This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Anish Shankar Menon 1221009
• Paper 1
– Exposure to violent media: The effects of songs with violent lyrics on aggressive thoughts and feelings
• Paper 2
– Automatic effects of alcohol and aggressive cues on aggressive thoughts and behaviours
Paper 1 • Effect of media on aggression: – Exposure to violent media increases both short and long term tendencies of aggression – Most studies on television and movies. – New research on video games – music not studied in depth .
Venting • Ancient Greek idea • Popularized by Breuer and Freud • Experiencing and expressing aggression will reduce subsequent aggressive behaviour .
Violence in music • Key differences between violence in music and other media – Not graphic – Lyrics are lost in the music – More focus on music and less on lyrics .
Then what is the danger? • Use of words that prime aggression • Violent themes of the music • Imagination .
Theoretical perspective • General Aggression Mode (GAM) – Anderson and Bushman .
The overall framework • Effect of violent songs on aggressive thought and effect • The arousal effects are controlled by: – Song selection – Measuring perceived arousal • Appraisal and aspects level are not discussed • Trait hostility and humour were investigated as potential moderating variables .
respectively. • Experiment 3 – effects of violent lyrics and trait hostility on state hostility and aggressive cognitions using a broader set of songs and a different measure of aggressive cognition.The experiments • A total of 5 experiments were conducted • Experiments 1 and 2 – effects of violent lyrics on state • hostility and aggressive cognitions. • Experiments 4 and 5 – combined effects of violent humorous song lyrics on aggressive thought and affect and included trait hostility .
• Violent – “Jerk off” – from “Opiate” • Nonviolent – “Four degrees” from “Undertow” .Experiment 1 • 29 Female and 30 male participants • 2 (song) x 2 (sex) x 2 (participant pool) factorial design • Songs – in pairs – – – – Suggestions from undergrad students 1 violent the other nonviolent or minimal violence Understandable and same genre 2 songs used – Same music group “Tool” – 5 mins.
. MSE = 0. nonviolent) 2(participant pool: volunteer vs.17). F(1. MSE = 0. psychology) ANCOVA – the violent song produced higher levels of state hostility than the nonviolent song (Ms = 2. p < .97. .19).• Procedure: – Contemporary song – couple of psychological tasks – Assigned song – State Hospitality Scale (Anderson et. Al. F(1. – Females reported higher levels of state hostility than males (Ms = 2. 54) = 5.02.02.426. 54) = 6.426.62 and 2. p < . 1995) • Results: 2 (song: violent vs.60 and 2.71.
Experiment 2 • Similar to experiment 1 in all regards except that dependent variable was a measure of aggressive cognition • 61 undergrad volunteers (30 females. 31 males) • Dependent variable – Ratings of a large number of word pairs from Bushman (1996) .
choke. fight. hurt. knife. animal. kill. and stick) – People with trait hostility perceived greater similarity between aggressive and ambiguous words • Volunteers – Rate the pairs as “similar. drugs. rock. and wound) • Ambiguous in meaning . associated or related” • 1 to 7 rating from not related to extremely related . movie. police. butcher. red.(alley. hatchet. night. • gun. bottle.• Aggressive .(blood.
• Smaller scores indicated more similarity in 1st pair than the control pair • Participants who heard violent songs would have smaller scores . ambiguous – ambiguous (45) and aggressive – aggressive (45) • The second two pairings were within-subject controls • Contrast scores were computed – The 2nd and 3rd scores were averaged and from this the 1st score was reduced.• Average similarity scores were calculated – aggressive – ambiguous (100).
the mean similarity increase was just slightly more than a quarter of a scale point (0. nonviolent) 2 (subject pool: volunteer vs. F(1.113.• The 2 (song: violent vs. 56) = 4. . the predicted main effect of music lyric content. • The corresponding song effect on the control pairs was much smaller.24.27). introductory psychology) ANCOVA • Only 1 effect.05 • Mean similarity score of experimental group increased by almost half of a scale point (0. MSE = 0. p < .45) on a 7-point scale.
.. 1985) • Accessibility of aggressive thoughts: participants were timed as they read aggressive and nonaggressive words. Dill et al.Experiment 3 • Broaden the tests • 4 pairs of violent and non-violent songs used • Moderating effects of trait hostility examined using the Caprara Irritability Scale (Anderson. Caprara et al. . 1997. 1997.
• Additional controls difficulties: for possible interpretational – Check for difference in arousal properties – No song control to test state hostility and aggressive cognition • Counterbalance the order in which the two dependent variables were assessed on the basis of other findings that measuring one aggression-related variable frequently changes the outcome of subsequently measured variables. a sort of psychological uncertainty principle (Lindsay & Anderson. • The experiment used a 3 (song type) x 2 (order) x 2 (sex) factorial design with trait hostility as a continuous independent variable. 2000). .
Procedure • 83 female and 79 male undergraduates • Preselection done: – Caprara Irritability Scale – Upper and lower quartiles chosen • An adaptation of the Caprara Irritability Scale (Caprara et al. 1997) involved reverse scoring and using the 10 “friendly” filler items.. 1985). along with the original 20 “irritable” items. 1997.. Dill et al.(This was the Trait Hostility Scale) . The adaptation (Anderson.
listless)..• The participants listened to one of eight songs • Then they completed the dependent variables • Participants in the no-song condition went directly from the THS to the dependent variables..g.. energetic) or lack of arousal (e. The lack-of-arousal items are reverse scored. Participants’ ratings were based on how they felt “at the present moment” using 5-point Likert-type scales (1 = very slightly or not at all. 3 = moderately. • Word pronunciation test • Other questionnaires • Perceived Arousal Scale (PAS: Anderson et al. 1996) contains 31 adjectives describing feelings of arousal (e. 5 = extremely). 1995.g. .
F(1. violent-lyric effects on other variables cannot be attributed to arousal differences. 140) = 16. .001.31. p < .65. F(1. Thus.25.512.• PAS: The main effect of type of song did not approach significance. 140) = 1. The only reliable effect on PAS was a negative relation to trait hostility. MSE = 0. p < .
Experiment 4 • Generality of the violent song effect on aggressive thoughts and feelings by using humorous songs and including trait hostility. nonviolent humorous songs will yield levels of aggressive affect and thought that are significantly lower than levels obtained from violent humorous and no-song control conditions. . • If humor and violent content combine additively.
Those in the control condition listened to the nonviolent song and then completed the Music Questionnaire.Procedure • 65 Female and 74 male • Completed the measure of trait hostility • participants either listened to one of the humorous songs (violent or nonviolent) or they continued directly to the dependent measures (no-song control). . Participants in the two song conditions then completed the Music Questionnaire. • Next. participants completed the SHS and the word completion task.
with a no-song condition and trait hostility as a continuous independent variable. . • The design was a 2 (violent or nonviolent music lyrics) x 2 (humorous or nonhumorous lyrics) factorial.Experiment 5 • Replicated experiments 1 to 4 • Effects of violent lyrics and trait hostility on state hostility and aggressive cognition with both humorous and nonhumorous songs.
State hostility score .
Pooled results .
and applause. Othello .Paper 2 • People need not drink alcohol to become aggressive. that men should put an enemy in their mouths to steal away their brains! That we should. pleasance. the mere thought is enough • O God. with joy. revel. transform ourselves into beasts! – William Shakespeare.
– Expectancy-based models propose that alcohol increases aggression because people expect it to.Theories • Two broad categories: • Pharmacological models models. . and expectancy – Pharmacological models propose that alcohol increases aggression by impairing higher level cognitive functions such as inhibitory control.
.Experiment 1 • Mere exposure to alcohol.and weaponrelated cues automatically increases the accessibility of aggressive thoughts • Participants would respond more quickly to aggressive words (but not to neutral words) after seeing alcoholic beverage bottles and weapons than after seeing nonalcoholic beverage bottles.
Experiment 2 • Extended the results of Experiment 1 by testing the hypothesis that mere exposure to alcohol.and aggressive related cues increase aggressive behavior .
Thank you .
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.