|
What Goes In Must Come Out: Print
this page
Children's Media Violence Consumption at Home and Aggressive
Behaviors at School
Audrey M. Buchanan (Brigham Young University)
Douglas A. Gentile, Ph.D. (National Institute on Media and
the Family)
David A. Nelson, Ph.D. (Brigham Young University)
David A. Walsh, Ph.D. (National Institute on Media and the
Family)
Julia Hensel (St. Mary's University)
Paper presented at the International Society for the
Study of Behavioural Development Conference, Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada. (2002, August)
Introduction
A significant number of studies have solidified the notion
that media violence has an effect on children's subsequent
aggression (see Bensley & Eenwyk, 2001 and Wilson, Smith,
Potter, Kunkel, Linz, Colvin, & Donnerstein, 2002, for recent
reviews). Violent media can take many forms, ranging from
television programming and movies to video games and other
interactive activities. This study examines a number of
these different media formats. Previous studies of the impact
of media violence on childhood aggression have been limited
by a focus on physical forms of aggression, which tend to
be more common among boys. Accordingly, little is known
of the impact of media violence on aggression in girls.
This study expands upon previous research by examining
subtypes of aggression in relation to violent media. In
particular, research has established relational aggression
as a point of contrast with physical forms of aggression
(see Crick et al., 1999, for a review). Children who spread
rumors, exclude peers, and engage in other relationship-oriented
aggression are different than those who simply hit or kick
to aggress against another. Relational aggression has been
defined as "behaviors that harm others through damage (or
the threat of damage) to relationships or feelings of acceptance,
friendship, or group inclusion" (Crick, 1996). Studies show
that relational aggression is associated with a significant
level of negative consequences for both perpetrators and
their victims (see Crick et al., 1999, for a review).
Physical and relational forms of aggression are moderately
correlated, which is to be expected (given that they are
both forms of aggressive behavior). Nonetheless, relational
aggression emerges as a distinct form of aggression and
studies have begun to focus on the possible differential
correlates of these subtypes (Crick et al., 1999). To our
knowledge, no study has yet compared physically and relationally
aggressive children in terms of their violent media viewing
habits. Accordingly, the current research separately considered
both forms of aggression.
Research regarding the media violence and aggressive behavior
has often been hampered by emphasis on the question of whether
media violence actually promotes aggressive behavior or,
in contrast, whether aggressive children simply prefer media
violence, consistent with their behavioral style. Research
tends to suggest that both processes are in motion, and
the effects of media violence are indeed heightened for
children who already struggle with aggressive tendencies
(Huesmann & Miller, 1994; Coie & Dodge, 1998). Accordingly,
analyses in this study focus on highly aggressive children,
using an extreme groups approach, in order to define the
possible impact of media violence on children who are most
at risk for developmental difficulties.
A second area of interest in the current study is that
of social information processing styles related to exposure
to media violence. In particular, we were interested in
the possible relation of media violence to the formation
of intent attributions. Previous research has demonstrated
that the association between hostile attributional bias
and social maladjustment is quite strong, and has been demonstrated
with children of all ages (see Crick & Dodge, 1994, for
a review). In particular, physically aggressive children
tend to exhibit a hostile attributional bias, in which they
tend to infer hostile intent from the actions of others,
even when intent is ambiguous and might be benign. This
style of processing understandably contributes to the development
and maintenance of aggressive behavior. This research is
also limited in regard to consideration of aggressive girls,
as the focus of such studies tends to be aggressive boys.
In contrast, Crick (1995) has shown that relationally aggressive
children also tend to exhibit hostile attributional biases,
although social context matters a lot. In particular, Crick
(1995) demonstrated that instrumental conflicts (e.g., a
peer breaking your toy) are more salient and provocative
for physically aggressive children whereas relational conflicts
(e.g., a peer fails to invite you to his birthday party)
tend to elicit a response consistent with a hostile attributional
bias in relationally aggressive children. Social information-processing
theory suggests that violent media might activate cognitive
structures, "making it more likely that other incoming information
would be processed in an 'aggression' framework, possibly
increasing aggressive behavior" (Bensley & Eenwyk, 2001).
Considering many children seem to be predisposed to assume
hostility in ambiguous situations, violent media has the
potential to be a destructive contributing factor. Thus,
we examined relationships between violent media habits and
hostile attributional bias (for instrumental and relational
conflict situations) in the current study.
Method
Participants
Two hundred and nineteen 3rd (n = 81), 4th (n = 49), and
5th grade (n= 89) students participated in the study. Students
were recruited from four Minnesota schools, including one
suburban private school (n = 41), two suburban public schools
(n = 151), and one rural public school (n = 27). The sample
was almost evenly divided between boys and girls, with 49%
of the children being female (51% male). Participants ranged
in age from 7 to 11 years of age (M = 9.53; SD = 1.07).
Ninety-one percent of the respondents classified their ethnic
background as Caucasian (which is representative of the
region). Participants were treated in accordance with the
"Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct"
(American Psychological Association, 1992).
Procedure
Data were collected between November 2000 and June 2001.
Letters were mailed directly to the parents of students
in participating classrooms informing them about the study
and requesting consent. Consent levels were greater than
70% for all classrooms. Interested teachers volunteered
their classrooms for inclusion in the study. Each of the
participating classrooms was a mandatory class (i.e., not
elective) to reduce the likelihood of self-selection bias.
Each participant completed three confidential surveys:
- a peer-nomination measure of aggressive and prosocial
behaviors,
- a self-report survey of media habits and demographic
data, and
- a self-report measure of hostile attribution bias.
Trained research personnel administered the peer-nomination
survey, and classroom teachers were trained to administer
the other surveys. The surveys were administered on consecutive
days. Teachers also completed one survey for each participating
child, reporting on the frequency of children's aggressive
and prosocial behaviors.
Assessment of Social Adjustment
A peer nomination instrument was utilized in order to assess
children's social adjustment, and was adapted from a peer
nomination instrument that has been used in several previous
studies of children's social behavior (e.g. Crick, 1995;
Crick & Grotpeter, 1995). This instrument consists of 10
items. Two of these items were the peer sociometric items
(nominations of liked and disliked peers), which are used
extensively in research of this nature to assess peer acceptance
and rejection (see Crick & Dodge, 1994) for a review. The
remaining 8 items assess four different types of social
behavior: physical aggression (2 item subscale), relational
aggression (3 item subscale), prosocial behavior (2 item
subscale), and verbal aggression (1 item). For the purposes
of this study, the physical aggression and relational aggression
subscales were examined (see Table 1 for a listing of all
of items related to the different subscales). Cronbach's
alpha was computed for each of the three subscales and was
found to be satisfactory: a = .93 for physical aggression,
a = .86 for relational aggression, and a = .81 for prosocial
behavior.
Children's physical and relational aggression scores were
used as continuous variables in subsequent correlational
analyses and were also used to identify groups of aggressive
and nonaggressive children (for categorical comparison).
In particular, the classification of aggressive groups was
based on an extreme groups approach. Children with scores
one standard deviation above the mean were considered aggressive,
and the remaining children were classified as nonaggressive.
This allowed for the organization of four groups:
- non-aggressive (both relational and physical aggression
scores low),
- physically aggressive (relational aggression low, physical
aggression high),
- relationally aggressive (relational aggression high,
physical aggression low) and
- combined relationally and physically aggressive (both
scores high).
Teacher Ratings of Aggressive Behavior
Teachers completed a survey assessing children's aggression
and prosocial behavior for each child participating in the
study. This instrument consists of twelve behavioral subscales,
including a variety of behaviors (e.g. aggressive behavior,
victimization, prosocial behavior, and others). For the
purposes of this study, only the subscales reflecting relational
aggression and physical aggression are used in subsequent
analyses. These items are listed in Table 2. Cronbach's
alpha was computed and found to be satisfactory for each
subscale: a = .93 for teacher ratings of relational aggression
and a = .94 for teacher ratings of physical aggression.
Finally, similar to the peer-nomination measure, the continuous
scores for each of these subscales was used to identify
groups of children according to aggressive status (as described
above).
Assessment of Media Habits
Violent media exposure Similar to Anderson and Dill's
(2000) approach, participants were asked to name their three
favorite television shows, their three favorite video or
computer games, and their three favorite movies/videos.
For each named media product, participants were asked to
rate how frequently they watched or played on a 5-point
Likert scale (1 = "Almost never," 5 = "Almost every day").
Participants were also asked to rate how violent they consider
each media product to be on a 4-point Likert scale (1 =
"Not at all violent," 4 = "Very violent"). A violence exposure
score was computed for each participant by multiplying the
frequency of watching or playing each media product by its
subjective violence rating, and then taking the mean of
the three similar products. Accordingly, media-specific
(i.e., Violent TV Exposure, Violent Video Game Exposure,
and Violent Movies/Videos Exposure) violence exposure scores
were computed for each participant. Finally, an overall
violent media exposure score, the mean of all nine products
(TV, video games, movies/videos), was also calculated. Previous
research has confirmed that participants were likely to
assess the violence in media products based on the amount
of physical violence, rather than relational aggression.
People's ratings were most strongly correlated with the
graphicness of the portrayal of physical violence, across
age, gender, amount of television viewing, and other factors
(Potter, 1999).
Preference for violent video games.
One item assessed each participant's preference for more
or less violent video games by asking, "On a scale from
1 to 5, how much violence do you like to have in video games?"
Amount of television watching and video game play
Participants provided the amount of time they spent watching
television and playing video games during different time
periods on weekdays and weekends. Weekly amounts were calculated
from these responses.
Assessment of hostile attributional bias/social information
processing.
The final survey was an adapted version of a hostile attribution
survey that has been reliably used in past research (e.g.,
Crick, 1995; Nelson & Crick, 1999). This instrument is composed
of 10 stories, each describing an instance of provocation
in which the intent of the provocateur is ambiguous. The
stories were developed to reflect common situations that
children and young adolescents might encounter in the school
years. Four of the stories depict instrumental provocations
and six represent relational provocations. Participants
answer two questions following each story. The first presents
four possible reasons for the peer's behavior, two of which
indicate hostile intent and two reflect benign intent. The
second question asks whether the provocateur(s) intended
to be mean or not. This survey relates to the participant's
perception of hostility from the outside world. Two scale
scores result from analysis of this measure: intent attributions
for relational provocation and intent attributions for instrumental
provocations.
Based on procedures delineated by Fitzgerald and Asher
(1987), the children's responses to the attribution assessments
were summed within and across the stories for each provocation
type. Possible scores ranged from 0 through 12 (0-8 for
the instrumental subscale and 0-12 for the relational subscale).
Finally, Cronbach's alpha was computed for each of these
scales and found to be satisfactory: intent attributions
for relational provocations (a = .81) and intent attributions
for instrumental provocations (a = .74).
Results
The first set of analyses report simple bivariate correlations
for all of the variables included in the study. Further
analyses considered grade, sex, and aggression group differences
for the various media variables. These analyses were conducted
separately for teacher ratings and peer behavioral nominations
of aggressive behavior and, as noted earlier, discriminate
between physical and relational forms of childhood aggression.
Correlation Findings
Teacher and peer ratings were generally consistent with
each other across the various correlations (see Table 3).
Interestingly, amount of television viewing correlated with
not only exposure to violent television content, violent
video games, violent movies/videos and the violent media
index, but more importantly, with a preference for violence
in video games and peer reports of physical aggression.
Similarly, amount of video game play per week was significantly
associated with exposure to violent television content,
violent video games, violent movies/videos and the violent
media index. It was also correlated with a preference for
violent video games and both peer and teacher reports of
physical aggression. In general, children with greater exposure
to violent media preferred more violent video games.
The hostile attribution scores also showed many significant
correlations. Instrumental hostile attribution was significantly
correlated with a preference for violent video games, amount
of television watched per week, the violent television exposure
index, the violent video game exposure index, the violent
media exposure index, the relational hostile attribution
scores, and peer ratings of relational aggression.
Likewise, the relational hostile attribution scores were
associated with a preference for violent video games, the
violent media exposure index, and the violent video game
exposure index. (See Table 3 for all correlation findings.)
Findings Related to Teacher Ratings of Aggressions
To assess grade, sex, and physical and relational aggression
group differences in children's exposure to and preference
for violent media, 3 (grade) x 2 (sex) x 2 (physical aggression:
aggressive or nonaggressive) x 2 (relational aggression:
aggressive or nonaggressive) analyses of variance were conducted.
Variables relating to children's exposure to and preference
for different forms of violent media served as the dependent
variables.
In regards to preference for violence in their video games,
analyses produced significant main effects for grade, F(2,
193) = 6.6, p < .01, sex, F(1, 193) = 85.1, p < .001, physical
aggression, F(1, 193) = 4.5, p < .05 and relational aggression,
F(1, 193) = 9.4, p < .01. Specifically, a post-hoc test
(Fisher's LSD) (p < .05) revealed that the fifth graders
(M=2.7, SD=1.2) were significantly more likely than fourth
graders (M=2.1, SD= 1.0) to prefer violence in their video
games. In regard to the main effect for sex, boys (M=3.1,
SD=1.1) were more likely to favor video game violence than
girls (M=1.8, SD=1.0). In addition, physically aggressive
children (M=3.2, SD=1.2) and relationally aggressive children
(M=2.7, SD=1.3) also tended to favor more violence in their
video game play over their nonaggressive peers (M=2.3, SD=1.2;
M=2.4, SD=1.2, respectively).
The analyses of the violent television exposure index revealed
significant main effects for sex, F(1, 197) = 36.9, p <
.001 and relational aggression, F(1, 197) = 8.3, p < .01.
In addition, a significant sex X relational aggression interaction
F(1, 197) = 5.2, p < .05, and a physical aggression X relational
aggression interaction F(1, 197) = 6.6, p < .05 were found.
Analysis of the means showed that boys (M=6.2, SD=2.6) were
exposed to relatively more violent television than girls
(M=4.4, SD=1.7). In addition, relationally aggressive children
(M=5.9, SD=2.6) report being exposed to significantly more
violent television programming than their nonaggressive
peers (M=5.2, SD=2.3). Furthermore, a simple effects of
analysis of variance of the relational aggression group
means (conducted separately by gender) showed the main effect
of the relationally aggressive group to be significant for
boys only, F(1, 108) = 11.1, p < .01. Specifically, relationally
aggressive boys (M = 8.4, SD = 2.6) were significantly more
likely to be exposed to violent television than nonaggressive
boys (M = 5.9, SD = 2.5). Finally, a post hoc test (Fisher's
LSD) (p< .05) conducted on the physical aggression X relational
aggression means found that children who were comorbid for
aggressive behavior (both physically and relationally aggressive,
M=6.6, SD=2.4) were more likely to be exposed to violent
television programming than nonaggressive children (M=5.1,
SD=2.3).
For the violent video games exposure index, analyses demonstrated
a significant main effect for sex, F(1, 182) = 48.2, p <
.001, and relational aggression, F(1, 182) = 5.2, p < .05.
In regard to the sex effect, boys (M= 6.7, SD = 3.7) were
more likely to report greater exposure to violent video
game play than girls (M = 3.6, SD =2.5). In addition, relationally
aggressive children (M = 5.9, SD = 3.8) were more involved
in violent video game play than their nonaggressive peers
(M = 5.2, SD = 3.5).
For the violent movie/video exposure index, analyses showed
a significant main effect for sex, F(1, 195) = 16.9, p <
.001. Analysis of the means showed that boys (M = 4.6, SD
= 2.8) were more likely to be exposed to violent movies
and videos than girls (M = 3.3, SD = 2.0).
For the violent media exposure index, analyses revealed
significant main effects for sex, F(1, 199) = 63.6, p <
.001, and relational aggression, F(1, 199) = 6.6, p < .05.
In regard to the main effect for sex, boys (M = 5.9, SD
= 2.3) reported greater exposure than girls (M= 3.8, SD
= 1.6) to all forms of media violence. In addition, relationally
aggressive children (M = 5.2, SD = 2.2) also reported significantly
more exposure to overall media violence than their nonaggressive
peers (M = 4.8, SD = 2.2). Finally, analyses revealed a
physical aggression X relational aggression interaction,
F(1, 199) = 7.9, p < .01. A post-hoc test (Fisher's LSD)
(p< .05) conducted on the physical aggression X relational
aggression means found that children who were physically
aggressive (M=6.1, SD=2.6) were more likely to be exposed
to violent media than nonaggressive children (M=4.6, SD=2.1).
Findings Relating to Peer Ratings of Aggression
To assess grade, sex, and physical and relational aggression
group differences in children's exposure to and preference
for violent media, 3 (grade) x 2 (sex) x 2 (physical aggression:
aggressive or nonaggressive) x 2 (relational aggression:
aggressive or nonaggressive) analyses of variance were conducted.
Variables relating to children's exposure to and preference
for different forms of violent media served as the dependent
variables.
In regards to preference for violence in their video games,
analyses revealed significant main effects for grade, F(2,
192) = 7.2, p < .001, sex, F(1, 192) = 86.7, p < .001, and
relational aggression, F(1, 192) = 10.1, p < .01. As for
the main effect for grade, post-hoc tests (Fisher's LSD)
(p< .05) showed that both 3rd graders (M = 2.5, SD = 1.2)
and 5th graders (M = 2.7, SD = 1.2) were significantly more
likely to prefer violence in their video games than 4th
graders (M = 2.1, SD = 1.0). In addition, boys (M = 3.1,
SD = 1.1) were more likely to prefer violence than girls
(M = 1.8, SD = 1.0). In regard to the main effect for relational
aggression, relationally aggressive children (M = 3.0, SD
= 1.4) showed a greater preference for violence than their
nonaggressive peers (M = 2.4, SD = 1.2).
For the violent television exposure index, analyses demonstrated
significant main effects for sex, F(1, 196) = 37.0, p <
.001, physical aggression, F(1, 196) = 7.3, p < .01, and
relational aggression, F(1, 196) = 4.2, p < .05. There was
also a significant grade x sex interaction, F(2, 196) =
3.4, p < .05. In regard to the main effect for sex, boys
(M = 6.8, SD = 3.8) were much more likely to report exposure
to violent television than girls (M = 3.6, SD = 2.5). In
addition, both physically aggressive children (M = 6.8,
SD = 2.8) and relationally aggressive children (M = 6.2,
SD = 2.6) were exposed to significantly higher levels of
televised violence than nonaggressive children (M = 5.1,
SD = 2.3) for physical aggression comparison; M = 5.2, SD
= 2.3 for relational comparison).
Analyses of the violent video games exposure index showed
significant main effects for grade, F(2, 181) = 3.2, p <
.05, sex, F(1, 181) = 48.5, p < .001, and relational aggression,
F(1, 181) = 5.4, p < .05. Post-hoc analyses of the means
(Fisher's LSD) (p < .05) showed that 5th graders (M = 6.1,
SD = 4.2) had significantly more exposure to violent video
games than their 3rd and 4th grade counterparts (M = 5.0,
SD = 3.3; M = 4.8, SD = 3.0, respectively). In addition,
boys (M = 6.8, SD = 3.9) were far more likely than girls
to be exposed to violent video games (M = 3.6, SD = 2.5).
Finally, relationally aggressive children (M = 6.5, SD =
4.4) were more likely to play violent video games than their
nonaggressive peers (M = 5.2, SD = 3.5).
Analyses of the violent movie/video exposure index revealed
significant main effects for sex, F(1, 194) = 17.4, p <
.001 and physical aggression, F(1, 194) = 6.5, p < .05.
Analysis of the means showed that boys (M = 4.7, SD = 3.0)
were more likely to watch violent movies and videos than
girls (M = 3.3, SD = 2.0). In addition, physically aggressive
children (M = 5.5, SD = 4.0) were also more likely than
non-physically aggressive children (M = 3.8, SD = 2.4) to
watch violent movies and videos
Finally, analyses of the violent media exposure index revealed
significant main effects for grade, F(2, 198) = 3.5, p <
.05, sex, F(1, 198) = 62.6, p < 001, physical aggression
status, F(1, 198) = 6.0, p < .05, and relational aggression
group, F(1, 198) = 7.2, p < .01. Post-hoc tests of the grade
means (Fisher's LSD) (p < .05) showed that 5th graders (M
= 5.3, SD = 2.7) were more likely to be exposed to violent
media of all types than their 3rd and 4th grade peers (M
= 4.7, SD = 1.9; M = 4.5, SD = 2.1, respectively). In regard
to the main effect for sex, boys (M = 6.0, SD = 2.4) reported
significantly more exposure to all types of violent media
than girls (M = 3.8, SD = 1.6). In addition, physically
aggressive children (M = 6.3, SD = 2.7) reported greater
exposure than non-physically aggressive children (M = 4.7,
SD = 2.2) and relationally aggressive children (M = 5.8,
SD = 2.5) also reported greater exposure than non-relationally
aggressive peers (M = 4.7, SD = 2.2).
Discussion
To date, this is the first research conducted regarding
relational aggression and media violence. The true seriousness
of relational aggression and its potential destructive effects
are just beginning to be recognized in the field, and much
exploration of this exciting area is sure to follow these
harbinger efforts. Another strength of the study is that
it incorporates authentic measures of aggression, teacher
and peer reports, which have strong ecological validity.
Findings revealed that children who watched more television
and played video games more often were more likely to view
violence and exhibit hostile attributional biases. Perhaps
those spending more time engaged in these media forms have
less parent supervision of their activities and viewing
material, and the children are left to their own devices.
Secondarily, perhaps these children are inadvertently exposed
to television violence, due to the sheer number of hours
they report spending with these media forms.
Hostile attributions were associated with multiple indices
of exposure to violent media and teacher and peer ratings
of violent behavior. It appears that those children who
engage in violent media viewing and play tend to assume
the worst in their interactions with others. While the direction
of effect is not clear, this finding merits additional investigation.
The sex difference was strong across the various findings.
Boys were exposed to more violent media and preferred more
violent media. The reasons for this might include socialization
differences-the toys, games and even subtle messages boys
and girls receive guide their behavior and what they expect
of themselves. This finding has implications for the importance
of prudence and care in the socialization of young children.
This includes what they are exposed to in terms of media.
In regards to their preference for violent media forms,
fifth graders consistently showed greater preference than
either their fourth grade counterparts alone or sometimes
both third and fourth grade children. The implications of
this apparent increase with age are addressed further on.
Relationally aggressive children were shown to view and
play more violent media than their nonaggressive peers.
This provides a persuasive case for the idea that violent
media does not only contribute to physical aggression, but
that it is possible that subtleties in media character relationships
demonstrate other ways that individuals hurt one another.
What do these relational aggression findings mean? It is
possible that children who indulge in relational aggression
perceive it as more subtle and easier to perpetrate without
significant repercussions from parents or teachers. This
may be why relational aggression often emerged as significant
without physical aggression. Another possibility might be
that currently comorbid children began with relational aggression
for the same self-defensive reasons and then moved on to
more overt, physical forms of aggression.
Of course, there were limitations in the study. Children's
ratings of the violence in their favorite media were subjective.
It is possible that children who view violence more frequently
might report it as being less violent, having been desensitized
to its content over time. Conversely, children who view
violence infrequently might inflate their reports of the
violence they do observe.
Also, the findings reported here are correlational and
do not merit casual assessment. However, the significant
level of consistency of the findings give substantial evidence
for the central purpose of this report-to document differences
in children's aggression, based upon their violent media
consumption. Future analyses will include the factor of
parental involvement, conceptualized as whether or not parents
place limits on children's consumption of different kinds
of media and how often a parent watches television programs
with their child (providing opportunities for discussion
of the various scenes portrayed). These will provide a more
detailed picture of the results given here.
It is likely that the perpetration of relational aggression
increases as children grow into young adolescents and peer
groups become increasingly important to them (Nelson & Crick,
1999). Closer examination of popular media is needed in
order to assess its danger in terms of relational aggression.
This research underscores the need for continued study of
these relationships. It will have implications for parents
and educators alike in the prevention of aggression problems,
and possibly inform future interventions with maladjusted
children.
References
Anderson, C. A.; Dill, K. E. (2000). Video games and aggressive
thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in
life. Journal of Personality
& Social Psychology, 7, 772-791.
Bensley, L., & Eenwyk, J. (2001). Video games and real-life
aggression: review of the literature. Journal
of Adolescent Health, 29 vol. 3). New York: Wiley
and Sons.
Coie, J. D. & Dodge, K. A. (1998). Aggression and antisocial
behavior. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook
of Child Psychology (5th ed., vol. 3). New York:
Wiley and Sons.
Crick, N. R. (1996). The role of overt aggression, relational
aggression, and prosocial behavior in children's future
social adjustment. Child
Development, 67, 2317-2327.
Crick, N. R., Werner, N. E., Casas, J. F., O'Brien, K.
M., Nelson, D.A., Grotpeter, J. K., & Markon, K. (1999).
Childhood aggression and gender: A new look at an old problem.
In D. Bernstein (Ed.), Volume
45 of the Nebraska symposium on motivation: Gender and motivation.
(pp. 75-141). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Crick, N., and Grotpeter, J. (1995). Relational aggression,
gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child
Development, 66, 710-722.
Crick, N. and Dodge, K. (1994). A review and reformulation
of social information-processing mechanisms in children's
social adjustment. Psychological
Bulletin, 115, 74-101.
Fitzgerald, P., & Asher, S. R. (1987, August). Aggressive-rejected
children's attributional biases about liked and disliked
peers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Psychological Association, New York.
Fleming, M. & Rickwood, D. (2001). Effects of violent versus
nonviolent video games on children's arousal, aggressive
mood, and positive mood. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 2047-2071.
Funk, J., Hagan, J., Schimming, J., Bullock, W., Buchman,
D., & Myers, M. (2002). Aggression and psychopathology in
adolescents with a preference for violent electronic games.
Aggressive Behavior, 28,
134-144.
Huesmann, L. R., & Miller, L. S. (1994). Long-term effects
of repeated exposure to media violence in childhood. In
L. R. Huesmann (Ed.), Aggressive
behavior: Current perspectives, 153-186, New York:
Plenum Press.
Nelson, D. A. and Crick, N. R. (1999). Rose-colored glasses:
examining the social information-processing of prosocial
young adolescents. Journal
of Early Adolescence, 19, 17-38.
Potter, W. James. On Media Violence. Thousand Oaks, Calif:
Sage Publications, 1999
Wilson, B., Smith, S., Potter, W., Kunkel, D., Linz, D.,
Colvin, C., & Donnerstein, E. (2002). Violence in children's
television programming: assessing the risks. Journal
of Communication, 52, 5-35.
Table 1. Peer nomination subscale items
Physical aggression subscale:
- Who hits, kicks, or punches others?
- Who pushes and shoves other kids around?
Relational aggression subscale:
- Who tries to make another kid not like a certain person
by spreading rumors about them or talking behind their
backs?
- Who, when they are mad at a person, get even by keeping
that person from being in their group of friends?
- Who, when they are mad at a person, ignore the person
or stop talking to them?
Verbal aggression item:
- Find the number of three kids who say mean things to
other kids to insult them or put them down.
Prosocial behavior subscale:
- Who does nice things for others?
- Who tries to cheer up other kids who are upset or sad
about something? They try to make the kids feel happy
again.
Table 2. Teacher rating subscale items used in this study.
Physical aggression subscale:
- This child hits or kicks peers.
- This child initiates or gets into physical fights with
peers.
- This child threatens to hit or beat up other children.
- This child pushes or shoves peers.
Relational aggression subscale:
- When this child is mad at a peer, s/he gets even by
excluding the peer from his or her clique or playgroup.
- This child spreads rumors or gossips about some peers.
- When angry at a peer, this child tries to get other
children to stop playing with the peer or to stop liking
the peer.
- This child threatens to stop being a peer's friend in
order to hurt the peer or to get what s/he wants from
the peer.
- When mad at a peer, this child ignores the peer or stops
talking to the peer.
Table 3. Correlational table for variables used in this
study.
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
1.
Video Game (VG) Violence Preference
|
1
|
.354**
|
.421**
|
.504**
|
.620**
|
.361**
|
.632**
|
.246**
|
.171*
|
.131
|
.325**
|
.012
|
.270**
|
|
2.
Amt. TV per week
|
.354**
|
1
|
.467**
|
.313**
|
.270**
|
.288**
|
.373**
|
.163*
|
.120
|
.044
|
.160*
|
.064
|
.106
|
|
3.
Amt. VG play per week
|
.421**
|
.467**
|
1
|
.378**
|
.628**
|
.345**
|
.602**
|
.107
|
.138
|
.044
|
.185**
|
-.108
|
.157*
|
|
4.
Violent TV Expos. Index
|
.504**
|
.313**
|
.378**
|
1
|
.503**
|
.438**
|
.775**
|
.164*
|
.102
|
.200**
|
.300**
|
.140*
|
.214**
|
|
5.
Violent VG Expo Index
|
.620**
|
.270**
|
.628**
|
.503**
|
1
|
.444**
|
.857**
|
.210**
|
.205**
|
.134
|
.221**
|
.072
|
.267**
|
|
6.
Vio. Movie/Video Expo. Index
|
.361**
|
.288**
|
.345**
|
.438**
|
.444**
|
1
|
.755**
|
.111
|
.102
|
.135*
|
.243**
|
.037
|
.216**
|
|
7.
Vio. Media Expo. Index
|
.632**
|
.373**
|
.602**
|
.755**
|
.857**
|
.755**
|
1
|
.201**
|
.167**
|
.191**
|
.320**
|
.091
|
.297**
|
|
8.
Instrumental Hostile Attribution (HA)
|
.246**
|
.163**
|
.107
|
.164*
|
.210**
|
.111
|
.201**
|
1
|
.368**
|
.134*
|
.130
|
.121
|
.183**
|
|
9.
Relational HA
|
.171*
|
.120
|
.138
|
.102
|
.205**
|
.102
|
.167*
|
.368**
|
1
|
.028
|
.091
|
.073
|
.130
|
|
10.
PeerBRelational Aggression Scale
|
.131
|
.044
|
.044
|
.200**
|
.134
|
.135*
|
.191**
|
.134*
|
.028
|
1
|
.642**
|
.497**
|
.317**
|
|
11.
Peer-Physical Aggression Scale
|
.325**
|
.160*
|
.185**
|
.300**
|
.221**
|
.243**
|
.320**
|
.130
|
.091
|
.624**
|
1
|
.296**
|
.529**
|
|
12.
Teacher-Relational Aggression
|
.012
|
.064
|
-.108
|
.140*
|
.072
|
.037
|
.091
|
.121
|
.073
|
.497**
|
.296**
|
1
|
.313**
|
|
13.
Teacher-Physical Aggression
|
.270**
|
.106
|
.157*
|
.214**
|
.267**
|
.216**
|
.297**
|
.183**
|
.130
|
.317**
|
.529**
|
.313**
|
1
|
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level.
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.
|