Prosocial behavior in the media
Download
1 / 42

Prosocial behavior in the media - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 1412 Views
  • Uploaded on

Prosocial behavior in the media. What do we mean by “prosocial”. Not as easy to define as one might think Which is more important, the intent or the effect? “The road to hell is paved with good intentions” “Enlightened self-interest”

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Prosocial behavior in the media' - sophia-parsons


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

What do we mean by prosocial
What do we mean by “prosocial”

  • Not as easy to define as one might think

    • Which is more important, the intent or the effect?

      • “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”

      • “Enlightened self-interest”

      • Without intent, any good outcome suddenly becomes evidence of moral behavior

    • When one group benefits and another is disadvantaged, is the act “prosocial”?

    • Can the actor benefit from “pro-social” behavior? Can one’s family?


Prosocial working definition
“Prosocial” working definition

  • For our use, a person will engage in prosocial behavior when she intentionally commits any act which will be likely to improve other people’s welfare overall

    • The actor can (and as we see later, hopefully does) feel good about the act

    • If the actor is really not free to decide whether to benefit another or not then the action is really not prosocial, though the person requiring the beneficial behavior may be acting prosocially

      • Contributions to Red Cross taken out of your check while the boss looks on


What kinds of prosocial acts have been proposed
What kinds of prosocial acts have been proposed?

  • Altruism

  • Control of aggressive impulses

  • Delay of gratification/task persistence

  • Explaining feelings of self or others

  • Reparation for bad behavior

  • Resistance to temptation

  • Sympathy

    • Liebert & Sprafkin


Prosocial effects
Prosocial effects

  • The study of prosocial effects of media portrayals is a minor part of effects study

  • Most prosocial effects research occurred in late 70s and early 80s


Researchers of prosocial effects apply theories akin to those for violence studies
Researchers of prosocial effects apply theories akin to those for violence studies

  • Social learning (social cognitive) theory

  • Affect referal

  • Differential effects

  • Not catharsis, though


Scholars have reviewed the findings
Scholars have reviewed the findings those for violence studies

  • A number of meta-analyses have been produced

    • Rushton

    • Hearold

    • Paik

    • Mares


Most research looks at children s learning of prosocial behavior
Most research looks at children’s learning of prosocial behavior

  • Developed as an extension the 1960s-1970s concern over the application of television to the goal of public education

    • Educational content

    • Prosocial content

      • Often the two are combined (Sesame Street)



Prosocial effects1
Prosocial effects reveal:

  • Conclusions

    • Prosocial content can lead to positive behavioral outcomes

    • Effects of exposure to prosocial content are comparable in strength to those of exposure to antisocial content

      • Scholars disagree on which is stronger

    • Altruism is the most effective prosocial portrayal


Prosocial effects2
Prosocial effects reveal:

  • The effect of prosocial content on boys is not significantly different from the effect on girls

    • Paik, 1995

  • Prosocial portrayals in family sitcoms have a greater effect than in educational programming

  • The effects are positive for all ages

  • The effect is greater for donation than for prosocial play or cooperation

  • The effect of stereotyping is greater than the effect of anti-stereotyping content


Hearold 1986
Hearold, 1986 reveal:

  • Synthesis of 1,043 studies of effects of television on social behavior

    • “Effect sizes for prosocial treatments and behavior, of course, were consistently greater than for antisocial treatments on behavior.”

    • “The implication is that if subjects watched the antisocial treatments, usually violent programs or episodes, they would be elevated from the 50th to the 62nd percentile in antisocial behavior, typically physical aggression, and if they watched the prosocial treatment, they would be elevated from the 50th to the 74th percentile in prosocial behavior, typically altruism.”


Critique of studies
Critique of studies reveal:

  • Stimulus materials were usually either:

    • depictions of prosocial behavior developed specifically to elicit the behavior, or

    • Either Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood or Sesame Street

  • Normal tv fare sends mixed messages

    • prosocial violence

    • characters exhibiting good and bad behaviors


Prosocial content research
Prosocial content research reveal:

  • Liebert, Sprafkin, Rubinstein and others (mid 70s)

  • Greenberg et al. (late 70s)

  • Baxter & Kaplan (early 80s)

  • Lee (late 80s)

  • Potter & Ware (late 80s)



Primetime prosocial behavior
Primetime prosocial behavior reveal:

Lee, 1988


Comparison of pro and antisocial behavior primetime kaplan baxter 1982
Comparison of pro- and antisocial behavior primetime reveal:(Kaplan & Baxter, 1982)

Note: 12 hours, 17 programs


Prosocial content
Prosocial content reveal:

  • The relative incidence of prosocial and antisocial acts varies widely among studies

    • Greenberg et al., about 42 pro- and 40 antisocial acts per hour

    • Kaplan & Baxter, 46 pro- and 17 antisocial acts per hour

  • Altruism

    • Greenberg et al., 14 acts/hour, most common pro-social act

    • Potter & Ware, 2 acts/hr, 5th most common



Prosocial content1
Prosocial content programming

  • Males engage in the most prosocial acts

    • Potter & Ware: 67% of pro, 80% of anti

    • Baxter & Kaplan: 69% of pro, 78% of anti

    • However, there are more male characters

  • The great majority of both violent and prosocial acts are seen as justified

  • The outcome of prosocial acts was not reviewed


Proportion of prosocial and antisocial acts committed by gender(Greenberg et al. primetime 1975-78 study)


Prosocial content2
Prosocial content gender

  • Most analyses exclude violent content from prosocial acts

    • Some evidence exists of a significant amount of prosocial violence

      • Heroes commit a significant amount of violence

      • Saturday morning tv


Liss and reinhardt
Liss and Reinhardt gender

  • Regular and prosocial Saturday morning cartoons

  • Antagonists commit more violent acts than protagonists

  • No significant difference in the amount of violence on regular and prosocial cartoons


Prosocial content3
Prosocial content gender

  • We were interested in:

    • Relationships among actors

    • Involvement of third parties

    • Rewards for altruism

    • Social support


The method finding and measuring altruism
The method: genderfinding and measuring altruism

  • Primetime programs recorded for one week on ABC, NBC and Fox networks

  • 26.5 hours of programming included in the study

  • Only regularly scheduled series included (no movies, game shows, sports, news)

  • Unit of analysis: the altruistic act


Defining altruism
Defining altruism gender

  • “social behavior carried out to achieve positive outcomes for another rather than for the self” (Rushton, 1980)

    • must include some nontrivial self-sacrifice

    • leaves open the possibility of antisocial altruism


Acts of altruism

Risking life, health or safety gender

Risking career or future

Sacrificing money

Sacrificing or giving up time

Sacrificing something of personal value, a dream or satisfaction

Not included: common courtesy or minimal sacrifice

Acts of altruism


Coding altruistic acts on tv
Coding altruistic acts on TV gender

  • Relationship of the benefactor and beneficiary

    • Friends, neighbors or coworkers

    • Mere acquaintances

    • Strangers

    • Superior and subordinate

    • Subordinate and superior

    • Family

    • Lovers or romantically involved


Coding altruistic acts on tv1

Gender of beneficiary and benefactor gender

Relationship to violence

Involvement of a third party

Outcome of the act for any third party

Immediate response to the act by the benefactor and the beneficiary

Long-term outcome of the act for the benefactor and the beneficiary

Coding altruistic acts on TV


Measuring altruistic acts on tv
Measuring altruistic acts on TV gender

  • Coding the justification of the acts

    • Was it part of the benefactor’s job?

    • Was it expected under the circumstances?

    • Was this above and beyond what would be expected?


Measuring altruistic acts on tv1
Measuring altruistic acts on TV gender

  • The coding instrument was pretested

    • Both authors viewed two hour long programs

    • (Neither program included in results)

  • Programs were recorded on videotape and later coded

  • Second author coded all programs

  • No “sweeps month” programs included


Research questions

1 gender: What is the rate for altruistic behavior in primetime programming?

2: Is there a relationship between the gender of the benefactor and the gender of the beneficiary of the altruistic acts?

3. What is relationship between the benefactor and the beneficiary?

4: What is the nature of the altruistic act?

Research questions


Research questions1
Research questions gender

  • 5: What are the consequences of the altruistic act for the benefactor and the beneficiary?

    • Outcome

    • Response


Results
Results gender

  • 27 acts of altruism identified in 26.5 hours of primetime programming

  • Just over one act per hour (1.1 acts/hour)

    • Fewer than in previous research




Outcome for the actors percent of acts n 27
Outcome for the actors genderPercent of acts (n=27)



Results1
Results gender

  • Altruistic acts were rarely tied to violence

  • Most acts (63%) exceeded expectations for benefactor behavior based on occupational role or social norms

  • The outcome for third parties was negative more than half the time


Conclusions
Conclusions gender

  • Results of altruism are as likely to be negative as to be positive

  • Gender is less related to TV altruistic acts than in the past

  • Altruistic violence is uncommon


More conclusions
More conclusions gender

  • The definition of altruism is critical to outcome of the analysis

  • A larger sample is needed

  • Multiple coders are needed

  • More extensive analyses are needed

    • Monitoring much like violence studies

    • Dramatic function of violence and prosocial acts


ad