PSYCHOLOGY 1110

LAB ASSIGNMENT 2

ANALYSIS OF AGGRESSION & PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOUR ON TV

QUESTIONS

1. Is this a between-subjects or within-subjects experiment?

Since we are analysing two variables (pro-social behaviour and aggressive behaviour) in different 'data sets' (three different children's cartoons) rather than within the same data set more than once, this is a between-subjects experiment.

2. How did you operationally define:a. Aggression?b. Prosocial behaviour?Provide an example of each from one of the actual cartoons that you watched to illustrate.

Pro-social behaviour: '"voluntary actions that are intended to help or benefit another individual or group of individuals (Eisenberg & Mussen, 1989, p. 3) ... sharing, comforting, rescuing, and helping' (Kuickerbocker, 2003, para. 1).

An example of pro-social behaviour in the selected set of three cartoons is an instance in the second choice, Ed Edd n Eddy ('To Sir with Ed' episode) when Edd spends most of the duration of the clip helping his friend Eddy work out the fine points of behaviour and etiquette on what he believes is his first romantic date (which is actually a babysitting night).

Aggression was equated with aggressive behaviour.

Aggressive behaviour: 'A forceful behaviour, action, or attitude that is expressed physically, verbally, or symbolically' (Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 2009).

An example of aggressive behaviour is the set is an instance in the third cartoon, Tom and Jerry ('Sweet Water Tabby' episode) when an angry Tom flattens Jerry on the beach with blows of his fist.

Consequences: 'outcomes that happen as a result of behavior ... (Pryor & Tollerud, 1999)' (University of Kansas, 2005, para. 1).

A rare example of a direct behavioural consequence in the set is an instance in the first cartoon, Dexter's Lab (episode 70) when Dee Dee intractably shouts into a microphone linked with Dexter's sound system and is at length expelled from the lab.

3. Describe in words what you found. Don't draw any conclusions about what you think your results mean. Just summarize what the numbers on your Observational Record show.

There was a high mean number of acts of aggressive behaviour in the cartoon set (7.67) relative to the other quantitative findings.

The set showed very little display of pro-social behaviour, with a mean number of 0.67 acts of this behaviour.

The three cartoons had a mean number of 3 negative consequences for aggressive behaviour. However, more aggressive behaviour was found to have no consequences (3.67).

Pro-social behaviour either had negative consequences (0.33 mean) or no consequences (0.66 mean).

4. Refer back to the article by Bandura et al. (1963) that you read for Lab Assignment 1, and the Research Foundations box (p. 307-308) describing the research by Sprafkin et al. (1975). How might their studies help you consider the possible implications of what you found? Be sure to use your results to support your conclusions.

Bandura found that the behavioural development of children is best modeled by their observations of behaviours displayed in their lives, whether it be the behaviours of their families or other adults, playmates, or the behaviours of fictional characters they witness or especially look up to on television. Thus, it follows that he believed that portrayals of conduct in children's television media play a significant hand in the shaping of their behaviours and personalities. In later research (1988) he carried out further trials of his theory on the effect of observed media when he had child subjects view a short black-and-white film of a toy human figure being destroyed by hand by a volunteer. He included an element in the experiment to trigger the children's annoyance, to investigate what manner of behaviours they would display when given the opportunity. When at length the children were allowed to play with the same model of toy they had seen in the footage, 88% displayed the same aggressive behaviour on it, with 40% maintaining this behaviour at another trial session eight months later (Isom, 1998).

Bandura ascribed models for determining a displayed medium's impressionability on a child; factors of this model were attention (focused observation of a displayed behaviour), retention (memory), motor reproduction (the capability of physically applying the displayed behaviour), and motivation (such as anger). Bandura also analysed factors of the attention component that increase appeal to a child viewer – simplicity (briefness, ease of perception), distinction (from the child's learned and observed routine), prevalence (a displayed behaviour that is frequently repeated), usefulness and positivity (when the displayed behaviour appears to be shed in a positive light or as the rectification of a dilemma) (Strangl, 2004).

All the features of Bandura's attention-determining model seem to exist in high levels in our cartoon set. Acts of aggressive behaviour shown in the cartoon set have simplicity (in the sense that violence is uncomplicated to perceive), distinction (the cartoons are fascinating for a child to watch because they are very much out of the ordinary to a child, even, or especially, if the child does not understand), prevalence (children may view several hours of television a day and the programming analysed in this assignment shows many instances of aggressive behaviour), positivity (in our cartoon set the aggressive behaviour was shown in a casual and humorous light – in other cartoon genres, such as action, it is portrayed positively much more directly) and usefulness (e.g. child viewers would see the behaviour Tom chooses when he is irritated or provoked by Jerry, and learn to imitate it when similarly irritated or provoked in real life).

Reverting to Bandura's first model of attention, retention, motor reproduction and motivation, we see that strong retention is a natural ability among children, especially for scenes they view that seem very out of the ordinary – 40% of the children who watched the film of the toy being destroyed retained the memory and practiced the behaviour eight months later. Most children, of course, remain capable of motor reproduction of displayed behaviours, i.e. mobile, and finally, the motivation factor is the many instances in their day-to-day lives when children, being emotionally undeveloped, may feel provoked, such as being refused access to candy or a toy.

In conclusion, we can see that (a) television is one of many channels that shape children's behavioural development, (b) it is one that children are particularly susceptible to because of its attention-grabbing characteristics, and (c) behaviours displayed in television are easily retained and reproduced by children even after long after the observation of the behaviours. All of this applies to our cartoon set.

5. What are some possible limitations of your study to keep in mind while drawing your conclusions? For example, what other variables/factors could a researcher look at to get a fuller understanding of the extent of aggression and pro-social behaviour on television?

The cartoons analysed in this assignment were selected because of their popular use in modern programming for children, and not because of any particular matters of their content. A researcher may wish to compile a wider and more diverse selection that would be better reflective of television content.

Furthermore, these cartoons are fairly lukewarm in the sense that they do not strongly portray sides of good and evil (unlike more dramatic cartoons, e.g. those of the superhero theme) or make an excessively positive portrayal of aggressive behaviour (also unlike more dramatic themes where heroes are praised in their violent handling of villains). Thus, their ability to cast a strong (i.e. ideological) impression on a child is weaker than that of other themes. Their only purpose is entertainment. A child who watches Dexter's Lab or Tom and Jerry may think more casually of raising their voice or badgering their younger siblings, but probably would not adopt violence as a solution to social problems at school, for example. Our selection would not make a strong case for Bandura's linking aggression on television with replicated aggression in life; other cartoons undoubtedly will.

References

Anderson, K.N., Anderson, L.E. & Glanze, W.D. (Eds). (2009) Mosby's Medical Dictionary (8th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.

Isom, M.D. (1998, November 30). The Social Learning Theory. Retrieved November 23, 2010 from http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/bandura.htm

Kuickerbocker, R.L. (2003). Prosocial Behaviour. Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. Retrieved November 23, 2010 from http://learningtogive.org/papers/paper52.html

Stangls, W. (2004). Social Learning Theory of Albert Bandura. Retrieved November 23, 2010 from http://paedpsych.jk.uni-linz.ac.at:4711/LEHRTEXTE/Bandura.html

University of Kansas. (2005). Natural and Logical Consequences. Special Connections. Retrieved November 23, 2010 from http://www.specialconnections.ku.edu/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/specconn/main.php?cat=behavior&section=main&subsection=classroom/natural