Media influences on social behaviour

Explanations for media influences on pro-social and antisocial

behaviour:

Cognitive priming:
Watching pro-social acts may make the PPs more helpful e.g. Holloway et als
lab experiment Good News Studies = PPs from two conditions in two waiting
rooms = listened to radio.
Those in condition where good news were heard = more likely to be
cooperative when asked to participate in study involving bargaining with a
confederate.
Blackman and Hornstein carried out follow-up = additionally asked PPs to
rate their beliefs about human nature those who heard good news were
more likely to report that humans are good.
Evaluation: correlations =/= causation e.g. factors like temperament but
Holloways was reliable b/c it was replicated by Bla + Horn and thus supports
Hol.
Existent aggressive thoughts become activated when a viewer is primed to
respond aggressively due to network of memories involving aggression is
retrieved.
Josephson: hockey players were asked to play violent video games and
shown violent/nonviolent film of actor using walkie-talkies subsequent
hockey game, those who behaved aggressively were those who had seen
violent firm and referee was holding walkie-talkie so walkie-talkie was cue for
aggression.

Social Learning Theory:

Both pro/antisocial behaviour can be learnt through same mechanisms of
watching and imitating the actions of role models on TV.
The two mechanisms are learning via direct experience (operant conditioning)
and via vicarious reinforcement (observation + imitation of role-models).
Four stages of SLT: attention retention reproducing motivation.
Sprafkin et al: asked PPs to press button to save puppt or gain prize after 3
groups watched TV programme (condition 1: boy saves puppy, condition 2:
same but no help, condition 3: something else) = found that those in condt. 1
were more likely to save puppy
Bobo Doll Experiment: three groups of children aged three to six years old
had been assessed for aggressiveness and spread out between the groups.
Two groups saw adult models that were either aggressive or non-aggressive
towards a Bobo doll- those who were aggressive towards it sat on it, punched
it, hit it on the head with a mallet and threw it in addition to verbally abusing
it.
The third group acted as a control group.
After being frustrated to increase the chance of aggressive behaviour being
exhibited, all children were observed through a one-way mirror for twenty
minutes.
Children who were exposed to the aggressive model imitated their exact
behaviour and were significantly more aggressive- both physically and
verbally- than the control group. This effect was greater for boys than girls,
although girls showed more verbal aggression.
Easily replicated b/c its a lab experiment so has high levels of control but
Bobo doll is artificial stimuli so is contrived as adult would not abuse a Bobo

doll, which is undoubtedly different to abusing a human also experiment is

unethical as it put kids under distress.

Explanations for media influences on pro-social behaviour only:

Parental mediation Austin: effective mediation is parent discussing programme

with child and explaining ambigious/disturbing material + following up concepts
presented on TV Rice et al: parental mediation enhances learning effect of
Sesame Street Rosenkoetter: kids able to understand complex messages in
adult sitcoms thanks to parental mediation.
Valkenburg et al: only some forms of PM is effective e.g. co-viewing w/o
discussion is ineffective and only instructive mediation is an effective mediator
between kid and TV.

Developmental factors pro-social skills develop throughout childhood according

to Eisenberg so strong developmental difference in degree in which child of
different age are influenced by pro-social content so younger children may be less
affected than older kids.
Mares meta-analysis: weakest effect was on adolescents and strongest effect
was on primary school kids idea that media has effect on development of prosocial reasoning is stupid b/c theyre more likely to be affected by home
experiences.

Explanations for media influences on antisocial behaviour only:

Desensitisation violent media stimulates violent behaviour through

desensitisation ad the more violent TV is watched, the more acceptable the
behaviour becomes so makes them less anxious about violence.
Cumberbatch: argues that it does the opposite = frightens child not make them
more frightening.
Lowered physiological arousal Huessmann + Moise: boys who watch loads of
TV show slower than average physiological arousal in response to new scenes of
violence as they become used to it and their emotional and physiological
responses decline.
Zillmann: excitation-transfer model suggests that arousal creates readiness to
aggress if there are appropriate circumstances as watching TV enhances arousal
and thus more aggression.

Effects of computers and video games:

NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF VIDEO GAMES:

Gentile + Stone: lab experiment; found short-term increases in physiological
arousal + hostility + aggression after violent gameplay compared to nonviolent
gameplay.
Major weakness of lab experiment is that researchers are unable to measure
real-life aggression so use measures of aggression that have no relationship to
real-life aggression and only measures short-term effect.
Anderson et al: 430 7-9 year olds surveyed at two points during school year
those with high exposure to violent video games became more verbally +
physically aggressive and less pro-social.
PPs may have been exposed to other forms of media violence during course of
study.
Gentile + Anderson: meta-analysis found consistent link between violent
games and aggressive behaviour.

 Correlation doesnt mean causation even Gentile et al. proposed bidirectional model wherein despite the negative effects of video games, those
who have aggressive temperament are more likely to play violent video games
for recreational purposes.
NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF COMPUTER-USE (FACEBOOK):
Charles: focus group + interview techniques to investigate FB habits of 200
Scottish undergrads 12% experienced anxiety linked to FB and had more
friends on FB than others; reported stress from deleting unwanted contacts +
constant pressure to be entertaining + worrying about etiquette 32% felt
guilty when rejecting FB friends + 10% reported they dislike FB friend requests.
Greenfield: FB infantilises the brain by shortening attention span and providing
constant instant gratification.
DAmato: case study of asthmatic 18 year old who broke up with girlfriend
she un-friended him he changed FB name to befriend her again but his
asthma worsened after seeing her pics =FB could be significant source of
psychological stress and triggering factor.

POSITIVE EFFECTS OF VIDEO GAMES:

Greitemeyer + Osswald: those who played Lemmings were showed more
pro-social behaviour than those who played aggressive game Lamers or neutral
game Tetris after 8 minutes, PPs saw researcher drop pencils and 67% of
those playing Lemmings helped, whilst only 33% of those playing Tetris helped
and 28% of those playing Lamers.
Kahne et al: found majority of those playinh Sims said they learned about
issues in societ and explorted social issues.
Lenhart et al: large-scale US survey to investigate influence of multiplayer
games on social commitment and found 64% of those who played multiplayer
games like Halo/The Sims were committed to civic participation and 26% had
tried to persuade others how to vote in an election.
But issue of survey is that it lacks control for young peoples prior civic
commitments and pro-social activities and also unable to make causal claims
due to lack of random exposure to civic game opportunities (basically young ppl
choose these games rather than being randomly allocated).
Real-world application of Tetris on traumatic patients has reduced their memory
flashbacks (Holmes et al).
POSITIVE EFFECTS OF COMPUTERS (FACEBOOK):
Gonzales + Hancock: FB walls have +e impact on our self-esteem, as
feedback on them tends to be +e.
Cornell Uni: students were asked to either use their FB page, look at
themselves or do nothing; found that those who used FB page gave much more
+e feedback about themselves.
Supported by Walthers Hyperpersonal Model which claims that self-selection
of info we choose to present ourselves has +e impact on self-esteem.

Explaining the persuasive effects of media:

Hovland-Yale Model:

Cognitive model.

Attitudes change by looking at is as sequence: attention comprehension

reactance = attitude change .
Persuasion is dependent on the source (trustworthiness + attractiveness),
message (e.g. emotional appeal), medium (written vs. audio-visual) and target
audience.
Petty + Cacioppo suggest that the more attractive the communicator is, the
more likely the audience will be persuaded Baron + Byrne suggest thats why
ads have experts in white coats = emphasises scientific status of message
Kiesler2 argue that physical attractive sources = more persuasive but
OMahoney + Meenaghan found that celeb endorsements arent always
successful and Hume suggest it doesnt increase persuasive communication as
they can overshadow product.
Walster + Festinger suggest messages which arent deliberately targeted at us
are more persuasive Meyerowitz + Chaiken gave female uni students
pamphlets about breast cancer: 3 different ones (loss pamphlet talking about
dangers of lack of check ups, gain pamphlet about +e results of self-exam and
control pamphlet just stating facts = found that after 4 months, loss condition selfexamined more and changed attitude but methodological issues include use of
interviews so social desirability but it is lab so highly controlled; ethical issues =
exposed to fearful messages so making them stressful.
Loftus found that younger people are more susceptible to persuasive messages
than adults Martin found that whereas older children have a good
understanding of persuasive intent of ads, kids dont McGuire suggest that
those with high IQ wont agree with message as opposed to low IQ ppl Eagly +
Carli suggest that women are socialised to conform and therefore more pen to
social influence.
But in general, H-Y model doesnt detail the relative importance of each
factor/major weakness is it concentrates on steps not how persuasion occurs
(based on assumption that attitude change derives from comprehension of
message which doesnt guarantee that people are persuaded)/most research into
persuasion assumes they can measure attitude by measuring ppls beliefs through
self-report and standardised measurement scales/model assumes we are all
equally rational but we are cognitive misers.
Elaboration-Likelihood Model:
Suggests that we dont think systematically about arguments when exposed to
persuasive material.
P&C agreed that even though we consider arguments, were cognitive misers who
dont think deeply about all info.
Two routes that lead to persuasion and attitude change.
Peripheral route taken by those with low need for cognition audience have low
motivation and ability to think about message superficial processing focusing on
secondary factors e.g. attractiveness of communicator = temporary change,
susceptible to fading and counterattacks.
Central route taken by those with high need for cognition audience has high
motivation deeply process info, focusing on quality of arguments = lasting
change that resists to fading and counterattacks.
Vidrine + Simmons + Brandon used 227 smokers who were measured to asses
their need for cognition when exposed to 1/3 conditions (fact-based leaflet warning
of risks, emotion-based leaflet and control condition) found that those with high
need for cognition responded better to fact-based pamphlet whereas those with
low need responded better to emotion-based highly controlled but awareness of
study so risk of social desirability and not longitudinal to cannot know whether
attitude is long-lasting; lacks ecological validity; ethical issues (stressful).

Lin et al supports ELM 63 Taiwanese students took part in online shopping

study in virtual shopping mall each PP had to select phone based on consumer
reviews; each consumer review differed in quality and quantity also asked to
complete need for cognition measurement found that those with high need for
cognition were more likely to look at quality of reviews when buying.
ELM takes into consideration gender differences + interest in topic + individual
choices so ppl therefore have some degree of control and freewill in being
persuaded.

Explanations for the persuasiveness of TV ads:

Hard-sell and soft-sell advertising hard-sell = presenting factual info about

product/soft-sell = using more subtle and creative persuasive techniques
Snyder + DeBono: HS/SS approaches had different effects on different people
Okazaki et als meta-analysis of 75+ investigations to see which one was more
effective found that viewers find HS more believable but SS were associated with
positive attitudes and that HS have a greater capacity to annoy audience thus
decreasing persuasiveness.
Product endorsement Giles: celebs provide familiar face (reliable source of info
we can trust b/c we have parasocial relationship with them) Martin et al found
that PPs were more convinced by fellow student endorsing product than celebrity
bc students like to make sure their stuff is fashionable among ppl who resemble
them rather than approved by celebs.
Making it memorable Belch: studied cognitive effects of ad repetition and found
that attitudes and purchase intentions werent affected by repetition and that
cognitive responses became more negative as frequency increased but Zajonc
argued that the mere exposure effect makes it more familiar and thus makes us
more likely to choose it when faced with other choices.
Children and advertising Oates et al: investigated kids responses to TV ad
tested them on their recall + recognition + understanding of message found
that although kids are able to recall the ads they dont fully understand their
purpose Martin et al found positive correlation between age and understanding
of persuasive intent.

The attraction of celebrity:

Social-psychological explanations:
Para-social relationships: one in which person is attracted to celeb whos
unaware of persons existence according to Horton + Wohl they wont run risk
of getting rejected/criticised three levels = social level (celeb seen as source of
enjoyment), intense-personal level (fan becomes intensively engaged with
celeb) and obsessional level (following them home etc.) Schiappa et al
carried out meta-analysis of studies of Para-social relationships and found theyre
most likely to form when celeb is attractive and similar to fan Maltby et al
examined link between mental health and para-social relationships and used
sample of 300 UK students to complete CAS scale and loneliness and depression
questionnaire and found that those with anxiety and depression were most likely
Giles + Maltby found intense interest in celebs to be common with teems not due
to parents, suggesting celebs provide teens with pseudo-friends Jenkins +

Jason suggest that PR serve as important function and has +e effect on people b/c
they enable fans to enhance lives by taking an active role + help fans make social
networks with other fans and develop their sense of appreciation of others talents
models of social behaviour and opportunity to learn cultural values but
Maltby et al founds link between PR and eating disorders.

Absorption-Addiction model: McCutcheon et al: most people dont go beyond

admiring celebs due to their entertainment/social values but the motivational
reasons driving this absorption could for some people become addictive = more
extreme behaviour to sustain satisfaction Giles + Maltby identified 3 levels in
this process: entertainment-social (attraction b/c their perceived ability to
entertain and are source of social interaction and gossip), intense-personal
(worships celeb, compulsive feelings) and borderline-pathological (relationship
goes beyond para-social) difference between I-P and B-P is that BP feel empathy
for them ad if something happens to them they feel it has happened to them
Maltby et al used Eysenck Personality Questionnaire to assess link between
level of celeb worship and personality and found that E-S is linked to extraversion
and I-P linked to neuroticism (tendency to experience e emotional states related
to anxiety and depression).\

Attachment theory: tendency to form PR begins in early childhood relationships;

those with insecure attachment types as adults are more likely to become strongly
attached to celebs b/c they make no demands and the fan runs little of
criticisms/disappointment/rejection anxious-ambivalent are very likely to form PR
b/c they have unrealistic and unmet rational needs due to their belief that others
will not reciprocate ones desire for intimacy whereas anxious-avoidant are least
likely b/c find it difficult to develop intimate relations and are therefore less likely to
seek them with real/fictional ppl deterministic and ignores freewill

Evolutionary explanations:
Attraction to creative individuals: humans are neophilic (love of novelty)
before TV, people would amuse each other and neophilia would have led to more
creative displays from potential mates mate choice in environment of
evolutionary adaptation could have favoured creative displays which explains how
characteristics that are universally and uniquely developed e.g. music are highly
valued during mate choice mating mind (Miller) claims that despite natural
selections favouring development of skills, sexual selection favours minds prone to
creativity and celebs represent creative skills so were attracted to them and its a
part of human evolution neophilia in animals as complex songs make a bird
more attractive Shiraishi found that individuals with gene that codes for MAOA
enzyme are more novelty seeking, suggesting a genetic origin for some peoples
preference for creative people.

Celebrity gossip: may have been adaptive as De Backer suggests it creates

bonds within social groups and maintains alliances constructs and manipulates
reputations of rivals Barkow suggests our minds are fooled into regarding
celebs as being members of our social network thus celebs trigger same gossip
mechanisms that have evolved to keep up with affairs of social group DeBacker
surveyed 800 PPs and they reported that gossip was seen as useful way of getting

info about social group members, concluding that media exposure would lead to
misperception that celebs are actually a part of social network.
Both are difficult to falsify as we cant go back in time reductionist as they focus
on past as important factor but ignores current issues within individuals life that
may play a role doesnt take sufficient account of variations across cultures as
Anderson et al carried out meta-analysis from 52 cultures and found that some
cultures preferred curvy women (little food access) whilst others preferred slim
women (reliable food access).

Research into intense fandom:

Celebrity worship:
Gabriel 348 student PPs given questionnaires measuring self-esteem, then
asked to write essay about fav celeb then asked again to fill out questionnaire =
found those initially scoring low scored higher after essay so associated celebs
characteristics to themselves use of questionnaires may be affected by social
desirability and idealised answers to can lack answers correlation so doesnt
show causal relationship, other variables can affect findings.
Fuji et al looked at those with erotomania (those convinced that a stranger is in
love with them) and found they suffered from cognitive deficits and lacked
flexibility in their thinking but mild forms may be beneficial as Larsen found it
provided youngsters with attitudinal and behavioural examples Houran et al
showed those who engage in celeb worship dont perceive clear boundaries
between themselves and others as they fail to distinguish between emotions and
thoughts.
Kennedys characteristics of sufferers include absence of: partner, full-time job,
often have mental disorders, 75% female Cheng + Yue: carried out telephone
survey of 833 Chinese teens and found that idol worship was associated with lower
levels of work/study and lower self-esteem and less successful identity
achievement.
Celebrity stalking:
Kamphius + Emmelkamp: wanted to review demographic and clinical traits of
stalker and the psychological impact on victim of stalker = carried out metaanalysis = found different types of stalkers (erotomatic, obsessional, resentful,
predatory, psychotic) and no link between celebrity stalking and risk of violence)
research can lead to formation of effective therapies and instances can be
prevented through utilisation of counselling to promote more satisfactory
relationship conclusions.
Mullen looked at 20,000 incidents of stalking British Royal Family and found 80%
were psychotic so celeb stalking is a separate phenomenon.
McCutcheon et al: developed Obsessive Rational Intrusion and Celebrity Stalking
Scale to measure celeb stalking and factor analysis found two subscales: persistent
pursuit and threat found to be valid and reliable and uses indirect measurements
so free from social desirability bias.
Bartholomew + Horowitz: proposed model of adult attachment styles based on
individual workings of selves and others one of these is pre-occupied attachment
style which has been linked to celeb stalking as they have a negative self-model
and positive other-model Meloy claims that celeb stalking happens b/c they
overvalue others and perceive contact wit celebs will indicate they are acceptable
and valued, challenging their negative views of self.