Cultivation Theory Daniel Chandler Cultivation theory (sometimes referred to as the cultivation hypothesis or cultivation analysis) was an approach

developed by Professor George Gerbner, dean of the Annenberg School of Communications at the University of Pennsylvania !e began the "Cultural #ndicators" research pro$ect in the mid%&'()s, to study whether and how watching television may influence viewers" ideas of what the everyday world is li*e Cultivation research is in the "effects" tradition Cultivation theorists argue that television has long%term effects which are small, gradual, indirect but cumulative and significant +hey emphasi,e the effects of television viewing on the attitudes rather than the behaviour of viewers !eavy watching of television is seen as cultivating attitudes which are more consistent with the world of television programmes than with the everyday world -atching television may tend to induce a general mindset about violence in the world, .uite apart from any effects it might have in inducing violent behaviour Cultivation theorists distinguish between first order effects (general beliefs about the everyday world, such as about the prevalence of violence) and second order effects (specific attitudes, such as to law and order or to personal safety) Gerbner argues that the mass media cultivate attitudes and values which are already present in a culture/ the media maintain and propagate these values amongst members of a culture, thus binding it together !e has argued that television tends to cultivate middle%of%the% road political perspectives And Gross considered that "television is a cultural arm of the established industrial order and as such serves primarily to maintain, stabili,e and reinforce rather than to alter, threaten or wea*en conventional beliefs and behaviours" (&'00, in 1oyd% 1arrett 2 1raham &'30, p &))) Such a function is conservative, but heavy viewers tend to regard themselves as "moderate" Cultivation research loo*s at the mass media as a sociali,ing agent and investigates whether television viewers come to believe the television version of reality the more they watch it Gerbner and his colleagues contend that television drama has a small but significant influence on the attitudes, beliefs and $udgements of viewers concerning the social world +he focus is on heavy viewers People who watch a lot of television are li*ely to be more influenced by the ways in which the world is framed by television programmes than are individuals who watch less, especially regarding topics of which the viewer has little first%hand e4perience 5ight viewers may have more sources of information than heavy viewers 6udith van 7vra argues that by virtue of ine4perience, young viewers may depend on television for information more than other viewers do (van 7vra &''), p &(0), although !aw*ins and Pingree argue that some children may not e4perience a cultivation effect at all

where they do not understand motives or conse.uences (cited by van 7vra, ibid ) #t may be that lone viewers are more open to a cultivation effect than those who view with others (van 7vra &''), p &0&) +elevision is seen by Gerbner as dominating our "symbolic environment" As 8c9uail and -indahl note, cultivation theory presents television as "not a window on or reflection of the world, but a world in itself" (&'':, p &))) Gerbner argued that the over%representation of violence on television constitutes a symbolic message about law and order rather than a simple cause of more aggressive behaviour by viewers (as 1andura argued) ;or instance, the action% adventure genre acts to reinforce a faith in law and order, the status .uo and social $ustice (baddies usually get their $ust dessert) Since &'(0, Gerbner and his colleagues have been analysing sample wee*s of prime%time and daytime television programming Cultivation analysis usually involves the correlation of data from content analysis (identifying prevailing images on television) with survey data from audience research (to assess any influence of such images on the attitudes of viewers) Content analysis by cultivation theorists see*s to characteri,e the +< world Such analysis shows not only that the +< world is far more violent than the everyday world, but also, for instance, that television is dominated by males and over%represents the professions and those involved in law enforcement Audience research by cultivation theorists involves as*ing large%scale public opinion poll organi,ations to include in their national surveys .uestions regarding such issues as the amount of violence in everyday life Answers are interpreted as reflecting either the world of television or that of everyday life =espondents are as*ed such .uestions as/ -hat percentage of all males who have $obs wor* in law enforcement or crime detection> #s it & percent or &) percent> ?n American +<, about &@ percent of all male characters hold such $obs, and about & percent of males are employed in the USA in these $obs, so &) percent would be the +< answer and & percent would be the real%world answer (Aominic* &''), p B&@) Answers are then related to the amount of television watched, other media habits and demographic data such as se4, age, income and education +he cultivation hypothesis involves predicting or e4pecting heavy television viewers to give more +< answers than light viewers +he responses of a large number of heavy viewers are compared with those of light viewers A tendency of heavy viewers to choose +< answers is interpreted as evidence of a cultivation effect #n a survey of about CB) Dew 6ersey schoolchildren, 0: percent of heavy viewers compared to (@ percent of light viewers gave the +< answer to a .uestion as*ing them to estimate the number of people involved in violence in a typical wee* +he same survey showed that children who were heavy viewers were more fearful about

wal*ing alone in a city at night +hey also overestimated the number of people who commit serious crimes (Aominic* &''), p B&@) ?ne controlled e4periment addressed the issue of cause and effect, manipulating the viewing of American college students to create heavy% and light%viewing groups After ( wee*s of controlled viewing, heavy viewers of action%adventure programmes were indeed found to be more fearful of life in the everyday world than were light viewers (ibid , p B&:) Cultivation theorists are best *nown for their study of television and viewers, and in particular for a focus on the topic of violence !owever, some studies have also considered other mass media from this perspective, and have dealt with topics such as gender roles, age groups, ethnic groups and political attitudes A study of American college students found that heavy soap opera viewers were more li*ely than light viewers to over%estimate the number of real%life married people who had affairs or who had been divorced and the number of women who had abortions (Aominic* &''), p B&@) +he difference in the pattern of responses between light and heavy viewers (when other variables are controlled), is referred to as the "cultivation differential", reflecting the e4tent to which an attitude seems to be shaped by watching television ?lder people tend to be portrayed negatively on television and heavy viewers (especially younger ones) tend to hold more negative views about older people than lighter viewers 8ost heavy viewers are unaware of any influence of television viewing on their attitudes and values Cultivation theorists argue that heavy viewing leads viewers (even among high educationalEhigh income groups) to have more homogeneous or convergent opinions than light viewers (who tend to have more heterogeneous or divergent opinions) +he cultivation effect of television viewing is one of "levelling" or "homogeni,ing" opinion Gerbner and his associates argue that heavy viewers of violence on television come to believe that the incidence of violence in the everyday world is higher than do light viewers of similar bac*grounds +hey refer to this as a mainstreaming effect 8is$udging the amount of violence in society is sometimes called the "mean world syndrome" !eavy viewers tend to believe that the world is a nastier place than do light viewers Pingree and !aw*ins (&'3&, cited in Condry &'3', p &@0) studied &,@3) primary schoolchildren (@nd%&&th grade) in Australia using viewing diaries and .uestionnaires +hey found that heavy viewing led to a "television%biased" view of Australia as a "mean and violent" place +he children with the blea*est picture of Australia were those who most watched American crime adventure programmes ?ddly, they did not $udge the USA to the same e4tent by these programmes Gerbner reported evidence for "resonance" % a "double dose" effect which may boost cultivation +his is held to occur when the viewer s everyday life e4periences are

congruent with those depicted in the television world ;or instance, since on television women are most li*ely to be victims of crime, women heavy viewers are influenced by the usual heavy viewer mainstreaming effect but are also led to feel especially fearful for themselves as women +he cultivation effect is also argued to be strongest when the viewer"s neighbourhood is similar to that shown on television Crime on television is largely urban, so urban heavy viewers are sub$ect to a double dose, and cultivation theorists argue that violent content "resonates" more for them +he strongest effects of heavy viewing on attitudes to violence are li*ely to be amongst those in the high crime areas of cities Criticisms of cultivation theory Cultivation theory offers a very plausible case, particularly in its emphasis on the importance of mediation and on the symbolic function of television in its cultural conte4t !owever, the theory is sub$ect to a number of criticisms Gerbner has been critici,ed for over%simplification Aenis 8c9uail argues that it is almost impossible to deal convincingly with the comple4ity of posited relationships between symbolic structures, audience behaviour and audience views, given the many intervening and powerful social bac*ground factors" (in 1oyd%1arrett 2 1raham &'30, pp ''%&))) ?ur attitudes are li*ely to be influenced not only by +<, but by other media, by direct e4perience, by other people, and so on A correlation between television e4posure and the beliefs of viewers do not, of course, prove that there is a causal relationship, although it may suggest the possibility of one +here could be a another common factor influencing the apparently associated ones !aw*ins and Pingree could not find conclusive proof of the direction of the relationship between television viewing and viewers" ideas about social reality =ather than heavy +< viewing leading people to be more fearful, it may be that more fearful people are drawn to watching more television than other people +here might be a reciprocal relationship/ "television viewing causes a social reality to be constructed in a particular way, but this construction of social reality may also direct viewing behaviour" (!aw*ins 2 Pingree &'3:, cited in 8c9uail 2 -indahl &'':, p &)&) #n any case, surveys cannot establish causation Cultivation research does avoid the artificiality of laboratory e4periments % it is based on normal viewing over a long period % but it is sub$ect to the usual criticisms of both content analysis and surveys Some studies have shown that careful controls of various variables tend to reduce or eliminate cultivation effects Aoob and 8acAonald (&'0', cited in Condry &'3', p &:)) report that in the study of the topic of violence, controls for neighbourhood were more reliable than the controls for income used by Gerbner !irsch (&'3), cited in 5ivingstone &''), p &(), argued that an apparent relationship between e4posure to violence on television and fear of crime can be e4plained by the neighbourhood viewers live in +hose who live in high%crime areas are more li*ely

to stay at home and watch television and also to believe that they have a greater chance of being attac*ed than are those in low%crime areas Cultivation theorists do tend to underplay the point that heavy and light viewers do vary in other ways in addition to their +< viewing habits, such as in age, se4 and education Pingree 2 !aw*ins have argued that brea*downs by content type are more useful than measures of total viewing, because viewers are selective 8ore specifically content%based measures would show stronger correlations in cultivation analysis (Condry &'3', p &@3) ?ver% reliance on content analysis misses subtleties and assumes that meaning resides "in" television programmes (although Gerbner does emphasi,e connotative rather than denotative meaning unli*e many in "effects" tradition) Also, different genres % and even different programmes % contribute to the shaping of different realities, but cultivation analysis assumes too much homogeneity in television programmes (though some commentators would argue that there is increasing homogeneity in television programmes which may ma*e the cultivation case stronger) As*ing viewers for their estimations of crime statistics is a crude measure of their beliefs about crime Aoob 2 8acAonald note that there is evidence of a cultivation effect with social .uestions (e g "!ow many muggings were there in your neighbourhood last year>") but less so with personal .uestions (e g "Are you afraid of being mugged>") 7ven in the conte4t of a symbolic function, some critical theorists go further than cultivation theorists, arguing for instance that the relative absence of female characters on television is a symbolic statement about their lac* of importance in current social reality/ women are "symbolically annihilated" Condry (&'3', p &:') ma*es the point that viewers don"t usually use people on television for "social comparison" -e are not worried by contrasts between how people on television loo* and live and the way we do #f we were, then the heaviest viewers would be most concerned about their appearance, health and weight because television actors and actresses tend to be young, thin and attractive 1ut the heaviest viewers are in fact least concerned about their health and weight +here is relatively little evidence of cultivation effects outside the USA -ober (&'03, cited in Condry &'3', p &:)) found no 1ritish evidence of a lin* between heavy viewing and insecurity 1ut this may be because there is less violence on 1ritish television than in the USA, and Condry suggests that there may be a critical level of the televisual distortion of social reality before it is reflected in the attitudes of viewers ?r it may be that 1ritain has a more diverse media culture 8ore recent theories stressing the active viewer downplay the power of television to influence viewers which is assumed by cultivation theory Cultivation theory focuses on the amount of television viewing or "e4posure", and does not allow for differences in the ways in which viewers interpret television realities <iewers do not necessarily passively accept as "real" what they see on television +elevision

programmes are open to varying interpretations +he degree of identification with characters by viewers may play a part 8otivations to view also vary greatly 6oseph Aominic* comments that individuals who watch +< simply to pass time or because it becomes a habit appear to be more affected than people whose viewing is planned and motivated (Aominic* &''), p B&C) Cultivation theorists tend to ignore the importance of the social dynamics of television use #nteracting factors such as developmental stages, viewing e4perience, general *nowledge, gender, ethnicity, viewing conte4ts, family attitudes and socio%economic bac*ground all contribute to shaping the ways in which television is interpreted by viewers -hen the viewer has some direct lived e4perience of the sub$ect matter this may tend to reduce any cultivation effect +here is some evidence that lower socio%economic groups tend to watch television as a source of information more than other groups, but the viewer"s framing of television "reality" also needs to be considered here #t is often argued that cultivation may be enhanced when the viewer interprets the content of programmes to be realisticF sceptical viewers may be less li*ely to be affected +here is some evidence that ethnic minorities e4hibit more sophistication in "perceived reality" than others do (van 7vra &''), p &(') +here is also evidence that wor*ing class mothers are more li*ely to confirm the realism of programmes offering negative depictions of undesirable behaviour to discourage such behaviour, whereas middle% class mothers may tend to ma*e less directive comments References

1oyd%1arrett, ?liver 2 Peter 1raham (eds ) (&'30)/ Media, Knowledge & Power 5ondon/ Croom !elm Condry, 6ohn (&'3')/ The Psychology of Television !illsdale, D6/ 5awrence 7rlbaum Aominic*, 6oseph = (&''))/ The Dynamics of Mass Communication Dew Gor*/ 8cGraw%!ill 7vra, 6udith van (&''))/ Television and Child Development. !illsdale, D6/ 5awrence 7rlbaum 5ivingstone, Sonia (&''))/ Making ense of Television. 5ondon/ Pergamon 8c9uail, Aenis 2 Sven -indahl (&'':)/ Communication Models for the tudy of Mass Communication. 5ondon/ 5ongman

Aaniel Chandler, U-A

http://fates.cns.muskingum.edu/~psych/psycweb/history/bandura.htm

lbert !andura
(&'@B % ) Compiled by Amanda 8oore (8ay &''') !iography Theory Time "ine !ibliography

Albert 1andura was born on Aecember C, &'@B in the province of Alberta, Canada !is parents were Polish wheat farmers !e went to a small high school with only @) students and @ teachers #n &'C' 1andura received his 1 A from the University of 1ritish Columbia 1andura then went on to the University of #owa where he obtained his doctorate in &'B@ Upon graduation 1andura did a clinical internship at the -ichita Hansas Guidance Center +he following year, in &'B:, 1andura accepted a teaching position at Stanford where he continues to teach today -hile at the University of #owa 1andura"s interests in learning and behaviorism began to grow 1andura has done a great deal of wor* on social learning throughout his career and is famous for his ISocial 5earning +heoryI which he has recently renamed, ISocial Cognitive +heoryI 1andura is seen by many as a cognitive psychologist because of his focus on motivational factors and self%regulatory mechanisms that contribute to a person"s behavior, rather than $ust environmental factors +his focus on cognition is what differentiates social cognitive theory from S*inner"s purely behavioristic viewpoint Albert 1andura focuses on the ac.uisition of behaviors !e believes that people ac.uire behaviors through the observation of others, then imitate what they have observed Several studies involving television commercials and videos containing violent scenes have supported this theory of modeling #n #n &'3( 1andura wrote ocial !oundations of Thought and "ction which provides a framewor* of his social cognitive theory addition he has written many articles and a total of nine boo*s on various topics in psychology 1andura has made important contributions to the field of psychology, as seen in the many honors and awards he has

received 1andura has received several honorary degrees from universities all over the world +his year (&''3) he will receive the +horndi*e Award for Aistinguished Contributions of Psychology to 7ducation from the American Psychological Association Theory 1andura has conducted many studies involving observational learning, or modeling +he modeling process includes several steps/ #$ ttention% #n order for an individual to learn anything, he or she must pay attention to the features of the modeled behavior 8any factors contribute to the amount of attention one pays to the modeled activities, such as the characteristics of both the observer and the person being observed and competing stimuli &$ Retention% #f an individual is to be influenced by observing behaviors he or she needs to remember the activities that were modeled at one time or another #magery and language aid in this process of retaining information !umans store the behaviors they observe in the form of mental images or verbal descriptions, and are then able to recall the image or description later to reproduce the activity with their own behavior '$ Reproduction% =eproduction involves converting symbolic representations into appropriate actions 1ehavioral reproduction is accomplished by organi,ing one"s own responses in accordance with the modeled pattern A person"s ability to reproduce a behavior improves with practice ($ )otivation% +o imitate a behavior, the person must have some motivating factor behind it, such as incentives that a person envisions +hese imagined incentives act as reinforcers Degative reinforcers discourage the continuation of the modeled activity Albert 1andura combines both behavioral and cognitive philosophies to form this theory of modeling, or observational learning !e sees the human personality as an interaction between the environment and a person"s psychological processes 1andura says that humans are able to control their behavior through a process *nown as self regulation +his process involves three steps/ #$ *elf observation% !umans loo* at themselves and their behavior and *eep trac* of their actions &$ +udgment% !umans compare these observations with standards +hese standards can be rules set by society, or standards that the individual sets for him or herself '$ *elf response% #f, after $udging himself or herself, the person does well in comparison with the set standards, he or she will give him or her% self a rewarding self%response #f the person does poorly he or she then administers a punishing self%response to him or herself Self regulation has been incorporated into self control therapy which has been very successful in dealing with problems such as smo*ing ?ne of 1andura"s more famous e4periments dealing with modeling is his study with 1obo dolls #n one particular e4periment 1andura showed a video to children in which an adult beat up on a doll, called it names, etc 1andura divided the children into three groups, and each group watched a video with a different ending +he first video showed the adult being rewarded for his behavior, the second video showed the adult being punished for his behavior, and the third video showed no conse.uences for the behavior !e then studied the differences between how male children and female children reacted to this video in regard to whether they imitated the observed behavior or not +he results are shown to the left +his graph represents the number of imitative responses by males and females after observing one of the three different videos +he results show that males in all cases imitated the viewed behavior more so than females +he results also show that the children who watched the video in which

the person was rewarded for his actions duplicated the behaviors more so than when the person was punished or did not receive either a punishment or reward +his was consistent in both male and female children, supporting 1andura"s argument that people learn from observing others Time "ine &'@B% 1orn in 8undane, Canada &'C'% =eceived his 1 A from the University of 1ritish Columbia &'B@% =eceived his Ph A from the University of #owa &'B:% Accepts a teaching position at Stanford University where he continues to teach today &'B'% Published "dolescent "ggression &'(:% Conducted 1obo Aoll e4periment &'(:% Published ocial #earning and Personality Development &'('% Published Principles of $ehavior Modification &'0&% Published "ggression% " ocial #earning "nalysis &'0@% -on the Guggenheim ;ellowship Award &'0C% 7lected President of the American Psychological Association &'00% Aeveloped the Cognitive +heory &'00% Published ocial #earning Theory &'03% Published Psychological Modeling% Theory and Practice &'3)% -on the Aistinguished Scientific Contributions Award &'3(% Published ocial !oundations of Thought and "ction% " ocial Cognitive Theory &''B% Published elf &fficacy in Changing ocieties #n more recent years 1andura"s research focus has switched to self% efficacy and self regulation !ibliography 1andura, A (&'0&) ocial #earning Theory Dew Gor*/ General 5earning Press 1andura, A (&'3() Social ;oundations of Thought and "ction 7nglewood Cliffs, D6 / Prentice%!all Chapman, Conroy, and Sheehy, editors (&''0) $iographical Dictionary of Psychology 5ondon/ =outledge Press ,-!*.T-*: http/EEwww ship eduEJcgboereeEbandura html http/EEwww valdosta eduEKwhuittEpsy0)@EbehsysEsocial html

L!istory !ome PageM LPsychology Aepartment !ome PageM

http://www.mhhe.com/socscience/comm/bandur%s.mhtml

C!AP+7= :& */C. " "- R0.01 T2-/R3 of lbert !andura #f you"ve ta*en an introductory course in economics, you"re already familiar with the policy planner"s dilemma of deciding whether to allocate limited resources for guns or for butter +he problem is usually posed to illustrate the impersonal mar*et forces of supply and demand, profit and loss Get planners are people, and most individuals come to the war%or%peace decision points of life having already developed preferred responses Dorthwestern psychologist Aonald Campbell calls these tendencies Iac.uired behavioral dispositions,I and he suggests si4 ways that we learn to choose one option over another

& Trial'and'error e(perience is a hands%on e4ploration that might lead to tasting the butter and s.uee,ing the trigger, or perhaps the other way around @ Perception of the o)*ect is a firsthand chance to loo*, admire, but don"t touch a pistol and a pound of butter at close range : +)servation of another,s response to the o)*ect is hearing a contented sigh when someone points the gun or spreads the butter on toast #t is also seeing critical frowns on faces of people who bypass the items in a store C Modeling is watching someone fire the gun or melt the butter to put it on popcorn B &(hortation is the Dational =ifle Association"s plea to protect the right to bear arms or -illard Scott"s commercial message urging us to use real butter ( -nstruction a)out the o)*ect is a verbal description of the gun"s effective range or of the number of calories in a pat of butter Campbell claims that direct trial%and%error e4perience creates a deep and long% lasting ac.uired behavioral disposition, while perception has somewhat less effect, observation of response even less, and modeling ervation of response even less, and modeling less still 74hortation is one of the most used but least effective means to influence attitudes or actions Stanford psychologist Albert 1andura agrees that conversation is not an effective way of altering human behavior, but he thin*s that classical learning theory"s preoccupation with trial%and%error learning is shortsighted ICoping with the demands of everyday life would be e4ceedingly trying if one could arrive at solutions to problems only by actually performing possible options and suffering the conse.uences I& !is social learning theory concentrates on the power of e4ample T2- *4R- D /5 T6 6./"-0C- T2R/712 )/D-".01 1andura"s ma$or premise is that we can learn by observing others !e considers vicarious e4perience to be the typical way that human beings change !e uses the term modeling to describe Campbell"s two midrange processes of response ac.uisition (observation of another"s response and modeling), and he claims that modeling can have as much impact as direct e4perience Social learning theory is a general theory of human behavior, but 1andura and people concerned with mass communication have used it specifically to e4plain media effects 1andura warned that Ichildren and adults ac.uire attitudes,

emotional responses, and new styles of conduct through filmed and televised modeling I@ George Gerbner (see Chapter @') was concerned that television violence would create a false climate of fear Albert 1andura cautioned that +< might create a violent reality that was worth fearing 1andura"s warning struc* a responsive chord in parents and educators who feared that escalating violence on +< would transform children into bullies Although he doesn"t thin* this will happen without the tacit approval of those who supervise the children, 1andura regards an4iety over televised violence as legitimate +hat stance caused networ* officials to blac*ball him from ta*ing part in the &'0@ urgeon .eneral,s /eport on 0iolence : #t is doubtful whether +< sets will ever bear an inscription similar to that on pac*s of cigarettes/ I-arning/ +he Surgeon General has determined that +< violence may turn your child into an insensitive brute I 1ut if 1andura had been pic*ed as a member of the research team, the report would have been more definitive in pointing out the causal lin* between television violence and aggressive behavior Consider the case of +yler =ichie, a shy &)%year%old boy who has been raised on a Saturday%morning diet of superheroes After school he"s absorbed for an hour in helping Dintendo"s 8ario 1rothers fight their way out of danger !e then catches the last half of a /ockford !iles rerun on a local station and sees that even mild mannered 6ames Garner regards violence as the best option when his Pappie is in trouble After dinner, +y laughs at the fa*e fighting of roller derby and wrestling on sports cable !e then slips a cassette of Dirty 1arry into the <C= and settles bac* for some hard%core violence IGo ahead and ma*e my day,I he drawls as Clint 7astwood appears on the screen +he combined four hours that +y spends in front of the screen represent a typical day for boys in his class at school 1andura considers IgentleI +y a li*ely candidate to someday clobber his sister, shoot a prowler, or use criminal force to get his own way Social learning theory postulates three necessary stages in the causal lin* between television violence and actual physical harm to another/ attention, retention, and motivation ttention: 8. 0ever Thought of That !efore8 1ecause advertising rates are tied directly to a program"s share of the mar*et, television professionals are e4perts at gaining and holding attention Practitioners are committed to the drawing power of dramati,ed personal in$ury and physical destruction According to 1andura, televised violence will grab +y"s attention because it is simple, distinctive, prevalent, useful, and depicted positively

& imple +here"s nothing very subtle about punching someone in the face Arawn%out negotiations and attempts at reconciliation are complicated, but even a child can understand a .uic* right to the $aw #n order to avoid confusion, the good guys wear white hats @ Distinctive +he characters on the screen ta*e ris*s that don"t fit the ordered pattern of +y"s life +hat"s why Action 6ac*son pays his own way on commercial stations, while 8r =ogers" ten%minute sweater change re.uires a subsidy on public television Prosocial behavior li*e sharing, sympathy, control of anger, and delayed gratification appears dull when compared with violent action se.uences : Prevalent 1andura cites Gerbner"s inde4 of violence (see Chapter @') to show that television portrays Ithe big hurt I ?ver 3) percent of prime%time programs contain violent acts +hat figure rises to over ') percent for wee*end cartoon shows -ith Dintendo sweeping America and more than half of the nation"s families owning a <C=, violence on demand is easy to arrange C 2seful Social critics decry the gratuitous violence on television, but 1andura denies that aggression is unrelated to the story line +he scenes of physical force are especially compelling because they suggest that violence is a preferred solution to human problems <iolence is presented as a strategy for life B Positive ?n every type of program, television draws in viewers by placing attractive people in front of the camera +here are very few overweight bodies or pimply faces on +< -hen the winsome star roughs up a few hoods to help the lovely young woman, aggression is given a positive cast Using violence in the race for ratings not only draws an attentive audience, it transmits responses that we, as viewers, might never have considered before +he media e4pand our repertoire of behavioral options far beyond what we would discover by trial and error and in ways more varied than we would observe in people we *now +he unthin*able no longer is Retention: 8. 5igured /ut ,hat . ,as Doing ,rong8 1andura says it"s fortunate that people learn from vicarious observation, since mista*es could prove costly or fatal -ithout putting himself at ris*, +y is able to discover that a *nife fighter holds a switchblade at an inclined angle of forty% five degrees and that he $abs up rather than lunging down +y can pic* up this bit of Istreet smartsI from an admired !arry or a despised Scorpio, and learning ta*es place whether the fictional model is rewarded or punished for his action -e hope that +y will never have an occasion to put his *nowledge into practice #t"s certainly unli*ely that he"ll wal* out of the house and immediately mimic the

action he has learnedF instantaneous reproduction is uncommon #n contrast to classical learning theory, 1andura says we can learn novel behavior without any practice or direct reinforcement for its conse.uences +he action will lie dormant, available for future use, as long as we remember it 8emory is a cognitive function, so 1andura"s theory moves beyond mere behaviorism 5i*e most other communication theorists, he believes that the ability to use symbols sets humans apart from the limited stimulus%response world of animals I!umans don"t $ust respond to stimuli, they interpret them IC 1andura says that we store events in two ways%through visual images and through verbal codes +y may have a vivid picture in his mind of Clint 7astwood leveling an unswerving Colt CB 8agnum revolver #f so, repeated instant mental replays (with +y in the role of enforcer) will ensure that he remembers how to point a gun in the future +he more he e4ercises the image, the stronger the memory will be in the future 1andura is convinced, however, that ma$or gains in vicarious learning come when the observer develops a conscious awareness of the techni.ue involved +hese insights are stored verbally +y will ta*e a giant step toward becoming a dead shot when he can sort out the visual image of Clint 7astwood into generali,ed principles/ I!old the weapon with both hands I IAon"t $er* the triggerF s.uee,e it I IAim si4 inches low to compensate for the recoil I 1andura says that learning through modeling is more a matter of abstracting rules than mimicry #t"s not simply Imon*ey see, mon*ey do I +he entire ac.uisition process described by 1andura is a spectator sport +hat"s why television teaches violence so well +y doesn"t have to actually do the aggressive behaviorF fantasy rehearsal in his mind will *eep the act a live option for the future #f he ever does point a gun in anger, the act of force, after years of mental role%playing, will set his ac.uired behavioral disposition into granite I+he highest level of observational learning is achieved by first organi,ing and rehearsing the modeled behavior symbolically, and then enacting it overtly IB )otivation: 8,hy 0ot Do .t9 .t ,orked /ut 5ine for Them8 -e observe many forms of behavior in others that we never perform ourselves -ithout sufficient motivation, +y may never imitate the violence he sees on +<

1andura uses the term motivation to refer to the rewards and punishments +y imagines will accompany his use of physical force -ould he go to $ail for blowing away an enemy, remain anonymous if he dropped a bric* from a highway overpass, or gain status for punching out a $er* who was hassling a friend> Dote that these .uestions concern potential outcomes rather than sanctions already e4perienced 1andura cautions that Ithe widely accepted dictum that behavior is governed by its conse.uences fares better for anticipated than for actual conse.uences I( 8ost reinforcement theorists recogni,e that +y"s e4pectations for future rewards or punishment come in part from e4ternal sources such as parents, friends, and teachers 1andura says that the effects of +< violence will be greatly diminished if a youngster"s parents punish or disapprove of aggression !e contends that unconditional love and approval merely encourage self%actuali,ed tyrants Get +y also shares a responsibility for his own actions +he latest version of social learning theory places increasing emphasis on self%regulation 1andura is uncomfortable with any form of determinism !e doesn"t believe that people are Ibuffeted by environmental stimuli,I nor does he accept the notion that they are Idriven by inner forces I !e sees e4ternal and internal rewards wor*ing together in a Ireciprocal determinationI to influence behavior 1ut social learning theory focuses on vicarious reward as a third factor which causes ac.uired responses to brea* out into action +elevision models do more than teach novel styles of conduct -hen people on television are punished for being violent, that punishment reinforces society"s sanctions against acting above or outside the law 1ut when other characters in the story accept or applaud the use of force, that approval wea*ens inhibitions the viewer may have about hurting people Producers, writers, and directors are .uic* to argue that action se.uences end up by showing that crime doesn"t pay Armed robbers, rapists, murderers, and terrorists are brought to $ustice by the final fade%out 1ut 1andura isn"t worried about the bad guys glorifying violence #t"s the aggression of the good guys that troubles him Crime may not pay on television, but physical force does Consider the potential encouragement of violence offered by the &'3' motion picture $atman #n the first wee* of its release in the United States, over &) million patrons watched the 6o*er"s creative sadism amid s.ueals of delight in the theaters -hile the average young male in the audience might have difficulty identifying with the bi,arre 6ac* Dicholson, 8ichael Heaton loo*ed li*e 7veryman in his low%*ey portrayal of the wealthy young avenger +he producer, 6on Peters, wanted a story line that would provide Ia great opportunity to have this guy *ic* some ass,I0 which 1atman does #n the end, 1ruce -ayne gets the satisfaction of avenging his parents" murder, praise from the grateful mayor of

the city, and the adoration of the adorable Him 1asinger +hese vicarious rewards would seem to $ustify almost any vigilante action +he filmma*ers would claim that $atman is mere fantasyF 1andura would probably call it an effective classroom for life 83/7 !.1 !7""3: ;7.T 4.C<.01 /0 T2 T C"/,08 1andura and his students ran a series of e4periments to study social learning of aggression through television !e used a three%foot%high inflated plastic 1obo doll as the potential victim +he clown figure had a heavy sand base that made it pop bac* up after being *noc*ed down Dursery school boys and girls saw a film in which an adult male or female model assaulted the clown +he *ids themselves then had a chance to IplayI with the 1obo doll without adult supervision ;igure :& & shows two of the attac*s the female model performed, with typical matching behavior of a girl who saw the film Since children in the control group didn"t normally say and do these things, the e4periment demonstrated that the youngsters had ac.uired the new, aggressive behavior by watching the film Some children saw a version in which the adult model was rewarded with candy, soda pop, and praise for being a Istrong champion I ?thers heard the model scolded/ I!ey there, you big bully, you .uit pic*ing on that clown I As the adult retreated, he or she tripped and fell, and then received a humiliating span*ing with a rolled up maga,ine Consistent with social learning theory, 1andura found that children e4hibited more aggression when the adult models were rewarded for their attac* on the 1obo doll than when they were punished Get given enough inducement by the e4perimenter, most children were able to copy the hostile actions 1andura concludes that reinforcement doesn"t affect the learning of novel responses, but it does Idetermine whether or not observationally ac.uired competencies will be put into use I !e discovered that the same antisocial learning too* place when the aggressor was a cartoon character (!erman the Cat), rather than a human model #n other studies he discovered that removal of restraint is greatest for boys when the model is male and greatest for girls when the model is female Consistent with traditional gender%based roles, boys were more violent than girls R/7*-D /R DR .0-D: T,/ "T-R0 T.6-* T/ .).T T./0 Although 1andura discusses television violence in terms of modeling, there are alternative interpretations of the effect that dramati,ed aggression has on an audience Aolf Nillmann and other instigation theorists agree with 1andura that

viewers are aroused when they see simulated violence on the screen 3 1ut arousal researchers note that people also get e4cited watching suspense, comedy, or se4y bedroom scenes #f a viewer turns on the set feeling somewhat angry, the emotions these programs stir up can fuel a full%blown hatred that may spill over into physical aggression According to instigation theorists, it"s the arousal in the violent programs that stimulates aggression, not the imitation processes 1andura emphasi,es #nstigation is an idea which sounds plausible, but an appeal to arousal fails to e4plain how viewers learn new techni.ues Dor can it account for a violent action brea*ing out years after it was modeled on television ;avored by media apologists, catharsis theory, on the other hand, suggests that the depiction of physical force actually reduces aggression ' +he theory maintains that many viewers are filled with pent%up anger, hostility, and tension 5i*e e4cess steam vented from a boiler, these destructive impulses are safely drained off through e4posure to fantasy violence (+he catharsis theory sees =ambo and psychiatric counselors as serving the same function ) +he notion that violent drama can be healthy traces bac* to Aristotle"s belief that Gree* tragedy served to purge feelings of grief and fear +he problem with the catharsis claim is that there is no evidence to support it 8ost efforts to demonstrate that a heavy dose of televised violence reduces aggression end up showing the opposite People may feel better, but they get worse CR.T.;7-: 4/*.T.6-: !7T ,- <: C 7* " R-" T./0*2.4

1andura states that Itheories must demonstrate predictive power I Social learning theory"s claim that fantasy violence teaches and encourages real aggression tests out splendidly in the laboratory, where other factors can be held constant, but only passably in the field ?ne ten%year study trac*ed C() third% grade boys until they were &' years old &) +he young men in the study who had watched a great amount of televised violence as children were more aggressive than those who had been occasional viewers !owever, those who were more aggressive as *ids showed no tendency to watch more televised violence when they grew up +he twin findings support 1andura"s claim that fantasy aggression leads to the real thing 1ut childhood viewing habits accounted for only &) percent of the difference in later aggression Although this &) percent figure may sound rather small, even a small effect from media violence can add up to a significant social problem when a program has an audience of :) million people #f only & out of every &),))) viewers imitates an act of violence, the fictional drama had produced at least :,))) new victims Social learning theory shares the problem of almost all reinforcement theories%it doesn"t predict what the learner will regard as positive +y may be turned off by

the machismo of 6ohn -ayne (IA man"s got to do what a man"s got to doI), yet relish the lean intensity of Clint 7astwood ;orecasting taste is ris*y business 1andura"s theory is also vulnerable to the charges of Stuart !all, which were presented in the previous chapter 1andura"s research epitomi,es everything in the American media%effects tradition that !all disdains Get social learning theory is relevant to many of the crucial cultural issues !all and other social theorists discuss 8odeling clarifies why highly publici,ed suicides and drug overdoses (8arilyn 8onroe, 7rnest !emingway, 6anis 6oplin, 6ohn 1elushi) are followed by sharp upswings of self%inflicted death && #t also helps us understand why political assassinations (=obert Hennedy, 8artin 5uther Hing, 6r , 8alcolm O) occur in clusters <icarious observation e4plains the spread of Gandhi"s innovative tactics of militant nonviolence to racial and antiwar protest +he theory predicts that publici,ing airline hi$ac*ings and terrorist *idnappings will result in increased political violence #t implies that news coverage of urban riots will promote further disorder when it shows video clips of $oyous looters rather than the human misery of a destroyed neighborhood Social learning theory also has useful observations about the antisocial results of pornography <icarious reinforcement e4plains how men can maintain a Irape mythI in the face of overwhelming evidence that women are angered and sic*ened by the mere idea of se4ual assault +he pornographic portrayal of abducted females stirred to se4ual ecstasy by their captors encourages men to hang on to a dehumani,ing rationali,ation that women secretly want to be ta*en by force Although se4ually e4plicit films are used beneficially by dysfunction clinics to lower inhibitions and teach foreplay techni.ue, 1andura warns that continuous e4posure to erotic fantasy may hinder se4ual satisfaction +he simulated wild passion portrayed in every encounter sets up an unreasonably high e4pectation that normal lovema*ing can"t match 1andura doesn"t advocate tight artistic censorship or governmental controls on news reporting, but his concern with these issues shows social learning theory"s usefulness in matters of death, power, and passion 1andura doesn"t claim that television is the only way people ac.uire behavioral dispositions 1ut he has established that the media are an important ingredient in the formative mi4 +y is learning todayF perhaps he will be acting out tomorrow ;7-*T./0* T/ *2 R4-0 3/7R 5/C7* #. 7ffective modeling re.uires attention, retention and motivation !ow does cognition play a part in each of these steps>

&. !ow do you respond to the claim that television doesn"t promote viewer violence because villains are punished rather than rewarded for their cruel behavior> '. #f you were designing a further $o)o doll study with children, what else would you want to e4plore about modeling or imitation> (. #s it possible that both 1andura"s social learning theory and Nillmann"s e(citation transfer theory could be right at the same time> *-C/0D "//< /ecommended resource/ Ale4es +an, ISocial 5earning of Aggression of +elevision,I in Perspectives on Media &ffects, 6ennings 1ryant and Aolf Nillmann (eds ), 5awrence 7rlbaum Associates, !illsdale, D 6 , &'3(, pp C&%BB -nitial statement/ Albert 1andura and =ichard -alters, ocial #earning and Personality Development, !olt, =inehart and -inston, Dew Gor*, &'(: .eneral theory/ Albert 1andura, ocial #earning Theory, Prentice%!all, 7nglewood Cliffs, D 6 , &'00 #ater cognative emphasis/ Albert 1andura, ocial !oundations of Thought and "ction% " ocial Cognitive Theory, Prentice%!all, 7nglewood Cliffs, D 6 , &'3( "c3uired )ehavioral dispositions/ Aonald Campbell, ISocial Attitudes and ?ther Ac.uired 1ehavioral Aispositions,I in Psychology% " tudy of a cience, <ol (, S Hoch (ed ), 8cGraw%!ill, Dew Gor*, &'(:, pp 'C%&0@ Classic learning theory/ 1 ; S*inner, $eyond !reedom and Dignity, Hnopf, Dew Gor*, &'0& $o)o doll study/ Albert 1andura, Aorothea =oss, and Sheila =oss, I#mitations of Aggressive ;ilm%8ediated 8odels,I 4ournal of ")normal and ocial Psychology, <ol ((, &'(:, pp :%&& #ongitudinal study/ 8 5ef*owit,, 5 7ron, 5 -al*er and 5 !uesmann, .rowing 2p to $e 0iolent% " #ongitudinal tudy of the Development of "ggression, Pergamon, Dew Gor*, &'00 Pornography/ 6ames Chec* and Deil 8alamuth, IPornography and Se4ual Aggression/ A Social 5earning +heory Analysis,I in Communication 5ear)ook ', 8argaret 8c5aughlin (ed ), Sage, 1everly !ills, Calif , &'3(, pp &3&%@&:

6. "l)ert $andura, Social Learning Theory, Prentice'1all, &nglewood Cliffs, 7.4. 6899, p. :9 :. -)id., p. ;8 ;. /o)ert #ie)ert and 4oyce prafkin, <The urgeon .eneral,s /eport,< The Early Window: Effects of Television on Children and Youth, ;d ed., Pergamon, 7ew 5ork, 68==, pp. 98'6>9. ?.$andura, p. @8. @ -)id., p. :9 A. -)id., p. 6AA 9. <$atmania,< Newsweek, 4une :A, 68=8, p. 96. =. Dolf Billmann, 4.#. 1oyt, and K.D. Day, < trength and Duration of the &ffect of "ggressive, 0iolent, and &rotic Communications on u)se3uent "ggressive $ehavior,< Communication Research, 0ol. 6, 689?, pp. :=A';>A. 8. #ie)ert and prafkin, pp. 9@'99. 6>. M. #efkowitC, #. &ron, #. Dalder, and #. 1uesmann, rowing !" to #e $iolent: % longitudinal Study of the &evelo"ment of %ggression, Pergamon, 7ew 5ork, 6899. 66. ee /o)ert $. Cialdini, 'nfluence, :d ed., cott, !oresman, .lenview, -ll., 68==, pp. 6;@'6?;.