The ever-increased violence with children is attributed to the rise of violent television and computer games.

The view, ‘There is a direct correlation between the increasing violence from children and the rise of violence in Video games and more frequent violence on Television’ is now gaining support among a lot of people in society. To see if this statement is false I am going to investigate through Functionalist ideas and see if this form of socialisation has a place in modern day culture. I came to have an interest in this after finding that so far Sociologists who have tackled the issue have not proved this theory right, however it has not been disproved.

My focal point, and opening study, is the Newson Report (1994). Newson researched whether video violence is a factor influencing violence in children. This research followed the trial of two ten year olds for the murder of two year old Jamie Bulger.

Newson found a strong correlation between real-world and TV violence. However, she stresses the difference between ‘Correlation’ and ‘Causation’. She considered other researchers who had identified this correlation and emphasised that this in itself doesn’t establish a cause for violence, just that there is a trend between the two.

Newson, however, makes the point that only a correlation has been established between smoking and lung cancer. It’s not correct to say that smoking causes lung cancer because the mechanism has not been explained.

My second focus is a recent study by psychologist Rowell Huesmann. This states that girls who often watched shows featuring aggressive heroines in the 1970s have grown up more aggressive, and confrontational, e.g. shoving matches, chokings and knife fights, than women who had watched few or none of these shows.

Between 1977-79 Huesmann asked 384 girls in the first to fifth-grades in Oak Park, Illinois about their viewing habits. Between 1992-95, he tracked 221 of the original subjects and collected information on their life. Subjects entered responses into a computer and as an accuracy check, obtained information about each subject from a close friend or spouse. He found that 59% who watched an above-average amount of violence on television as children became involved in more than the average number of aggressive incidents when older.

Both studies are relevant as both discovered that there is a correlation between ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Both studies are relevant as both discovered that there is a correlation between violence and media, however Newson does not believe this is the trigger for violence, whilst Huesmann has not included any other variables e.g. ‘Social Class’, which is my first concept to consider. Neither point out statistics showing working-class youths tend to be arrested or cautioned more than upper or middle-classes. Huesmann results were from one school so students are probably from one social class, which might influence results. Working-class children are brought up in different environments from middle class, and this could influence why they are more susceptible to violence on T.V.

My second concept to consider is ‘scripts’, Huesmann says that age 6 to 8 are very delicate years in a child’s development, they learn ‘scripts’ for social behaviour that last throughout their life. Huesmann found those "scripts" didn't always have happy endings. A study by George Gerbner reiterates this in research that shows children who watch television a lot are more likely to believe the world is a mean and dangerous place, and consequently turn to violence.

The principal method of research will be repeat questionnaires over a 30 year period. I will use this positivist approach because I want my work to take a scientific view, whilst at the same time it would clearly relate to my hypothesis better than other methods. This is because it would easily highlight the correlation between violence and violent T.V and gain greater credibility with previous researchers and critics as it has brought good results in the past. It will highlight clear trends within my sample group and offer possible explanations for their behaviour.

My study would consist 240 children chosen at random at birth from different backgrounds all with English passports. These will be chosen as shown below.

This ensures I have a good balance and range of children to see if all genders, class and ethnicity are effected by Television. Once chosen each group will split into half, the first half will be allowed to watch television and play games which contains violence. The others will be restricted to non-violent programmes, governed by their parents, these programs/games will be restricted until they are 12, the age a child is excepted to understand right from wrong.

I will send questionnaires out quarterly, asking whether or not the subject has behaved in a negative way after watching television as described by Psychologists as shown below: -

Children may become less sensitive to the pain and suffering of others.

Children may be more fearful of the world around them.

Children may be more likely to behave in aggressive ways toward others.

I will also ask if these happened after watching a television programme or game and if that contained violence. The particular questionnaires will be fixed-response questions as I want to make sense of data quickly and accurately so I can easily group and compare the results. In addition I would phone the parents to find any problems or answers I could not obtain from the fixed questions.

Before my main research I would do a one year test run on six children one from each sex and ethnicity to make sure that all questions are suitable and at the same time identify potential problems, and resolve them.

The immediate attack on my work would be that I am over ambitious on the practical side, the resources, time and money needed for this project would be substantial. However I believe that this doesn’t matter, because the method ensures that the real expense would be 240 phone calls while other costs would be minimised by inexpensive questionnaires. On the time issue, yes the length of study is very long however collating the questionnaires would barely take a weekend each quarter. I am also aware that I would receive a phenomenological attack on my questionnaires suggesting bias. However that is why I am also having unstructured questions in an interview to identify problems or obtain information not attainable in my questionnaires.

My second problem I could encounter is that my questionnaire could not be suitable for my subjects. They may unintentionally appear sexist or racist. However, these would hopefully not be a problem as my pilot study should stop any unintentional ethnic devaluation, however this is always a problem so I would take extra care in this issue. This leads on to my third problem, that some might say my questionnaire doesn’t equal the ethnicity of this country, however my response is that it is not supposed to, it is only supposed to make that the three most common are accounted for. Further smaller studies would have to be conducted to get results on Ethnicity and violence, my aim is to find a correlation between violence and children, not race and children.

My final problem could be that my theory could be too difficult to handle in practical terms, there are too many variables and it could be too difficult to ensure parents make sure children are watching what the are supposed too. Unfortunately I can’t govern them and this is the only real problem that can’t be resolved, however I anticipate the phone call would let me have a picture of whether or not the study is working and valid.