Media Psychology

  • Created by: aleeojo97
  • Created on: 31-10-15 10:02
View mindmap
  • Media Psychology
    • Media influences on prosocial behaviour
      • There are equivalent number of prosocial and antisocial acts on children's TV.
        • Prosocial  TV reflects prosocial norms
          • Younger children are less liekly to understand prosocial messages on TV.
            • Effective parental meditation- discussing programme with child.
        • Research studies.
          • Mares (1996) meta analysis- children exposed to prosocial content -showed higher social control.
          • Other forms of media: Eg children stories Mares and Woodard (2002) - acted more positively towards each other.
          • AO2
            • TV for preschool children contained few effects on prosocial lessons.
            • Strongest effects on preschool children and weakest for adolescents.
            • 'instructive meditation' is effective 'social co-viewing' is ineffective
    • Media influences on antisocial behaviour- Huesman and Moise 1996
      • Observational learning- children observe actions of models and may later imitated them. More likely to be imitated if perceived as real.
        • Bandura 1963 - artificial situation, little evidence of real-world 'copycat' violence.        St Helena- no increases in aggression after introduction of TV.
        • Cognitive priming: activation of existing aggressive thoughts and feelings.Frequent exposure leads to stored scripts for violent behaviour.
          • Josephson 1987- walkie talkie acted as a cue for aggression.
          • Desensitisation:Media violence desensitises children to it's effects.  Media violence represents violent behaviour as 'normal'.
            • Cumberbach 2001- screen violence not linked to real violence. Belson 1978- more TV watched more aggressive they became.
            • Lowered physiological arousal: heavy Tv violence viewers- lower arousal levels to senses of violence. Don't react in normal way to violence and less inhibited about using it.
              • Zillmann 1988- excitation transfer model creates readiness to aggress.
              • Justification: violence TV may justify what is acceptable behaviour. Unpunished TV violence decreases concerns about own behaviour.
                • Belson 1978- unpredictable link between TV and aggression.
    • Negative video games
      • Gentile and stone 2005 - increase in aggression.
        • Researchers cannot measure 'real-life 'aggression.    Longitudinal studies- participants exposed to other forms of media violence.
      • Longitudinal studies- Anderson et al 2007- higher exposure more aggression. consistent link- Gentile and Anderson 2003
      • Negative computer games
        • charles 2011- anxiety linked to Facebook.Karpirski- no casual relationship. Greenfield 2009 Facebook 'infinities' the brain
        • Karpinski study doesn't indicate casual relationship. Link between Facebook use and stress supported by real life study D'Amato et al 2010
        • positive computer games
          • Gonzles and Hancock 2011- Facebook wall have positive effects on self esteem
          • Hyerpersonalmodel by wather 1996- explains relationship between Facebook use and positive self esteem.
          • positive video games
            • Greitemeyer and Osswald 2010-increased helpful behaviour. Kahne et al 2008- multiplayer games and social issues.  Len hart et al 2008- social commitment.
            • Greitemeyer and Osswald 2010- video game industry less likely to produce altruistic games as they are less likely to sell.
    • Persuasive effects of media
      • Hovalnd -Yale model
        • Source factors - Experts are more effective as they are more credible.Popular and attractive sources more persuasive. Message factors- more effective if  we think they are not intended to persuade. Moderate level of fear is effective. Audience factors - low intelligence audiences are easily influenced.Both sides of the argument for more intelligent audiences. Younger people are more susceptible to persuade power of advertising-Martin 1997.
          • O'Mahony and Meenaghan 1997- celebrity endorsements not convincing or believable. Hume 1992- celebrity endorsements persuasive. Fear appeals persuasive if audience informed how to avoid danger.
      • Elaboration-likelihood model
        • Central route- audience motivated to focus on message, produces lasting attitude change.  Need for cognition choose this route. Peripheral route- audience not motivated to think about message produces temporary attitude change.
          • Lin  et al-better understanding of the effect of online reviews for different audiences. peripheral route may only be temporary  'magic' johnson and attitude to AIDS victims -penner and fritzsche 1984
    • Explanation of the persuasiveness of TV advertising.
      • Hard and soft sell-Hard- lots of facts and figures about the product. Soft- more focus on the customers than the product. The products may suggest a life style towards they want to aspire to. Giles 2002- advertisers use 'para social relationships'- relationships with the celebrity and found it trustworthy and reliable.
        • Hume 1992-concluded the celebrity endorsement  did not significantly increase persuasiveness communication of adverts. Difficult to determine the exposure of commercials due to parental mediation and peer influence.


No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Media psychology resources »