Psychology - Comparing Charlton et al (2000) and Willaims et al (1981) - Compare and contrast table in GCSE Psychology

Created by: Holly Thurston
Created on: 30-05-13 14:39


	Psychology - Comparing Charlton et al (2000) and Willaims et al (1981)
	Similarities Both studies were natural experiments. The researchers did not control the introduction of TV, it was naturally occurring. Both studies were conducted in real-life communities. The communities of St Helena and Notel had never had access to broadcast television (as opposed to videos) and were introduced to satellite TV for the first time. There were variables outside the control of both studies: other children or parents' behaviour. Both Charlton and Williams conducted observations to measure the amount of aggression children displayed. Both studies used questionnaires to ask teachers and parents about their children's behaviour and viewing habits.	Differences St Helena is so remote that it had developed a unique culture of parental control. Notel was not unique in this way because it is a mainland town. On St Helena most people knew each other and their families. Notel was a normal town with inhabitants coming and going; not everyone knew each other well. Notel was on the mainland, so had access to popular cultural trends, whereas St Helena only had a ferry visit every month to deliver supplies and so was isolated from popular culture. The adults on St Helena may have been reluctant to admit the children had aggressive behaviour because it might create a negative image of the island. The same reluctance would be unlikely of a mainland town whose name was never disclosed. It is the differences between these two studies that might give us a clue about why the findings are so different. Children on St Helena were monitored by family and friends more closely because of being an isolated community. This means that the children were unlikely to carry out aggressive acts they watched on TV even if they wanted to. The parents of these children had strict control over their behaviour and guided them more closely. This means that their behaviour was influenced more by their parents and community than by TV. In Notel, the children were monitored less by parents and the community. Because of this, children could copy what they watched without fear of surveillance. Cultural differences between the locations.
	Overall comparison What do these two studies tell us about the effect of TV? Most television programming broadcasts violence - even children's television. Charlton et al's (2000) study suggests that television violence has very little effect on aggression in children, whereas Williams et al's (1981) study tells us that TV almost doubled aggression in children. The differences in findings between these two studies leave us wondering what to think. Is TV bad for children or not? There are similarities between these studies that make them comparable, but there are also big differences that can help us to explain why they found what they did.Children are affected by watching TV. But parents and community can lessen the influence of TV by controlling what their children watch and how they behave. Living in smaller neighbourhoods with a strong sense of community helps.However, we should always remember that, although TV and family are important, aggression occurs for a number of reasons; friendship groups, biological factors and triggers in the environment can also play a part.

Psychology - Comparing Charlton et al (2000) and Willaims et al (1981)

Similarities

Both studies were natural experiments. The researchers did not control the introduction of TV, it was naturally occurring.
Both studies were conducted in real-life communities.
The communities of St Helena and Notel had never had access to broadcast television (as opposed to videos) and were introduced to satellite TV for the first time.
There were variables outside the control of both studies: other children or parents' behaviour.
Both Charlton and Williams conducted observations to measure the amount of aggression children displayed.
Both studies used questionnaires to ask teachers and parents about their children's behaviour and viewing habits.

Differences

St Helena is so remote that it had developed a unique culture of parental control. Notel was not unique in this way because it is a mainland town.
On St Helena most people knew each other and their families. Notel was a normal town with inhabitants coming and going; not everyone knew each other well.
Notel was on the mainland, so had access to popular cultural trends, whereas St Helena only had a ferry visit every month to deliver supplies and so was isolated from popular culture.
The adults on St Helena may have been reluctant to admit the children had aggressive behaviour because it might create a negative image of the island. The same reluctance would be unlikely of a mainland town whose name was never disclosed.
It is the differences between these two studies that might give us a clue about why the findings are so different. Children on St Helena were monitored by family and friends more closely because of being an isolated community.
This means that the children were unlikely to carry out aggressive acts they watched on TV even if they wanted to. The parents of these children had strict control over their behaviour and guided them more closely.
This means that their behaviour was influenced more by their parents and community than by TV. In Notel, the children were monitored less by parents and the community. Because of this, children could copy what they watched without fear of surveillance.
Cultural differences between the locations.

Overall comparison

What do these two studies tell us about the effect of TV? Most television programming broadcasts violence - even children's television. Charlton et al's (2000) study suggests that television violence has very little effect on aggression in children, whereas Williams et al's (1981) study tells us that TV almost doubled aggression in children. The differences in findings between these two studies leave us wondering what to think. Is TV bad for children or not? There are similarities between these studies that make them comparable, but there are also big differences that can help us to explain why they found what they did.Children are affected by watching TV. But parents and community can lessen the influence of TV by controlling what their children watch and how they behave. Living in smaller neighbourhoods with a strong sense of community helps.However, we should always remember that, although TV and family are important, aggression occurs for a number of reasons; friendship groups, biological factors and triggers in the environment can also play a part.

Get Revising

Psychology - Comparing Charlton et al (2000) and Willaims et al (1981)