Is Television Increasing our Crime Rate?

A Study of Trends Between Violence and Television

Kristin Pisa

Communications T/TH 8AM

Professor Ted Goertzel

April 17, 2006

Abstract

	This paper examines trends in violence and television watching, using data from the general social survey.  It has been argued that there is a significant amount of violence in television which results in increased aggression among the viewers.  This increased aggression results in increased real-life violence.  The counter argument is that there are other factors that influence violence and violent television has no affect on real-life violence.  By examining the data, it is concluded that there are basis on both sides of the argument and there is no way to determine the correct answer without further examination of outside factors.  Researchers say that aggression is increased by violent television and media (Anderson Bushman, 2001), while other researchers state that television does not cause aggression, it is only outside factors such as gangs, drugs, and guns (Hatch, 2001).  Overall, both sides of the argument must be taken into consideration.
   Anderson and Bushman state that America is one of the most violent countries in the industrialized world (2001).  It has been argued that one of the contributing factors to this violence is America's television programs.  Are Americans acting out the violence they are exposed to on television?
	Concerns about violence as a result of television emerged after broadcasting began in 1946 (Anderson Bushman, 2002).  Many studies have emerged from these concerns, and there is no specific conclusion made, both sides are have valid points.  Many feel that this aggression begins in the child, adolescent, and young adult stages of the viewer’s life.  On any given Saturday morning around 10A.M more than 60% of all children in America are watching TV (Anderson Bushman, 2001).  It has been suggested that more than 60% of all television programs contain violence (Anderson Bushman, 2002).  This suggests that most of the children in America are watching violent television shows. 
	It appears that America wants violence on television.  Television gives Americans what they demand and if 60% of the programs are violent, then this must be what America asks for.  Many argue that television is just portraying what is happening in real life, therefore television cannot be blamed for an increase of violence.  Television is just portraying the situations that Americans face every day.  The truth is that 87% of crimes in the real-world are non-violent, whereas 13% of reality-based television is non-violent. (Anderson Bushman, 2001) When it comes to extreme violence, such as homicide, the FBI reported that .2% of crimes are murders, but of the crimes on television 50% are murder (Anderson Bushman, 2001). 
	The question is whether there is a link between childhood exposure to violence on TV and adult behavior, but as adults researchers examine the affect of television.  There is no systematic evidence linking mass media violence to violence or murders in America, but D.P. Phillip (1983) attempted to show a relationship.  In mass media, and television, when violence is presented it is rewarded and exciting, similar to televised fight matches.  Laboratory subjects behaved more aggressively after seeing a filmed prize fight scene.  The more publicized the fight, the greater the increase in homicides (1983).  
	The other end of the spectrum feels that there is no causal relationship between television/media violence and real life violence/crime/murders.  David Hatch (2001) suggests that other factors such as guns, drugs, and gangs are three times more of a factor contributing to real life violence.  Perhaps other key factors are more responsible then merely violence in television.  
	This report intends to analyze the debate of whether or not television and media influence violence in America.  Data provided by the general social survey will help illustrate both sides of the argument.  The real question is, can a correlation be shown between television watching/media and violence.

Results

Television Viewing 3 Hrs+ VS. Violent Crimes 

	The above diagram represents Americans who watch television for 3 or more hours a day versus violent crimes.  Both lines do not have any correlation at all.  Television watching remains relatively linear with no apparent peaks while the violent crimes remained linear until a sharp peak in the 90s. The sharp increase in the 90s could be a result of an increase in drug crime as David Hatch states. (2001)  This chart suggests that violence is the result of other stronger factors then television, these factors are examined below.

Information on Amount of Time Spent Watching Television

              0-1 HRS        2-3 HRS        4+ HRS         TOTAL

<30           23.6%          44.3%          32.1%          100%

30-49         29.9%          47.0%          23.1%          100%

50+           19.5%          44.8%          35.7%          100%

MALE	         25.7%          48.4%          25.8%          100%

FEMALE        23.8%          43.4%          32.8%          100%

WORK FULL TIME 31.4%         50.2%          18.4%          100%

NOT WORK FULL 17.9%          40.9%          41.3%          100%

0 CHILDREN    27.4%          45.6%          27.0%          100%

1-2 CHILDREN  23.9%          45.8%          30.3%          100%

3+ CHILDREN   23.1%          45.3%          31.6%          100%

LOW INCOME    17.7%          38.8%		    43.5%	         100%

MIDDLE INCOME 22.5%	         47.9%          29.6%          100%

HIGH INCOME   31.7%	         49.4%          18.9%	         100%

	The above represents possible contributing factors to an increase of time watching television. These factors could in turn explain an increase of violence, which would discredit the suggestion that there is a direct correlation between violence and an increase in television watching.  
	Of the age groups, the group watching the most hours of television is 50+, but this age group is not prone to violence.  The <30 group comes in close second, and this group are the most influenced and commit the most crime.  This could suggest that the significant amount of time they spend watching television is creating more aggression, in turn resulting in more violence.  To argue the other side, we could suggest that the amount of television watching has no affect on the amount of violence.  The 50+ group are usually retired, in turn having more time to watch television.  The <30 watch less then the 50+ because they may have school or a job.  The 30-49 watch the least amount of television because this particular group is more likely to have a job along with a family.
	Males are more inclined to commit violent crimes than females.  According to the data provided, females are watching the most amount of television.  This does not support the hypothesis that one who watches more television is more likely to commit violent crimes.
	Working status has a significant impact on both violent crimes and television watching.  One who is not working a full time job is more likely to commit a violent crime.  This likely hood is based on time and need for income.  According to the data, the group that watches the most television is the population that does not work full time.  To argue that the increase amount of time watching television is not a contributing factor to violence, the population who does not work a full time job has more time to watch television and does not necessarily suggest that they are more likely to commit crime because of television watching.
	The amount of children had minimal impact on television watching.  From the percentages displayed, there were no significant differences between the three groups.  
	Possibly the most significant factor would be income.  Lower income is often associated with crime.  Low income watches the most television.  It could be argued that this group is watching more violence, therefore increasing their aggression.  The counter argument could be that the lower income population is watching more television because they are not working as many hours.  The increase of violence among this group could be a product of other important factors as discussed by David Hatch (2001).  This group is more inclined to be influenced by drugs and gangs, which is more of a factor in producing aggression and violence then violent television programs.  We could diagram the findings as follows: 

	
	Interpretation and Conclusion

	Using the findings outlined above, the data does not support the hypothesis that the violent crime rate is associated with the amount of TV viewing.  It can be determined though that there are other factors, other then television that can result in an increase of aggression and violence.  Both sides of the argument have valid points.
	The future is undeterminable.  Since it has been determined that violence can be influenced by other factors, we cannot determine the future without knowledge of those factors.  The non-linear relationship between the two factors that has been displayed in the last few years of our data suggests that there is no way to determine future trends, but we can make speculations using the other factors introduced.  
	If poverty continues to increase in America, violence could increase.  As indicated, a lower income results in more television watching.  An increase of violence could increase television watching because of citizens watching information on the increased violence.  In addition to lower paid jobs, the decreased amount of full time jobs available could result in an increase number of people with non-full time jobs.  As indicated, people are more inclined to watch television when not working a full time job.  
	There will always be reports suggesting that violent television is influencing increased violence and aggression.  Until there is a better understanding about all factors associated with violence, these reports must be taken with care.  There is no concrete evidence suggesting that increased television watching does NOT cause increased aggression, therefore both sides of the argument must be taken into consideration. 

References

1. Anderson, C.A., & Bushman, B.J., (March 2002).  The Effects of Media Violence on Society.  Science, Vol. 295 (No. 5564).  Retrieved April 4, 2006, from Google Scholarly database.  

2. Anderson, C.A., & Bushman B.J., (June/July 2001).  Media Violence and the American Public, Scientific Facts Versus Media Misinformation.  American Psychologist.  Retrieved April 4, 2006, from Google Scholarly database.

3. Hatch, D., (January 2001).  Murder Not a Product of TV Violence, Report Finds.  Electronic Media.  Vol 20 (Issue 4).  Retrieved April 15, 2006, from Academic Search Premier database.    

4. Phillip, D.P., (1983).  The Impact of Mass Media Violence  on US Homicides.   American Sociological Review.  Vol 48 (No. 4). Retrieved April 4, 2006, from Google Scholarly database.