Media
Topic 1: Explanations of Media Influences on Antisocial Behaviour
Observational Learning
Where individuals observe and imitate the behaviour of others. Many argue that watching television can teach viewers violent behaviour/draw their attention to behaviours they wouldn’t have previously considered.
Bandura (1983) used his Social Learning Theory to explain this. Watching violent role models may increase violent behaviour in those who are already motivated to behave aggressively. TV may also teach viewers the positive and negative consequences of behaving aggressively.
Research on the role of observational learning from media in antisocial behaviour has shown:
‐ Bandura et al (1986):
Children aged 3‐5 were shown films of a model behaving aggressively towards a “bobo doll”. The doll was hit, thrown, sat on and punched in the nose 3 times during the film. The children were then lead to laboratory containing toys (including the bobo doll), and were observed during free play. 88% of the children imitated the behaviour seen in the film‐ significantly more than a control group of children who did not see the film.
‐ Bobo dolls do not retaliate when hit. This raises questions as to how much this study tells us about the effect of media influences on antisocial behaviour towards other human beings.
‐ Smith et al (2004): The children’s behave would be better defined as “rough and tumble play” rather than aggression.
‐ Some have labelled Bandura’s study as artificial, as it was designed to study behaviours that children would not usually display.
‐ Johnston et al (1977): Children who behaved aggressively after observing an adult model were identified as more violent in general by their teachers and peers.
‐ Children in the study showed signs of demand characteristics. Noble (1975) quoted one child as saying “look, mummy! There’s the doll we have to hit!”.
‐ Paik and Comstock (1994):
Found that TV had a greater effect on antisocial behaviour if the actor was rewarded for his or her actions. The reward provides positive reinforcement.
Evaluation of observational learning:
‐ There are few studies on how observing violent media can influence antisocial behaviour.
Naturalistic studies rarely find that observational has taken place. Noble (1975): “In my own studies,
I have rarely found more than 5% imitation after viewing”.

‐ It seems that only fictional programmes which show violence are blamed for causing antisocial behaviour, and research tends to focus on these programmes. Not much attention paid to other forms of media i.e. non‐fiction programming such as the news.
Desensitisation
Under normal circumstances, our anxiety about violence prevents us from using it, and we are shocked when we witness acts of violence. However, if we are frequently exposed to media violence, violence becomes more commonplace, meaning we are more likely to engage in violence and less likely to intervene when we witness it. We are “desensitised” to the effects of violence.
Research on the role of desensitisation to violence in antisocial behaviour has shown:
‐ Boys who watch high levels of television violence show lower levels of psychological arousal to new scenes of violence.
‐ Belson (1978):
A study of 1565 teenage boys which found no evidence that high exposure to TV violence lead to desensitisation to violence/decline in respect for authority.
‐ Hagell and Newburn (1994):
Found that young offenders watched no more TV violence than non offenders.
‐ Goldstein (1976):
After showing male participants a violent movie, the men were highly concerned about punishing those who committed murder, a finding that was observed across four countries.
‐ Schramm et al (1961):
Found that those with access to a television showed more anxiety about using aggression than those who did not have access to a television.
Evaluation of desensitisation:
‐ Research fails to support the fundamental aspects of the theory.
Cognitive Priming
Watching violence leads to people storing memories/scripts of such violence. These memories/ scripts are activated if a similar situation is experienced in real life. Berkowitz (1984) argues that aggressive ideas in violent films can activate other aggressive ideas through association. Immediately after watching a violent film, a person will be primed to respond aggressively, because they will retrieve aggressive memories. Huesmann (1982) argues that children learn problem solving through observation, so if they witness an aggressive scene and then experience a similar situation in real life, they are likely to use the violent script.
Evaluation of explanations of media influences on antisocial behaviour:

‐ Gauntlett (1995): Research into media influences on antisocial behaviour has been affected by a political desire to blame television for social problems.
‐ It has been found that for 50% of the time children watch TV, they are doing something else and are not paying attention to what is on screen.
‐ Cumberbatch (1989): Research does not consider why viewers will imitate violent acts they see in the media. There is also a clear bias in this research field, as publishers of scientific journals are only interested in studies which show a link between violent media and antisocial behaviour.
‐ Klapper (1960) described research into media influences on antisocial behaviour as “simplistic”, as it involved counting participants’ acts of aggression to assess the effect of the media source.
‐ Research fails to take into account real world factors that may influence the behaviour of participants. Gunter (1983) claims that participants may behave differently in a research environment if they realise that any violent behaviour they display will not be punished. Freedman
(1992) points out that participants often try to provide responses that they believe the researcher would want. Livingstone (2001) points out that naturalistic studies of media influence on antisocial behaviour show less of an effect.
Topic 2: Explanations of Media Influences on Pro‐social Behaviour
The Nature of Television
People watch an average of 25 hours of television per week. 2 years old: 7 hours per week. 6 years old: 20 hours per week. Declines through adolescence then peaks with age. All viewers are exposed to large amounts of pro‐social as well as antisocial messages.
Exposure to Pro‐social Messages
Studies have found that television viewers are exposed to a number of pro‐social messages:
‐ Sprafkin et al (1975):
Content analysis of U.S. television found that there was an average of 11 unselfish and 6 sympathetic acts per hour of broadcasting.
‐ Greenberg et al (1980):
The researchers studied the idea that pro‐social and antisocial content often appears together, and found that among the favourite programmes of 8‐12 year olds, there was an average of 42.2 acts of antisocial and 44.2 acts of pro‐social behaviour per hour.
Several researchers argue that young children can understand and gain pleasure from pro‐social messages. For example, Wilson (2008) argues that children learn about the nature and causes of different emotions from television characters, and often experience empathy with them. Research in this area has shown:

‐ Howard and Roberts (2002):
The researchers studied toddlers aged 14 months + watching the programme ‘Teletubbies’. The children’s responses included parasocial behaviour such as joining in with the interaction on screen, and they would also interact with viewing companions. Similar behaviours in children aged 4‐5 had been observed by Palmer (1986). Penner et al (2005) described these behaviours as “micro level pro social tendencies”.
Evaluation:
‐ Research support.
‐ Many studies have found that children cannot apply pro‐social behaviours they learn from media influences to new situations.
‐ Zielenska (1985) claims that programme media designed to teach children pro‐social behaviour is not of the same quality as broadcast media.
‐ Gunter and McAleer (1997) claim that children are only able to perform pro‐social behaviours learnt from media if they are given sufficient opportunity to rehearse them.
Social Learning Theory
Bandura’s Social Learning Theory states that children learn behaviour through observation, and will later imitate it if the expectation of reward is greater than the expectation of punishment. If children are aware that they are likely to be rewarded for performing pro‐social behaviours, they are more likely to repeat these behaviours:
Evaluation:
‐ Eisenberg (1983): Prolonged viewing of pro‐social programming could results in substantial and enduring increase in children’s pro‐social behaviour.
‐ Midlarsky and Hannah (1985) suggest that younger children will perform social behaviours if they believe that they will bring reward/help them avoid punishment.
‐ Exposure to filmed models has less of an effect on behaviour than exposure to real life models.
‐ Children often find it hard to apply behaviours learnt from pro‐social media to new situations.
‐ The Social Learning Theory states that in order to recreate a behaviour, children must notice and remember it. Antisocial behaviours are more likely to be remembered as they have greater impact.
‐ Children’s observation of behaviours exhibited on television may be disrupted.
Development Trends in the Influence of Pro‐social Messages
Researchers argue that there is variation in the influence of pro‐social messages within media, as skills required for pro‐social reasoning develop with age. Eisenberg et al (1987) point out that pro‐ social behaviours have been shown to be dependent on skills such as empathy and moral reasoning that develop with age. Hoffman (1976) found that young children were less able to recognize the

emotional state of others. Mares (1996) found that children were unsure of how to help others, and claimed that they had difficulty understanding abstract pro‐social messages.
Evaluation:
‐ Roker et al (1998) suggest that adolescents are better able to understanding the underlying principles of pro‐social messages and are more likely to perform pro‐social behaviours for unselfish reasons. ‐ Research has shown that pro‐social messages have a greater impact on young children, contradicting the idea of a developmental trend in the influence of pro‐social messages.
Other research on media influences on pro‐social behaviour has shown:
‐ Mares (1996):
A meta analysis of 39 studies of media influences on pro‐social behaviour. Mares categorised pro‐ social influences from media into 4 types:
‐ Positive Interaction: Including friendly/non aggressive interaction, displays of affection and peaceful conflict resolution. Children who viewed positive interactions tended to act more positively in their own interactions. These messages had a moderate effect on children’s behaviour.
‐ Altruism: Including sharing, donating, offering help and comforting. Children who viewed explicit unselfish behaviours tended to behave more unselfishly. These messages had a moderate to large effect on children’s behaviour. Where the unselfish behaviour was not explicitly modelled, the effect on children’s behaviour was much smaller.
‐ Self Control: Including response to temptation, obedience, ability to work independently and persistence at a task. Children who viewed models exercising self control tended to show more self control in their own behaviour. These messages had a moderate effect on the children’s behaviour, but had a greater effect when compared with antisocial content.
‐ Anti Stereotyping: The effects of counter stereotyping on children’s attitudes and beliefs. Children who were exposed to counter stereotyping showed less evidence of stereotyping and prejudice in their own beliefs. These messages had a moderate effect on children’s behaviour, but a much greater effect when used in a classroom environment with activities to expand on these issues.
More positive effects were found for girls in studies that classified effects based on gender.
‐ Liss and Reinhardt (1979):
The researchers observed children watching a cartoon series ‘Superfriends’. The cartoon modelled both pro and antisocial behaviours, however, the characters usually tried to justify their aggressive behaviour, in turn legitimising it for the children.
‐ Cole et al (2003):
Evaluated the impact of a series of ‘Sesame Street’ programmes aimed at teaching mutual respect and understanding among Israeli and Palestinian children. Whilst pre‐research interviews revealed

that few of the children held negative stereotypes of each other, following viewing the series, the children used increased positive attributes to describe the other group and increase use of pro‐social justifications to resolve conflicts.
‐ Mares and Woodward (2005):
This meta analysis concluded that overall, males and females were equally positively affected by pro social content and there were no ethnic or racial differences, although pro‐social media had a greater effect on those in higher socio economic groups.
Topic 3: The Effects of Video Games/Computers on Behaviour
Video games have different effects on behaviour to television, as the person plays an active role in carrying out the violence as opposed to watching it. Content analyses of computer games have shown that they contain a significant amount of violent content:
‐ Dietz (1998):
Examined 33 popular games made by Nintendo and Sega and found that 80% contained some form of aggression, 50% contained violence towards another person and 21% of violence was directed at women. ‐ Haninger and Thompson (2004):
Examined 80 games aimed at teenagers and found that 94% contained some form of violence.
Guo (2007) identified the main effects of playing violent video games as increased psychological arousal, descreased helping behaviour and increased aggressive behaviour. Research has also shown that exposure to violent computer games can have desensitising effects:
‐ Tafalla (2007):
Examined the effect of music on playing the game ‘Doom’, and found that both men and women showed increased psychological arousal while playing the game whilst music was playing.
‐ Sheeze and Graziano (2005):
48 participants played a violent or non violent version of the game ‘Doom’ in pairs. They were then given the option of co‐operating with each other, exploiting each other or simply withdrawing from the game. The study found that those who played the violent version of the gamer were more likely to exploit their partners. The researchers argued that playing violent video games undermimed co‐ operative and parasocial behaviours.
‐ Anderson et al (2007):
430 children were asked to name their 3 favourite TV shows, films and computer games. They were then asked to rate how frequently they watched/played them (5 point scale) and how violent they considered them to be (4 point scale). The study found that violent video games accounted for 8.8% of variances in aggression‐ significantly higher than other factors such as abusive parents and poverty (0.8%).

‐ Sherry (2001) argued that the relationship between violent video games and aggressive behaviour was weaker than the relationship between watching violent TV and aggressive behaviour. Unsworth,
Devilly and Ward (2007) also disputed the idea of a link between playing violent video games and aggressive behaviour.
‐ Unsworth et al:
Participants were measured for feelings of aggression before, during and after playing ‘Quake 2’.
Feelings of aggression did not change in most participants, and only those who were measured as aggressive before the game became more aggressive after playing.
‐ Von Schie and Weigman (1997):
Studied 346 children, and found no relationship between the time spent playing violent video games and levels of aggression.
‐ Gentile et al (2004):
607 U.S. students were asked to name their 3 favourite video games, how often they played them and how violent the game was (7 point scale). These scores were multiplied to give the children an overall score for exposure to video game violence. The children were also asked general questions such as whether their parents limited their exposure to violent video games. The researchers predicted that those with aggressive traits would be influenced by violent video games the most.
The study found a correlation of 0.1% between video game exposure and arguments with teachers and a 0.07% correlation between video game exposure and fighting.
‐ Bartholow (2006):
Compared the responses to violence of habitual violent game players to those who did not play violent video games, and found reduced responses in those used to video game violence.
‐ Canargey, Anderson and Bushman (2007):
Participants were asked about their video gaming habits, and were then randomly allocated to playing either a randomly selected violent or non violent game for 20 minutes. Following this, the participants watched a film depicting real life violence whilst wired to measure their physiological responses i.e. heart rate. Those who played the violent game had lower levels of physiological responses, suggesting that their exposure to video game violence had reduce their response to real life violence.
‐ Physiological responses are fixed variables which allow a high level of control.
‐ Participants’ exposure to violence may have damaged their psychological wellbeing.
General Aggression Model‐ Anderson. Gill and Bushman
This theory states that individual differences and situational factors influence a person’s reaction to violent video games. Exposure to violent video games leads to increased aggression in 3 ways:

‐ Increased Psychological Arousal: Increased physiological arousal may lead to aggressive behaviour if the opportunity arises.
‐ Cognitions: Priming of aggressive thoughts.
‐ Affect: Increase in aggressive/hostile feelings.
Research on the General Aggression Model has shown:
‐ Guimetti and Markey (2007):
79 female and 88 male U.S. students were assessed for anger, and were then asked to play a violent or non violent video game. After this, they were asked to write a series of stories which were assessed for aggressive content. Only those who were identified as angry at the beginning of the study became more aggressive after playing the violent video game, support the ideas of the
General Aggression Model.
Evaluation of research into the effects of violent video games on behaviour:
‐ All of the reviews of research into the effects of violent video games on aggressive behaviour such as Cumberbatch and Howlitt (1989) have concluded that research evidence in this field is weak.
‐ There are not many studies in this field. More research needs to be carried out to precisely determine the relationship between violent video games and aggressive behaviour.
‐ The types of studies used in this field have their own methodological issues.
‐ There is little research into the long term effects of exposure to video game violence. Further laboratory/longitudinal research needs to be carried out in order to establish this.
‐ Anderson and Dill (2000) carried out a study in which they claimed that after playing a violent video game, students administered significantly longer blasts of noise to opponents in another room. They concluded that “violent video games are potentially more harmful than exposure to violent television/movies that are known to have substantial effects on aggressive behaviour”.
However, Cumberbatch (2004) pointed out that the “significantly longer” blasts were only 2% longer. Therefore, these findings were fabricated.
Topic 4: Persuasion
Hovland Yale Model
This theory suggests that three factors influence the persuasiveness/the ability to change attitudes of a form of communication:
‐ The Source:
The “source” is the person presenting the message. Hovland et al found that experts were usually more persuasive than non experts, and the argument was more convincing if the person believed that the source knew what they were talking about. The credibility, status and attractiveness of the

source also appear to be important in the persuasiveness of a form of communication. Research on the role of the source in persuasion has shown:
‐ Bochner and Insko (1966):
The researchers used a “credible witness” to convince an audience that one hour of sleep a night was an ideal amount. They found that experts were effective at influencing an audience, even when there was significant inconsistency between the argument and the audience’s existing beliefs. If a non expert tried to produce an argument that was inconsistent with what the audience believed, the audience would resist the argument and look for ways to discredit the source.
‐ Baron and Byrne (1997):
Claim that research suggests that those who speak quickly are more persuasive than those who speak slowly. This makes the audience think that the source knows what they’re talking about. The researchers also claimed that experts being more persuasive than non experts is why TV adverts place the source in a white coat, thus emphasising the scientific status of the message.
‐ Sorokin and Baldyreff (1932):
The researchers played participants 2 recordings of the same piece of music. Participants were told that one of the recordings had been judged as significantly better than the other by music critics.
96% believed that the two performances were different, and 59% agreed with the opinions of the experts. ‐ The Message:
Several aspects of the message have been found to affect the persuasiveness of a form of communication, including:
‐ The argument: McGinnies (1966) suggests that if the audience is intelligent/likely to be hostile towards the arguments being presented, it is best to present both sides of the argument. If the audience is not intelligent/already favoured towards a particular argument, a one sided argument is best. McGuire (1964) proposed that 2 sided arguments make a message more resistant to conflicting arguments. Research on the role of the argument has shown:
‐ McGuire and Papageorgis (1961):
½ of the participants heard a message supporting their arguments to tooth brushing, whilst the other participants heard a 2 sided argument. 2 days later, both groups heard a message that questioned these arguments. The group who had originally heard the two sided argument were more resistant to the conflicting arguments.
‐ Repetition: Zajonc proposed the “mere exposure effect”. He stated that “mere repeated exposure to a stimulus is sufficient for enhancement of a person’s attitude towards it”. Research on the role of repetition has shown:

‐ Arkes et al (1991):
Found that repetition of a statement made it appear to be truer.
‐ Zajonc (1968):
Participants were shown a variety of unfamiliar stimuli. Some of the stimuli were shown more frequently than others. Participants were asked to rate how positive they thought the meaning of each word was or how much they liked the people in the photos. More positive ratings were given to the more frequently shown stimuli.
‐ Kunst Wilson and Zajonc (1980):
Found that people grew to like a song the more they heard it.
‐ Fear: Studies have found that messages with moderate levels of fear are most effective in changing behaviour (Janis and Fesbach 1953). If the level of fear is too low, the audience may not be motivated to respond to the message. Whilst high levels of fear may make the audience pay attention to the message, the panic/anxiety caused may obscure the message’s factual content.
Studies have found that fear inducing messages are more effective if they show the audience a way of coping with the danger.
‐ Mood: Our mood can sometimes affect the extent to which we are affected by the message.
Research in this area has shown:
‐ Sinclair, Mark and Clore (1991):
The researchers rang students with an argument about the need for exams in order to graduate.
Some were called on sunny days, whilst others were called on gloomy days. Regardless of the strength of the argument presented, students in the good weather group were more likely to support the argument.
‐ The Audience:
Hovland et al identified several characteristics of an audience that may determine how easy they are influenced by persuasive communication:
‐ Self Esteem: Hovland et al believed that those with low self esteem were more easily persuaded than those with high self esteem. However, McGuire (1968) suggested that people with a low or high self esteem would be harder to persuade than those with moderate self esteem.
‐ Age: Tyler and Schuller proposed the “Lifelong Openness Hypothesis”. This states people can be influenced by persuasive communication at any point in their lives, and age is usually irrelevant.
However, Visser and Krosnick (1998) proposed the “Life Changes Hypothesis”, claiming that we are more susceptible to persuasive communication during early adulthood and later life.

‐ The Channel:
The “channel” is the form of communication used to convey the message. It was not included in
Hovland et al’s original theory. There are many different ways to communicate a message. Face to face interaction can be tailored to fit individual audiences. Mass media can reach many audiences at the same time. Lippa (1994) claims that print media is better for complex messages, as people pay more attention to written material.
Evaluation of the Hovland‐Yale model:
‐ Rhodes and Wood (1992) carried out a meta analysis of studies of social influence, and found that when the message was simple, clear and straightforward, it was readily received by all parties. The researchers argued that those with high intelligence were less likely to yield to persuasive messages.
‐ Rutland et al (1999) studied the developed of prejudice attitudes in 329 young children. The children were asked to take part in a photo evaluation task. Nationalism and group favouritism were not apparent in younger children, but emerged at 12, peak at age 16.
‐ Eagly (1978) points out that many of the studies in this field have found that women are easier to persuade than men, meaning there is a clear gender bias in the research. However, Sistrunk and
McDavid (1971) argue that women are only easily persuaded when the subject of communication is one that males are familiar with, and many of the studies in this field use male orientated subjects.
‐ It is hard to test the validity of Hovland et al’s model, as attitudes cannot be directly measured.
Many of the studies in this field use questionnaires to gauge participant’s belief about the persuasive communication, however, these are influenced by demand characteristics and social desirability bias. ‐ Much of the research into Hovland et al’s model was carried out during the 60s, so its validity with regard to modern forms of communication is questionable.
The Elaboration Likelihood Model
Petty and Cacioppo believed that the key to successful persuasion was whether or not an individual was motivated to elaborate on a particular message. Based on this idea, the identified two “routes” to persuasion:
‐ The Central Route:
The central route involves close elaboration and analysis of the message. In this route, it is the message itself that is most important. The arguments are examined closely, and we may counter argue the message if we disagree. For communication to be effective through the central route, the argument needs to be convincing. If individuals find the message interesting/involving and they can understand the arguments being used, they are likely to process the message through the central route. Petty and Cacioppo believed that attitudes formed through the central route would be stronger and more resistant to change than attitudes formed through the peripheral route. Central route processing is more likely when the message is seen as personally relevant/important.

‐ The Peripheral Route:
Individuals who process a message through this route are less likely to be motivated to think deeply about a form of communication. In the peripheral route, individuals are more likely to be influenced by contextual cues such as mood. Attitudes formed through the peripheral route are thought to be more susceptible to change than attitudes formed through the central route. Less personally relevant/important communications are more likely to be processed through the peripheral route.
‐ Need for Cognition:
Petty and Cacioppo claimed that there are individual differences in “need for cognition”‐ the extent to which individuals enjoy thinking about the messages they receive and analysing problems. Those with a high cognition have a tendency to search for, scrutinise and reflect on information in order to better understand the world around them. Those with a low need for cognition rely on the opinions of credible others and the context of the persuasive communication when making decisions.
Evaluation of the Elaboration Likelihood Model:
‐ Haugtvedt et al (1992) found that the attitudes of individuals with a high need for cognition were based more on an evaluation of the attributes of products in advertisements than those with a low need for cognition, whose attitudes tended to be based on more simple peripheral cues within the adverts. ‐ Vidrine et al (2007) measured the need for cognition of 227 college students, who were then asked to evaluate a fact based or emotion based leaflet on the risks of smoking. Among those with a high need for cognition, the fact based leaflet produced the greatest increase in risk perception, whereas in participants with a low need for cognition, the emotion based leaflet produced the greatest change. ‐ Studies have shown that peripheral route processing can be successful even when individuals hold an existing attitude on a subject. Mackie and Worth (1989) found that their participants were more easily persuaded by expert rather than non expert sources regarding the issue of gun control, even when they held an attitude on this issue prior to the experiment.
Topic 5: The Influence of Attitudes on Decision Making
During the 1950s, social psychologists established the idea that people like their beliefs, attitudes and behaviours to be consistent with each other. If they are, we are in a state of balance. We found inconsistencies in our attitudes unpleasant and are motivated to reduce them.
Cognitive Dissonance Theory‐ Festinger
Festinger described the ideal state of cognitive consistency as “consonance”. When our cognitions are inconsistent, we are in a state of “dissonance”. Festinger defined a cognition as “anything represented in a person’s mind”. He suggested three relationships that could exist between cognitions (irrelevant, consonant, dissonant). When people realise inconsistencies in their cognitions, they experience dissonance and will attempt to reduce these inconsistencies. Dissonance

can be reduced in a number ways i.e. removing the inconsistent cognition, or introducing a new cognition to explain the inconsistency.
Post Decisional Dissonance
We are often placed in situations where we are required to choose between two alternatives.
Making a decision in such situations invites cognitive dissonance. This type of dissonance is usually overcome by selectively exposing ourselves to information about the 2 choices.
Research on the Cognitive Dissonance Theory has shown:
‐ Festinger and Carlsmith (1959):
Participants were asked to carry out a boring task. At the end of the study, participants were asked if they would greet the next participant, tell them that the task is really interesting and that they would be paid for doing this ($1‐$20). After they had greeted the new participant, they were asked to rate how interesting they found the task.
The participants who had been paid $1 rated the task as more interesting. The researchers stated that knowingly telling a lie would have created dissonance for all participants, but those who were paid $20 were able to overcome this as the money acted as a significant justification for their behaviour. Money was insufficient justification for those who were paid $1, so the only way they could have reduced their dissonance was to convince themselves that they really enjoyed the task.
‐ Festinger et al (1956):
The researchers infiltrated a cult who believed that their leader “Ms Kleech” had been informed of an impending natural disaster by the “Elders of the Planet Clarion”, who said they would send a spaceship to rescue “Ms Kleech” and her followers. The natural disaster did not strike, and the members of the cult held beliefs that were not consistent with actual beliefs. They were able to overcome their dissonance by convincing themselves that the Elders had managed to prevent the disaster. Evaluation of the Cognitive Dissonance Model:
‐ Many have argued that cognitive dissonance can only be tested under laboratory conditions, however, Festinger et al’s study above discredits this assumption.
‐ Cooper and Fazio (1984) argued that realising inconsistent cognitions does not automatically lead to dissonance, and that people would only experience dissonance if they believed that the inconsistency would have had aversive consequences. People will only be motivated to reduce dissonance when it is unpleasant.
‐ Some studies have failed to support the idea that people expose themselves to information selectively after making a decision, however, Festinger (1964) argued that selective exposure only takes place in certain situations.

Self Perception Theory‐ Bem (1965)
Bem believed that everyone had equal knowledge of their behaviour, so our attitudes develop by observing our behaviour and inferring what behaviours might have caused a particular attitude.
Bem carried out his own version of Festinger and Carlsmith’s cognitive dissonance study.
Participants listened to a recording of a man enthusiastically describing a tedious task. The participants were told that he had been paid for the commentary ($1‐$20). Those who were told the man had been paid $1 thought he enjoyed the task more than those who were told he had been paid $20. Bem argued that the participants did not judge the man’s attitude to the task in terms of cognitive dissonance, but believed that any attitudes the man may have held were a result of his own self perception.
Overjustification Effect
In self perception, judgements are made regarding the likely causes of our behaviour. These judgements are important factors in motivation. The “overjustification effect” is where internal motivation to perform a task is reduce by significant external justification. Based on this theory,
Hogg and Vaughan (2008) claimed that people would find antisocial behaviour less appealing if they were rewarded for it.
Lepper et al (1973) asked nursery children to draw pictures. Half were promised a reward for drawing, whilst the others drew of their own free will. The children were later observed playing. The children who were originally rewarded for drawing spent half as much time doing so compared to those who drew of their own free will.
Topic 6: The Effectiveness of Television Advertising
The connection between psychological and persuasion is often considered to be directly linked to advertising. Research has been carried out to establish how effective advertising is at changing behaviour. Hard and Soft Sell Advertising
“Hard sell” advertising is where the advert is orientated towards the product. “Soft sell” advertising is where the advert is orientated towards the consumer. Products in soft sell adverts often suggest a particular lifestyle that the viewer might aspire to. Research on the effects of hard and soft sell advertising has shown:
‐ Snyder and de Bono (1985):
Found that participants with high “self monitoring” had more favourable attitudes to soft sell adverts, and were more likely to change their behaviour after being exposed to them. Those who scored low on self monitoring preferred hard sell adverts. Based on studies such as this, companies have began focusing their advertising on specific consumer profiles (“psychographics”).

Product Endorsement
Giles (2002) states that companies often make use of the relationships between viewers and well known celebrities (“parasocial relationships”) to provide a trustworthy and reliable endorsement of their product and make people more likely to try it. Celebrity endorsement is also thought to work by transforming the image of a product through its association with a particular celebrity. Walker et al (1992) found that participants rated the same products differently when they were endorsed by different celebrities. Giles (2003) analysed an advertising campaign by the insurance company More
Than, and concluded that whilst the advert did not include any mention of the product name etc, viewers would have needed to make more of an effort in recalling and recognising the advert, which would have lead to greater attitude change towards the product.
Evaluation of the effectiveness of television advertising:
‐ Although there are many examples of effective celebrity product endorsement, research in this area is inconclusive. Hume (1992) advertised over 5,000 TV adverts, and found that celebrity endorsement did not enhance the persuasive communication of the adverts.
‐ Comstock and Sharrer (1999) found that 80% of television viewers were likely to leave the room during advertising breaks. Also, those who watch recorded television are able to fast forward through adverts, therefore minimising their impact.
‐ Research suggests that the effectiveness of adverts may depend on the type of programme during which they are shown. Bushman (1998) found that violent and humorous programmes were associated with low levels of recall of advertised material.
Advertising to Children
The build up to Christmas is characterised by an increase in the number of advertisements for children’s products, which activates what some refer to as “pester power”, where children put pressure on their parents to add the advertised toys to their Christmas list. In Sweden, the
Government has placed a ban on all adverts aimed at under 12s during this period.
‐ Pine and Nash (2001):
Found a positive correlation between the amount of adverts watched by children and the number of items on their Christmas lists. This correlation was particularly strong for children that watched television on their own, suggesting that parents may have an influence on the connection between exposure to a product and subsequent requests for it. No correlation was reported for exposure to specific products and subsequent requests for that product. Swedish children’s letters to Santa contained significantly fewer gift requests.
Do Children Understand the Difference Between Advertising and Programming?
Young (1990) used the term “advertising literacy” to refer to the understanding that advertising is distinct from other forms of television programming and that it also has persuasive intent. Research on children’s understanding of the difference between advertising and television has shown:
‐ Martin (1997):

Meta analysis which found a strong correlation between age and understanding of persuasive intent.
‐ Robertson and Rossiter (1974):
289 Catholic school children from Philadelphia were interviewed on their understanding of television adverts using open questions. Data was collected on whether the children could understand the different between adverts and regular programming, whether they attributed persuasive intent to advertisements, whether they trusted adverts and whether they wanted the products advertised.
The study found that children are better able to understand the difference between regular programming and advertising as they get older (73.5% of 5 year olds vs 100% of 9 year olds). A similar finding was reported for attribution of persuasive intent to adverts (52.7% of 5 year olds vs
99% of 9 year olds). The findings also suggested that when the children attributed persuasive intent to adverts, they trusted/liked them less and were less likely to want the product being advertised.
Evaluation of advertising to children:
‐ A child’s peers are likely to influence their consumer behaviour, however, we cannot determine the extent of this influence.
‐ Giles (2003) argues that banning adverts aimed at children would not reduce their influence in the purchase of family goods. Modern day children have a different position in the family regarding decision making, and have considerable influence on parental choice.
Topic 7: Celebrities
Social Psychological Explanations of Celebrity Attraction
Parasocial Relationships
The concept of parasocial relationships was first introduced by Horton and Wohl (1956). They stated that “new media gives the illusion of a face to face relationship with the performer. Audiences respond to the performer similarly to those in their primary in group”. Horton and Wohl observed that for much of the time, those on television faced the audience and used direct address as if conversing personally. The key difference between parasocial and personal relationships is that the former “lacks effective reciprocity, and the audience cannot normally conceal this”.
Ashe and McCutcheon (2001) observed that “television news has increasingly come to resemble celebrity gossip”. Intimate details of celebrities are the subject of mass media, thus encouraging feelings of them being in our own personal circle. Cushmore (2006) observed that “for many, media coverage of celebrities has replaced the role of legitimate news”.
Parasocial relationships are usually measured using the “Celebrity Attitude Scale”. Put forward by
McCutcheon, Lange and Houran (2002), it originally consisted of 34 items on a scale distributed to residents in central Florida. McCutcheon et al believed there was 1 dimension to celebrity worship:
Those with low scores on the C.A.S. performed behaviours such as reading about celebrities, whilst high levels of celebrity worship were characterised by obsession and overidentification with the celebrity. However, a UK study by Maltby (2006) using 1732 participants aged 14‐62 found 3 dimensions to celebrity worship:

‐ Entertainment Social: People are attracted to celebrities because of their ability to entertain and become a social focus.
‐ Intense Personal: Intense, personal and obsessional feelings/tendencies of fans towards celebrities.
‐ Borderline Pathological: Uncontrollable desires and behaviours involving people’s favourite celebrities. Research on parasocial relationships has shown:
‐ McQuial, Blumler and Brown (1972):
Based on audience responses to a car crash scene from ‘Coronation Street’, the researchers concluded that people use parasocial relationships for companionship, personal identity and the way of understanding their lives.
‐ Giles (2002):
Claimed that parasocial relationships are used to supply gossip in offices/bars.
‐ Jenkins (1992):
Claimed that people form parasocial relationships because they are fun and help with real life interactions. ‐ McCann (2001):
Claimed that parasocial relationships originate from insecure attachments. People form them because unlike real relationships, they make no demands and there is no risk of rejection.
‐ Schiappa et al (2007):
Carried out a meta analysis of all studies of parasocial relationships, and found that their likelihood was best predicted by perception of TV characters as attractive (36%, 7 studies), perception of similarity with TV characters (23%, 5 studies), perception of TV characters as real (23%, 7 studies), parasociability (12%, 4 studies), tendency for watching television (7%, 12 studies), locus of control
(7%, 4 studies), gender (3%, 8 studies) and shyness/loneliness (2%, 10 studies). Age (5 studies) was not a predictor of parasocial relationships, despite speculation from other researchers.
Evaluation of parasocial relationships:
‐ Giles (2002) points out that whilst parasocial relationships are viewed as a disease, they are real to the individual in that they lead to behavioural and attitude changes.
‐ There is common consensus among researchers that parasocial relationships are indicators of loneliness, isolation and inactivity. However, Rubin et al (1985) found that loneliness was not a predictor of parasocial interaction, and people simply needed to pursue a similar media figure to themselves in order for companionship. Sood and Rogers (2000) point out that studies have consistently found that those who are more socially active are more likely to engage in parasocial relationships. Absorption Addiction Model – McCutcheon et al (2002)
This theory states that we form parasocial relationships due to a deficit/lack of relationships within our own lives. Relationships with celebrities are used to escape from reality and gain a sense of identity/fulfilment. The absorption addiction model is closely linked with the three categories of celebrity worship. Parasocial relationships are seen as addictive, so the individual needs to feel an increasingly stronger sense of involvement with their celebrity. The theory predicts an association between a person’s psychological health and the intensity of their paraosocial relationships.
One of the concerns of recent years is that by glamorising thing celebrities, the media may promote body shapes that are unachievable for many young people. Research has been carried out to investigate if parasocial relationships with celebrities perceived as having good body shape may lead to poor personal image:
‐ Maltby et al (2005):
Found the strongest relationship between celebrity worship and poor body image in females aged
14‐16. This relationship was not present in males, and the researchers claimed the relationship disappeared during the onset of adulthood. However, the relationship only appeared in those who had an intense personal relationship with their celebrity.
Evolutionary Explanations of Celebrity Attraction
Attraction to Creative Individuals
Humans have a characteristic of “neophillia” (love of novelty). Before modern technology, our ancestors would have had to have entertained each other and put on creative displays in order to attract a mate. Miller (1998) claims that this is why characteristics such music, art and humour are important in relationship choice today. We are drawn to individuals that display these skills, and because we are regularly exposed to broadcasts of celebrities who have these skills, our attraction to such figures is made greater. The work of celebrities often involves creative displays.
Evaluation:
‐ Darwin (1871) argued that neophillia was an important factor in the rapid diversification and evolution of birdsong, with females being attracted to males who produced the most complex songs.
‐ Duck (1982) points out that we often cite boredom as a reason for ending romantic relationships.
Participants who are more varied and creative in their relationships are more likely to maintain a successful relationship.
Celebrity Gossip
‐ The Parasocial Hypothesis:
This states that our interest in celebrities is a result of a misconception that they are part of our social group. In our ancestral past, anyone we knew intimate details about was considered to be an important member of our in group. However, we also know intimate details about celebrities.
Barkow (1992) points out that evolution did not prepare us to distinguish from members of our

community who have a genuine effect on our lives and celebrities. As a result, we use the same gossip mechanisms for celebrities as we do to keep up with the affairs of our in group.
‐ The Learning Hypothesis:
This states that our interest in celebrities is a product of an evolved mechanism which we use for acquiring relevant survival information. “Social grooming” is the process where species bond, reinforce social structures/family links and build relationships. De Backer (2005) claims that celebrity gossip serves a similar function to this, but does it in a more efficient, less time consuming way.
De Backer et al (2007) surveyed 838 and 103 participants to test which of the two evolutionary explanations best explained our fascination with celebrity gossip. Participants reported that celebrity gossip was a useful way of gaining information about their social group, and the amount of media exposure was a key predictor in the participants’ interest in celebrities. The researchers concluded in favour of the parasocial hypothesis.
Celebrity Worship as a Pathological Behaviour
Many psychologists are of the view that celebrity worship is a pathological behaviour. Research in this area has shown:
‐ Maltby et al (2006):
The researchers studied a sample of 372 18‐47 year olds and concluded that of this sample, less than
2% could be considered as borderline pathological, just over 5% as intense personal and around 15% as entertainment social.
‐ McCutcheon et al (2002):
The researchers analysed a large set of questions about celebrity worshipping behaviours. They found that celebrity worship resembled a hierarchical structure, with behaviour at the top of the hierarchy being characterised by overidentification with the celebrity and obsession with their life.
‐ Maltby et al (2001):
The researchers administered the Celebrity Attitude Scale and General Health Questionnaire (a screening method designed to reveal symptoms of poor psychological health) to 126 men and 181 women in South Yorkshire. Scores on the entertainment social category of the C.A.S. correlated positively with scores for social dysfunction, anxiety and depression on the G.H.Q. Scores on the intense personal and borderline pathological categories correlated positive with scores for anxiety and depression on the G.H.Q. The researchers concluded that there was a significant relationship between celebrity worship and poorer psychological wellbeing, caused by failed attempts to escape, cope or enhance the individual’s daily life.
‐ Handling of ethical issues was important in this study. Participants were told that their responses would remain confidential, however, they were deceived during the study.

‐ The G.H.Q. was designed for use on the non clinically diagnosed population, meaning it may not take into account mental health issues that we would expect within the borderline pathological category of celebrity worship.
Stalking
Celebrity worship in its most obsessional form can result in stalking.
The British Crime Survey defines “stalking” as “A course of conduct involving two or more events of harassment causing fear, alarm or distress to the victim”. Meloy (1999) distinguished between
“private” (where there is a relationship between the victim and the stalker) and “private” (where the victim is a public figure) stalking.
2 main theories used to explain stalking:
Attachment Theory
Kienlin (1989) believed that stalking was a result of insecure attachment during childhood. The motives/behaviour of the stalker depends on the type of insecure attachment:
‐ Fearful Stalker (Avoidant Insecure): The individual has a poor self image, and sees others and unsupportive and unreliable. They use stalking to boost their self esteem.
‐ Dismissive Stalker (Avoidant Insecure): The individual is distant from others in order to maintain a high self esteem. When relationships fail, they use stalking as an act of revenge.
‐ Pre‐occupied Stalker (Resistant Insecure): The individual has poor self image and constantly seeks reassurance and support from others. Stalking occurs as a result of rejection in order to boost self image. Relational Goal Pursuit Theory
Based on the assumption that people desire relationships. If our goal to have a relationship is thwarted, we will invest extra effort to achieve this goal. Those who are rejected emphasise the importance of having a relationship, and have an exaggerated belief in the consequences of failing to have a relationship. This leads to thoughts and feelings which emphasise their efforts.
Motives/Psychological Profile of Stalkers
‐ Mullen et al (1999):
The researchers studied reports of stalking, and developed five categories individuals’ reasons for stalking: Intimacy, reject, resent, incompetency and sexual motivation.
‐ Purcell et al (2002):
Studied 40 female and 150 male stalkers. The male stalkers had a greater history of crime and substance abuse, and had a variety of reasons for stalking. The female stalkers generally looked for intimacy, and often stalked someone they knew who worked in a caring profession.
‐ Kienlan et al (1997):

Examined the case histories of 25 stalkers. A third had a diagnosed psychotic disorder. The non psychotic stalkers held personality traits such as anger, obsession, dependency and jealousy, made more violent threats and were more likely to carry out these threats. No single profile of a “stalker personality” emerged.
Effects on the Victim
Pathe and Mullen (1997) asked 100 victims of stalking to complete a questionnaire. The victims reported symptoms similar to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder such as anxiety and suicidal thoughts.
Cyberstalking
Is the use of electronic means to stalk/harass. It has become a bigger issue with the growth of modern technology. For example, Finn (2004) found that 15% of a sample of 339 students had received emails/texts that could be considered insulting, harassing or threatening. Cyberstalking offers an attractive alternative to real life stalking. Finn points out that aspects of it such as anonymity and a greater opportunity for disinhibition can promote greater risk taking and antisocial behaviour. Eytan and Borras (2005) suggest that text messages are attractive to stalkers as there is no direct contact which reduces speaker apprehension.
Evaluation of cyberstalking:
‐ Sheriden and Grant (2007) argue that cyberstalking is less reinforcing than real life stalking, as stalkers are less able to observe the impact of their actions on the victim. Research also suggests that cyberstalkers develop tolerance to Internet based harassment, so they need to engage in more extreme activities in order to experience the same rush.
‐ Research suggests that cyberstalking may not be taken as seriously as real world stalking. Alexy et al (2005) presented students with a video based on a real life case of cyberstalking. Despite the case resulting in a prosecution, only 30% of the students considered the behaviours shown as stalking.