By Editor Bob Terry
For decades, most social scientists have scoffed at concern about the impact of the growing violence in entertainment. No more. Now a study funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has demonstrated an irrefutable link between exposure to media violence and violent behaviors.
The study was conducted by Brad Bushman, psychology professor and research associate at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research, and social psychologist Rowell Huesmann, who examines the long-term impact of repeated exposure to media violence.
The conclusion? There is a clear and demonstrable relationship between media violence and aggression.
Huesmann summed it up this way. “A high and steady diet of TV violence in early childhood increases the risk that both females and males from all social backgrounds will become violent, aggressive adults. Media violence can affect any child from any family, not just children who are already violence-prone.”
That ought to scare any parent, and it ought to cause producers of media violence to stop and take note of the impact their products are having on society.
Huesmann analyzed a study that tracked about 850 individuals and their children from one county in New York for more than 40 years. He examined the amount of violence the subjects viewed on television when they were young and what impact it had on their later behavior. The findings were dramatic.
By the time males exposed to large doses of TV violence between ages 6 and 9 were in their early 20s, they were twice as likely as other men to become physically aggressive with their spouses and three times more likely to be convicted of a crime.
Women who were heavy viewers of violent TV as children were more than four times as likely as other women to have punched, beaten or choked another adult.
A study of 329 children in the Chicago area, reported in Developmental Psychology, a journal of the American Psychological Association (APA), reached similar conclusions about the impact on future violent behavior. That study added, “These findings hold true for any child from any family, regardless of the child’s initial aggression levels, their intellectual capabilities, their social status as measured by their parents’ education or occupation, their parents’ aggressiveness, or the mother’s and father’s parenting style.”
In other words, watching video violence can undo all the efforts Christian parents make to help their children grow up to be disciplined, self-controlled individuals who practice love and concern for others.
As bad as violent TV is, violent video games are worse. In another study, Bushman reported that brain function changes when players immerse themselves in aggressive video games and that chronic players become desensitized to real-life violence. He explained, “Playing games is highly active, and it requires players to identify with violent characters. It also rewards aggression, and the amount of violence is almost continuous.”
A 2005 review of 20 years of research titled “Violence in Video Games” by Kevin Kieffer and Jessica Nicoll of Saint Leo University found “[v]iolent video games can increase aggressive behavior in children and adolescents, both in the short- and long-term.” One study pointed to the change in immediate behavior caused by playing a violent video game for less than 10 minutes.
The APA has said the scientific debate about the link between TV violence and real-life violence is over and has called for federal policies to protect society. Yet TV violence grows on all of the six major broadcast networks, according to a 2007 report from the Parents Television Council (PTC), and video games continue their descent into the most hideous forms of violence.
Most public efforts to curb media violence have been stymied by concerns about free speech guaranties in the U.S. Constitution. Still it would be wise for policymakers and parents alike to hear the words of Scripture that remind us that “as a man thinks in his heart, so is he” (Prov. 23:7).
It is also wise to recall the words of Genesis 6:11ff, “The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. … And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them … .” Obviously a violent society is not pleasing to the One who called all that is into being.
Christians must resist being “conformed to the patterns of this world” just as Romans 12:2 states. That can begin with some commonsense actions such as restricting access to media violence. Studies indicate that children spend more than twice as much time each day watching television than doctors recommend for exposure to all media. TV was never intended as a baby sitter.
Block objectionable content. A decade ago, the v-chip was made available for parents to use to block objectionable content. The device has largely been a failure. Few use it, causing the PTC to call for public policy changes. But until such changes are adopted, parents can use a variety of devices to block objectionable programming. One of the best ways is use of old-fashioned parental authority.
Keep media in the open. TV, computers and electronic games must be monitored to make sure such devices do not become gateways into private worlds. Parents should know what their children watch and play. Watching a program or playing a game with children is also important, especially when the activity is followed by conversation about what parent and child just experienced.
Teach good decision making. No parent can watch a child 24 hours a day. Not even an overprotective parent can keep a child from exposure to things not good for him or her. A child must be taught to make good decisions, including decisions about what he or she watches or plays whether the parent is with him or her.
The issue is serious. The evidence is clear. Exposure to media violence is harmful to children in the short-term and in the long run. It is time for concerned parents to act to protect their children, and it is time to express concern to those responsible for public policy.
Share with others: