) a model-rewarded condition, in which the model was called a "champion" and was treated with a drink they wanted and various types of sweets, (b) a model-punished condition in which the model was harshly scolded and called a "bully," or (c) a neutral condition in which the model received no rewards or penalties for his behavior. After, each child was led into the playroom where a plastic Bobo doll, three balls, a mallet, a dollhouse, and various other toys were spread out. The results showed that children in the model-rewarded and neutral groups displayed dramatically more imitative aggression than did children in the model-punished group. The fact that the no-consequences condition resulted in just as much aggression as the model-rewarded condition implies that so long as no penalties happen, children are very likely to imitate a model's behavior (Gentile 2003).

Anderson et al. (2003) state that the research that has been done on violent media reveals that media violence increases the chances of aggressive and violent behavior in both immediate and long-term contexts. Short-term exposure increases the likelihood of physically and verbally aggressive behavior, aggressive thoughts, and aggressive emotions (2003). Well-supported theory is able to describe 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 (2003). The researchers also posit that media violence creates long-term effects via different and many forms 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 decreasing the individuals' normal negative emotional responses to violence (i.e. desensitization)" (2003).

Anderson et al. (2003) note that though the debate is over as to whether or not media violence increases aggressive and violent behavior in children and youths, there are still certain tasks that must be performed. Laboratory and field studies are required, according to the researchers, in order to get a better understanding of underlying psychological processes, which can then lead to better or more productive interventions (2003).

Looking at the issue from a different perspective, Freedman (1992) states that if one were to look at Japanese television and the fact that it has some of the most violent imagery in the world, and yet, Japan has a much lower murder rate than other countries, including Canada and the United States, one would see that that there cannot be a correlation between media violence and aggressive and/or violent behavior. But all of this is in direct opposition where facts like the murder rate increase in North America after televisions began to pervade homes is present.

University of Wisconsin Professor Brandon Centerwall tested his hypothesis about television and their emergence in North American homes by examining murder rates in South Africa -- where, before 1975, the government banned television. He found that twelve years after the ban was lifted, murder rates skyrocketed (Stossel, 1997).

Founder of the Cultural Indicators project over 30 years ago estimated that the average American child will have watched 8,000 murders on television by the time they are twelve-years-old (Stossel, 1997). Stossel (1997) goes on to expound on the case of Ronny Zamora, a fifteen-year-old who shot and killed his 82-year-old next door neighbor in 1977. His lawyer pleaded "not guilty" -- reasoning that the teenager had watched too much television. His lawyer Ellis Rubin stated in court that because of his habitual watching of television the teenager had become "dangerously inured to violence" (1997). She called Ronny's condition "television intoxication," stating that he could no longer tell the difference between what was good and what was bad (or, wrong or right). She said, "If you judge Ronny Zamora guilty, television will be an accessory" (1997). Ronny was convicted of first-degree murder.

Stossel (1997) says that although there aren't many anti-television activists out there who would agree that television can exculpate a murderer, there is a ton of evidence (3,000 studies before the year 1971) that strongly links television watching and aggressive behavior (1997).

One example is a 1956 study that compared the behavior of twelve-four-year-olds who watched "Woody Woodpecker" with several violent episodes to twelve-four-year-olds who watched "The Little Red Hen." The children who watched "Woody Woodpecker" were significantly more likely to engage in aggressive behavior, which consisted of hitting others, breaking toys and, in general, being aggressive and destructive during playtime (Stossel, 1997).

Another example is a study by Leonard Eron in 1960. Eron, a professor of psychology at the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research, researched third-graders in a Columbia County -- a somewhat rural area of New York. He observed that the more violent TV a group of eight-year-olds watched while they were at home, the more aggressive they behaved while they were in school. When Eron went back to Columbia County in 1971, the children were now 19-years-old. The boys who had watched the most violent television when they were just eight-years-old, the more likely they were to get into legal trouble when they were older. When Eron returned a third time in 1982, the group was now thirty. Those children who watched the most violent television when they were eight-years-old were more aggressive with their children and their punishments, they were convicted of more serious crimes, and they reported to be more aggressive by their wives than the eight-year-olds who did not watch violent television (Stossel, 1997). "In 1993, at a conference of the National Council for Families & Television, Eron estimated that 10% of the violence in the United States can be attributed to television" (1997).

In 1998, Professors Singer, Slovak, Frierson and York (1998) surveyed 2,000 Ohio students in grades three through eight. They report that the incidences of psychological trauma (including anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress) increased in proportion to the number of hours of television watched each day.

In the research of the prevalence of violence on television, the National Television Violence Study was the biggest study up to the year 2003. The study analyzed programming over three consecutive television seasons from the years 1994 until 1997. Among the findings (The Henry J. Kaiser Foundation, 2003):

Almost 2 out of 3 TV programs contained some violence, averaging about 6 violent acts per hour (2003).

Fewer than 5% of these programs featured an anti-violence them or pro-social message emphasizing alternatives to or consequences of violence (2003).

Violence was found to be more prevalent in children's programming (69%) than in other types of programming (57%). In a typical hour of programming, children's shows featured more than twice as many incidents (14) than other types of programming (6) (2003).

The average child who watches 2 hours of cartoons a day might see almost 10,000 violent incidents each year, of which the researchers approximate that nearly 500 pose a high risk for learning and imitating violence and becoming desensitized to violence (2003).

The number of prime-time programs with violence increased over the three years of the study, from 53% to 67% on broadcast television and from 54% to 64% on basic cable. Premium cable networks have the highest percentage of shows with violence, averaging 92% since 1994 (Wilson, 2002).

Geen and Donnerstein (1998) suggests that people -- children and adults alike -- can become desensitized to anxiety-provoking situations created by violent media. It is also suggested that "self-awareness of reductions in anxiety and emotional arousal may be instrumental in the formation of other perceptions and attitudes about violence portrayed in the films which are then carried over to other contexts" (1998). This would show that by exposing a patient to a situation that the patient fears may dramatically reduce the anxiety or negative association that was once created by the situation (Foa & Kozak, 1986).

Geen and Donnerstein (1998) goes on to say that similar processes may operate when subjects are consistently exposed to media violence. "Once viewers are emotionally 'comfortable' with the violent content of films, they may also evaluate the film more favorably in other domains" (1998). That is to say that content that used to be considered degrading or offensive to the victims of violence may be viewed as less so with the continued exposure (1998).

Distinguishing characteristics of individuals who watch or participate in violent media (for example, the ability to identify with aggressive characters or situations, or the presence of existing aggressive thoughts and instincts), social environments (parental and peer influences, societal influences), and media content (attractiveness of the perpetrators, excitement related to the situations the media depicts) can influence (to a certain degree) which media violence affects aggression or violent behavior, but there are many inconsistencies in research results. Scientifically speaking, the debate over whether or not media violence negatively affects children is essentially over: watching violent media and playing violent video games does increase the propensity of violent behavior -- however, the psychological processes need much more research as this would help find more successful types of interventions. Anderson et al. (2003) suggests that larger-scale longitudinal studies would be beneficial in specifying the magnitude of media violence effects on the most severe forms of violence. Providing children and other youths with a healthier media diet would definitely be costly and a huge societal challenge, however, it is very unlikely that society would be able to tackle the problem on all fronts -- video games, television, films, Internet, news -- among others.

Children and youths spend vast quantities of time filling themselves to the limit with violent media. Huesmann and Moise (1996) state that many field surveys have shown that the burden of violent thoughts and behavior is more common among people who are exposed to violent media on a regular and habitual basis. There really isn't any logic to deny the notion that decreasing the exposure to media violence will reduce violent thoughts and actions -- but, what types of interventions will produce a decrease in exposure to violent media? Parental mediation interventions seem to be the most obvious way of getting beneficial effects and it is therefore assumed that media literacy interventions by themselves will probably not be very successful if there aren't parental interventions as well (Anderson et al., 2003).

Belson's (1978) article entitled "Television violence and the adolescent boy" was investigated for the purpose of examining the tenability of a number of hypotheses about the effects on male adolescents' long-term exposure to television violence. The investigation was performed in two stages: (1) a preparatory stage for the development of relevant hypotheses for the design of the strategy of investigation and for the construction of the necessary measuring techniques, and (2) an investigation in which the yield from the preparatory work was used in a study of 1,565 London boys varying in age from 12 to 17 years. The summary of findings stated that the evidence supported the hypothesis that high exposure to television violence increased the degree to which boys took part in serious violence.

In the article entitled, "Television and violence: The scale of the problem and where to go from here," Centerwall (1992) states that a 1990 American Academy of Pediatrics policy wrote that "Pediatricians should advise parents to limit their children's television viewing from 1 to 2 hours per day" (1992). Centerwall (1992) states that this is the best policy and in order to understand the impact that television has on children can only and be best understood within the context of normal child development. "Neonates" are apparently born with an "instinctive capacity and desire to imitate adult human behavior. That infants can, and do, imitate an array of adult facial expressions has been demonstrated in neonates as young as a few hours old" (1992) (i.e. before they are cognitively aware that they too themselves have facial features that correspond with those individuals whom they are observing (1992). Furthermore, even though infants have the instinctive desire and ability to imitate any observed behavior or expression, they do not have the ability to gauge whether or not a certain behavior or expression should be imitated (1992). Basically, they will imitate anything and everything.

Chapter III:

Methodology.

For this study, the population chosen consisted of 10 children and older youths consisting of eight boys and two girls. The ages of the eight boys are: 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, and 17 years of age. The two girls were ages 9 and 13. These ages were selected in order to represent young boys who may have had only limited exposure to violent media and boys who have had some or a lot -- depending on their experience. More girls would have been selected but there were not as many girls to choose from and the idea was to get a sample of differing ages and backgrounds.

To gain access to these children, an ad was placed for the study in a regional newspaper as a clinical study examining the short-term effects of media violence on children and youths. The children are all of different ages and backgrounds and do not go to the same school nor would they have likely met each other based on where they all lived.

Because the objective of this study is to watch and examine interactions between children and youths after watching violent images or playing violent video games, all of the study took place in a clinic that was central for all individuals coming to participate in the study. The children were paired together to play various games (based on their ages, all "non-violent games"). The non-violent games consisted of the game Memory for the 6-year-old and 8-year-old, Checkers for the two-9-year-olds, the 10-year-old, and the 11-year-old, 12-year-old, and 13-year-old; and Scrabble for the 14-year-old and 17-year-old.

Approximately 30 minutes after playing the non-violent games, the children and older youths were then separated from each other while they were exposed to the selected violent images either in the form of film or video games. The 6-year-old and 8-year-old were exposed to what is considered a "violent" animated cartoon (a la the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles); the two-9-year-olds, the 10-year-old and the 11-year-old watched a different "violent" cartoon in the style of Japanese anime, the 12-year-old and13-year-old watched a different Japanese cartoon -- also in the style of anime (though different from the previous and made for a bit older children) and the 14-year-old and 17-year-old played what was considered a "violent" video game where a gun is used to shoot your enemy. This game was rated for players 14 years of age and above (so it is also meant to be played by adults or -- at least- it is targeted from kids aged 14 and up to adulthood). All of the media depicted fighting, killing with guns, and explosions. The characters in the films -- as well as the bad guys in the video game -- all exhibited what can be considered "aggressive" behavior.

The selection process for these children depended largely on the parents and, after interviews -- consisting of approximately one hour -- with parents and the child, a decision was made as to which children would best represent a broad range of children and experiences. The selection process consisted of interviews where the parents and children were asked a series of open-ended questions about their exposure to all forms of media -- film, television, video games, etc., -- as well as what their likes and dislikes were when it came to watching television and film (what TV shows they enjoyed and what films they liked to watch, etc.). Parents were asked about rules and ways in which they tried to protect (if there was any protection) from violent media -- if indeed they were concerned about violent media and the short or long-term effects it can have on a child. (It can be assumed that there must be some concern since they answered the ads -- but there was also a stipend of $100 offered.)

The parent part of the interviewees were also asked about any present behavioral problems in the children, any trouble at school, any fighting with siblings, or any other type of behavior that was non-traditional with children. This was asked because there was worry that if the children already had behavioral problems, it would be difficult to determine the extent to which the media violence played a role. Therefore, a selection of children and youths who were considered to be "well-adjusted" -- though not considered "perfect" children were chosen.

Chapter IV:

Results.

The results of the experiment illustrated that after viewing violent media and then engaging in play with the other children and youths, all of the subjects exhibited behavior that was different from the behavior they exhibited before they had viewed the violent media. All of the children seemed to exhibit more anxiety as a general symptom, which was a commonality that was not expected. The younger children -- the 6-year-old and 8-year-old -- seemed especially affected by the violent imagery as their second round of non-violent play felt more tense, and the children were more hesitant about making decisions as well. They looked around the room a lot more than they did in the first non-violent round, which leads to the assumption that there were feeling more paranoid or worried -- or just "on edge" in general. Younger children may feel more fear when it comes to watching violent media as they are more insecure in the world and they may worry that they are vulnerable to becoming a victim of the same sort they are seeing in the violent media. While some of the older children showed outright aggressive behaviors, the younger children became more subdued although that paranoia may have easily turned into aggression if under the right conditions.

The two-9-year-olds also appeared to be more anxious in their non-violent game playing the second time around. This was a boy and girl paired up together, and the girl seemed to be much more subdued during the second game playing round than in the first round. Whether or not this had anything to do with sex is open for debate. Perhaps in the presence of a boy, the girl automatically felt more insecure. The boy, on the other hand, seemed very confident with his moves and he very abruptly told the girl a couple of times, "Go. It's your turn," becoming impatient when she didn't jump on her turn as soon as he was finished. The boy did not order these types of commands the first time around playing checkers -- nor did he seem to be edgy at all. On the contrary, the boy seemed to be very well-adjusted and relaxed while playing the game. The second time around he appeared to be extremely nervous and impatient. He seemed more anxious, confidant, impatient and more aggressive overall. He used shorter sentences and spoke them with a different tone of voice.

The 10-year-old played with the 9-year-old boy after his viewing of the violent media as there was the want of keeping certain age groups together and there was a mix-up with time scheduling and so there was some shuffling around. We also thought it would be interesting to see how the 9-year-old boy would react with the older boy after watching violent media (as opposed to a 9-year-old girl). The 9-year-old boy was much less impatient this time with the 10-year-old-boy (as we thought would happen because of intimidation and the mere fact that the other child was older). The 10-year-old questioned some of the 9-year-old's moves and he appeared to be very suspicious of the 9-year-old -- as if he was trying to watch him like a hawk to make sure he didn't cheat (this is just an assumption). This 10-year-old was one of the more verbal and extroverted children, so there is the possibility that he is more suspicious of people by nature (another assumption); however, he did not exhibit any of these behaviors in the non-violent game play the first round.

The 10-year-old was then paired with the 11-year-old after viewing the violent media. As happened with the previous grouping, the 11-year-old seemed to be the dominant one in the group -- although the 10-year-old still exhibited this suspicious behavior. The 11-year-old appeared very "antsy" as he was constantly touching the board and tapping his checkers from the ones he had "kinged" on the table. The 10-year-old copied this behavior at one point and then stopped, which brought up memories of Centerwall's work in 1992. While the older child may have been imitating a behavior or expression he had seen on TV, the younger child began to imitate the behavior of the older child. Centerwall said that neonates have the desire to imitate adult human behavior and there is the possibility that the younger child began to view the elder as an adult role model. These two seemed to feed other with anxious energy. The 11-year-old looked around the room quite a bit as if he was bored. At one point he stood up and walked around the table but sat back down when it was his turn.

The 12-year-old boy was paired with the 13-year-old girl after watching their violent media separately. The girl, not unlike the 9-year-old girl, was rather shy -- even though she was older. She was very focused on the game and rarely looked up the second time around -- perhaps from intimidation? She looked at her partner more the first time playing the non-violent game, but now she seemed to be avoiding him (which led us to believe that she was feeling less confident and insecure than the first time around. Did the violent media make her feel like a victim in the world?) The boy seemed bored and would make his moves on the board without giving it much thought at all. Whenever the girl eliminated one of his checkers, he would sigh very loudly and sometimes rub his face with frustration and look around the room with exasperation. He did not do this the first time around at all. At one point he asked the girl if he could do a move over after realizing that he was going to get "killed" again. The girl said 'no' and he seemed very frustrated by her response -- even angry perhaps. He started digging his tennis shoe heels into the floor underneath his seat and he then rubbed his face in frustration again. He then continued to play like he didn't care at all about the game -- with very little reverence, moving to places just so she could eliminate his checkers. It appeared that he wanted to show her that he didn't care. It seemed very passive-aggressive and edgy.

When the 14-year-old and 17-year-old sat down to play their non-violent game of Scrabble after playing the violent video game, the 17-year-old started grabbing letters from the bag immediately upon sitting. The 14-year-old informed him that they each should pick a letter to begin with and that decides who gets to pick their letters first -- as well as who goes first. The 17-year-old said he didn't care about those rules and that it wasn't a "real game" and then continued to take letters. The 14-year-old just shrugged it off and took his letters after the older boy was done. The older boy then changed one of his letters and when the younger boy saw this, he did the same. The older boy then lay down a four-letter word (A-T-A-M). The 14-year-old pointed out that atom is spelled with an o not an a, but the older boy said you could spell it that way too. He said he saw it in a science book recently and that he questioned it too, but then he looked it up. The 14-year-old seemed downright suspicious (as he should have been) and then he lay down his word. He spelled M-O-N-A-R-C-H -- using the older boys m. He used all but one letter. He counted his points and the older boy scribbled it down. The younger boy stood up a bit from his seat and looked at what the older boy wrote and said he wrote down the wrong number: it was 12 not 10 points.