THE PERCEIVED REALITY 0F TELEVISION AND AGGRESSIVE PREDISPOSITIONS AMONG CHILDREN IN MEXICO Thesis item the Degree of M A. MICEISRN STATE UNIVERSiTY Felipe Korzenny “£975 ." ‘7' '4 Hz a M . y WSJR a.» 065. 4 {I} ABSTRACT LK THE PERCEIVED REALITY OF TELEVISION AND AGGRESSIVE ‘ ‘ PREDISPOSITIONS AMONG CHILDREN IN MEXICO BY Felipe Korzenny The present study was carried out in Mexico City in order to assess the effectiveness of several independent variables in predicting the perception of television content as real. A further step was taken in the theoretical sequence of media effects, by analyzing the relationship between the perception of television violence as real and aggressive predispositions of young viewers. Two hundred and seventy three Mexican children in the third and sixth grades of elementary schools in Mexico City were administered questionnaires in the Spring of 1975. Eleven hypotheses were tested with respect to eleven in- dependent variables as predictors of the perception of reality of television. The independent variables were: real life ex- periences with television content; socioeconomic status; grade in SChOOl: age; SEX: GPA; the use of television for relaxation, learning and companionship; exposure; and the influence of significant others. A twelfth hypothesis was concerned with the perception of reality of television at three different levels of abstraction: T.V. in general; content areas of T.V.; and six specific characters, groups of characters or behaviors on specific television shows. Felipe Korzenny The final hypothesis predicted that as the perception of reality of television increased, aggressive predispositions in young viewers would also increase. It was found that: l. The perception of reality of television increased with: the use of television for learning and companionship; general T.V. exposure; and with the influence of significant others. 2. The perception of reality of television decreased as socioeconomic status, grade in school, age, and GPA increased. 3. No consistent relationship was found between the per- ception of television reality with real life experiences, the use of television for relaxation, specific T.V. exposure, or the sex of the viewers. 4. Contrary to the hypothesis proposed, as the referent for television became more abstract the children tended to perceive television as more realistic. 5. The perception of reality of television violence did not correlate consistently with two different measures of aggressive predispositions. 6. For those children high in the perception of reality of television violence there was not a consistent relationship between exposure to television violence and aggressive pre- dispositions. 7. By means of multiple regression analysis it was found that the best predictors of the perception of T.V. reality Felipe Korzenny were the influence of significant others, grade in school and age, and to a lesser extent GPA and the use of TV for companion- ship. The best predictor of aggressive predispositions was found to be sex. 8. Sheer exposure to two violent shows was found to be related to aggressive predispositions, while exposure to 13 violent shows and general exposure were not. It was concluded that, among other things, further research should analyze more closely the different referents on television; the sources of experience that the child uses for evaluating what he sees on the screen; the dimensions on which the reality of television is evaluated, if at all; other variables that may precede or interact with the perception of reality of television; and other possible effects of the perception of T.V. as realistic. An analysis over time of the effects of the perception of reality of television and other variables, such as exposure, on attitudes and behavior was suggested. THE PERCEIVED REALITY OF TELEVISION AND AGGRESSIVE PREDISPOSITIONS AMONG CHILDREN IN MEXICO BY Felipe Korzenny A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Communication 1975 Accepted by the faculty of the Department of Communication, College of Communication Arts and Sciences, Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts degree. Committee Chairman, ii to my wife Sandy, one more time, for her patience, support, help and love iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all I must thank Dr. Bradley Greenberg, my advisor and director of this thesis for his teachings, patience, and advice. Dr. Charles Atkin and Dr. Katrina Simmons are also thanked for their advice and guidance as committee members. Dr. Rolf Wigand, Mr. Josep Rota, Ms. Patricia Arriaga, and Ms. Maria Luisa Acuna deserve a special acknowledgement for their active c00peration in the collection of the data for this study, as well as for their advice, and comments. With- out their help, this study would not have been conducted. Special mention should be made of the following persons and institutions without which this enterprise would not have been accomplished: El Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia of Mexico (CONACYT) for their partial sponsorship; The Depart- ment of Communication, Michigan State University, for Graduate Research and Teaching assistantships; Use of the Michigan State University computing facilities was made possible through support, in part, from the National Science Foundation; my parents; my parents in law; my grandparents; Susan Kheder, Steve Prevost, Nelson Wasensky, and Chris Faber for their re- search assistance; and Vicki Conklin for typing the original. iv I want to thank many other persons that directly or indirectly collaborated or gave their assistance in completing this task, however the number of people is too large to make a specific mention of each name. My gratitude goes to all of them. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1 0 INTRODUCTION ....... O .......... 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O l CORRELATES OF PRTV.... ........... . .......... 5 Real life experiences with television content .......... . ...... ............... 5 Level of abstraction of the referent on TV with respect ot PRTV............. 7 Demographics ........ .... ..... ..... ..... 8 Functions and gratifications from television viewing...... ..... .......... 12 Exposure to television................. 15 The influence of significant others.... 17 THE EFFECTS OF PRTV ON AGGRESSIVE PREDISPOSITIONS ......... .... ................ 18 SUMMARY 0000000000000000 A. O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O 21 2. METHODS.. ..................... ... ..... ...... ..... 23 THE RESPONDENTS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT....... 23 EXPLORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE................... 25 PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRE..... ....... ........... 26 ADMINISTRATION OF THE FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE... 28 OPERATIONALIZATIONS OF THE DEPENDENT VARIABLES. ........ .......... ........ ........ 29 Perception of reality of television.... 29 Aggressive predispositions towards problem resolution..................... 35 OPERATIONALIZATIONS OF THE INDEPENDENT VARIABLESOOOOOOOOOO.......COOOCOOOOCOOOOOOOO 38 Real-life experiences with TV content.. 38 Functions and gratifications from TV... 40 Exposure to TV................ ......... 42 The influence of significant others.... 45 Demographic or socio-structural variables ...... .............. ........ .. 48 vi Chapter Page STATISTICAL ANALYSIS .................. ..... 51 3. RESULTS.. ..................... . ................. 52 Real life experiences with TV content ...... 52 The level of abstraction for the referent onTV ...... 0.0000.00.00000.0.0000.00....0.. 53 Demographics.. ........ . ........ ............ 59 Functions and gratifications from teleViSion0.0. .......... 0.0.00.0... ...... .. 68 Exposure................................... 73 The influence of significant others (150).. 76 The effect of perceiving television violence as real on aggressive behavioral predispositions...... ..... . ................ 78 4. CONCLUSION... ................................. .. 85 DISCUSSION .............................. ... 91 IMPLICATIONS ............................... 104 APPENDIX A - QUE PIENSAS TU DE LA TELEVISION?.. ...... .. 108 APPENDIX B - INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG ALL PREDICTOR VARIABLES ....................... .... ...... 117 APPENDIX C - ZERO ORDER CORRELATIONS COMMON TO BOTH REEVES' AND THIS STUDY, FOR COMPARABLE MEASURES. . . ............ 0 ..... . ..... 0 ...... 118 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................... . 121 vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Eta correlation coefficients and F values from the test for deviation from linearity for real life experiences with TV content with PRTV....... 54 2. Means, standard deviations, and number of cases for responses to PRTV items at three levels of abstraction............................... ..... .. 55 2a. One factor repeated measures ANOVA for differences in responses to PRTV items at three levels of abstraction............................ 56 3. t tests for PRTV by SES ..... ...... ....... . ..... .. 61 4. t tests for PRTV by grade in school ............. . 62 4a. Zero order correlations for age with PRTV........ 63 5. t tests for PRTV by sex ....... ................... 66 6. Zero order correlations for grade point average With PRTV00000.......0.00.0000...0...0..0....0.0. 67 7. Zero order correlations for relaxation with PRTV. 69 8. Zero order correlations for learning With PRTV.0.0.0.0...00000000000000.0... ....... .0. 70 9. Zero order correlations for companionship With PRTV.... .......... 0 ........ ....0....0.I..O.. 72 10. Zero order correlations for the index of exposure to 22 Shows With PRTVOOOOOOOOI ..... 00.000.00.000. 74 10a. Zero order correlations for specific measures of exposure with PRTV....................... ....... . 75 11. Zero order correlations of the influence of significant others with PRTV...... ............. .. 77 viii Table 12. 12a. 13. Zero order correlations for two measures of aggressive behavioral predispositions with PRTV ............................................ Conditional correlations for exposure to violence of TV with aggressive predispositions at three levels of PRTV of violence. ....... ..... Relationships obtained between the independent variables and the different measures of PRTV.... ix Page 83 84 88 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to try to examine the relationship between several predictor variables and the per- ception of television violence as realistic, and the relation— ship between the perception of reality of television violence and aggressive predispositions in young viewers. It is a common, every-day experience of many of us to hear parents blaming the media for teaching their children undesirable patterns of behavior. This concern has been shared by public and private institutions in different countries. It has resulted in a drive on the part of social scientists for discovering and clarifying the nature of this phenomenon by means of several theoretical perspectives. As evidence of the general concern with this issue, it seems pertinent to cite the major research effort that has been conducted in the United States of America: the Surgeon General, in 1969, appointed a panel of social scientists in order to study the effects of television on young viewers. As a result of this enterprise a technical report of five volumes was presented to him (Comstock and Rubinstein, 1972; Murray, Rubinstein, and Comstock, 1972; Comstock and Rubinstein, 1972; Rubinstein, Comstock, and Murray, 1972; and Comstock, Rubin- stein, and Murray, 1972). In England, the British Broadcasting Corporation has sponsored and initiated several projects which raise questions with regard to the effects of television on children (Greenberg, 1974b). In Mexico, the government banned 37 shows, most of them of U.S. origin, which were considered to be the most violent of those available for broadcasting by commercial networks, after a "survey in five major cities....was undertaken to determine who watched the shows and what they thought of them.. ..the audience was largely children; parents disapproved but complained there was nothing else to watch." (Kiester, 1975) The theoretical interest of generalizing research find- ings to multiple populations is important. It is also very important to note that for countries which struggle in order to achieve an adequate state of development, like Mexico, the potential impact of televised violence on the behavior of peOple in general, and of children in particular, constitutes a major problem. The study reported here was conducted with Mexican children, and it constitutes a systematic replication (Sidman, 1960, pp. 110-139) of an original and pioneer study in the U.S. (Reeves, 1974; and Greenberg and Reeves, 1974). Several intervening variables have been studied which plausibly mediate T.V. violence watching and aggressive be- havior or predispositions (Berkowitz, 1962). However, one of these intervening variables has been systematically overlooked until recently, in spite of its seemingly obvious character, namely the perception of television programming as real. Greenberg and Reeves (1974, p.2) have succinctly stated its importance: If the child perceives program information to be realistic, to be socially useful, to be assimilated equitably with information from non-television sources, then television may blur the child's distinction between real and play. A Mexican government official, after the 37 violent series were banned declared to the press that one of the criteria for that course of action is that television violence "could be associated in the viewer's mind with present-day life" (Kiester, 1975). He implied with that assertion that not only the time context, but the relationship to the im- mediate environment of the viewer, and the impact on the receiver's perception of how the "real world" Operates. This implication has been supported by Gordon (1973, p. 19), as he found that in a sample of American children, "action in the present context was perceived to be significantly’nmuraREALISTIC than the same action in the past or future contexts." It is then the impact or effect of perceiving television content as real that is of ultimate importance, and the pre- diction of the perception of television content as real (PRTV hereafter) acquires meaningfulness accordingly. Reeves in giving suggestions for future research states: In the absence of any effects, it would seem use- less to allocate research effort to defining and predicting the perceptions....if differential effects are found, aggregate measures of various audiences are needed to verify that perceptions exist in the directions that maximize the impact of TV messages....given that audiences perceive television as depicting real life and that these perceptions make a difference in their evaluation of TV information, predicting the perceptions becomes important. (Reeves, 1974, p. 70). Reeves (1974 hereafter*), based on scarce research, addres- sed the question of what are the determinants of the percep- tion of TV programming as real in American children, and he found some evidence for the explanation of the phenomenon: 1. As questions with respect to PRTV move from abstract to more specific, the child tends to report more perception of reality; 2. the influence of significant others of a child was found to be positively related to PRTV; 3. as age decreased, PRTV in- creased; 4. as exposure to TV increased, PRTV increased; and 5. as the use of TV for relaxation, learning, and companionship increased, PRTV increased. He failed to confirm hypotheses with respect to the relationship of PRTV with real life ex- periences, socioeconomic status, intelligence, and sex. The present study attempts (1) to replicate the relation- ships for which Reeves found support; (2) to present a new test, explanations and modifications for the relationships for which Reeves didn't find support; and (3) to introduce aggres- sive predispositions as the criterion variable directly affected by the PRTV of violence. All these are examined in a different sociocultural setting, namely Mexico City. *Reeves' study of 1974 hereafter will be refered to as Reeves, excluding the year, given the continued references to that study. It should be mentioned here that by replicating a study I am trying to enforce the idea that for the formation of solid human knowledge, among other things, the repetition of research endeavors is crucial in the attempt to confirm or revise this same knowledge, and its importance is increased when the popu- lation studied is culturally different from the original one. In order to fulfill the purposes of this study, the hypotheses to be tested will be derived from Reeves', Greenberg and Reeves' (1974) work, and other related literature. CORRE LATES OF PRTV Real life experiences with television content. Symbolic or, in this case, television experiences, and "real life" experiences can be assumed to be cognitively evaluated against each other, when both are available. The question that may arise in the mind of a TV viewer is: are these peOple, or these places, or in general these representa- tions, on this show, like people, places, or in general, ex- periences I have had in real life? To this question, the viewer may give, for example, one of the following categorical answers: yes, some of them, or no. Reeves hypothesized that as real life experiences with TV content increased, PRTV would decrease, since the more elements of experience in real life that exist for comparing symbolic experiences, the less likely one would expect a person to believe what he watches on TV to be true to life. However, this relationship didn't hold in Reeves' study, for families, black people, and policemen. One must note here that families, black people and policemen, are by no means scarce in the environment where this was tested. Some of those classes of characters, or specific characters may in fact correspond to some of the real life experiences viewers had had. This might yield a relationship that says that the more real life experiences the child has the more he will per- ceive television content to be real, as actually found in some of Reeves' results. The "general pattern of findings is such that the category 'high personal experience' generally yields the highest PRTV means" (p. 38). It can be contended, however, that for non-frequent ex- periences, that can never be extreme as indicated above, one may expect the original inverse relationship to hold, e.g., in the case in which a Mexican child in Mexico has most of his experiences with Americans via TV, and only occasional contact with some American tourists, one may expect the child to assert that Americans on TV are not like Americans in real life. De Sola Pool (1965, p. 117) cites some evidence that substantiates this rationale, and says "that the effect of first-hand experience is reduction of stereotyping". It must be noted, however, that stereotyping and PRTV are not equiva- lent. The reduction of a stereotype does not necessarily imply a reduction in the report of PRTV, since what is watched on TV may correspond to what is observed in real life. This may be precisely what one may expect in the cases where the number of real life experiences is extreme or very large. So if the child knows and has interacted with a large number of families, the probability that some of the families he sees on TV are like families he knows in real life is increased. Furthermore, there is substantial evidence that indicates that TV representations are quite selective in general (Gerbner, 1972; Dominick, 1973; Clark and Blankenburg, 1972). This fact leads us to tentatively state that as real experiences with television content increase, stereotyping will decrease, but that PRTV will follow a curvilinear pattern as follows: H1: As real life experiences with TV content increase up to a middle range point, PRTV will decrease, and as real life experiences with TV content increase any further, PRTV will also increase. Level of abstraction of the referent on TV with respect to PRTV. Reeves found that the more concrete the referent for television content the more the child identified such content as reflecting real life. So, for example, the child could more precisely evaluate a specific character than TV in general. This finding is consistent with a general pattern of findings in related research (Greenberg and Dominick, 1969; Dominick and Greenberg, 1970; Greenberg, 1972; Atkin, 1971; and Ward, 1972. See Reeves, 1974 for a graphic summary on p. 8). When children were asked to respond to items such as "People on TV are pretty much like people I meet in real life", and "The same things that happen to peOple on TV happen to me in real life", they typically answer slightly below or on the middle, or not sure, part of the scale. This general pattern of findings makes sense since one would expect children, or respondents in general, to find it easier to evaluate TV content as real or not real as the referent becomes more concrete. So for example, the probability of obtaining a categorical positive answer about PRTV should increase in the following order: "The same things that happen to people on TV happen to me in real life" less PRTV than in "Fist fights on television shows are like fist fights you have participated in or you have seen in real life", which in turn should render less PRTV than in "Fist fights on 'Mission Impossible 'are like fist fights you have participated in or you have seen in real life". Accordingly it is to be expected that: H2: Children will perceive specific television characters or events to be more real than content areas of tele- vision programming and the content areas to be more real than television in general. Demographics Demographic variables, sometimes called socio-structural variables, can be expected to contribute to PRTV, by reflecting the degree and type of socialization that the child undergoes. Socioeconomic Status (SES):-Reeves hypothesized that "as socioeconomic status increases, PRTV will decrease", and -he didn't find support. He points out "that the inability of SES to predict PRTV could possibly be a function of the lack of variance obtained in its measure. Past studies reporting significant findings used economically well defined samples from different geographical areas." Among such past studies one can count Hanneman's (1972), Greenberg's (1971), Greenberg and Dominick's (1969 and 1968), and Greenberg and Gordon's (1971). One can expect PRTV to correlate negatively with SES since it has been repeatedly found that low SES children tend to use the media, and specially television as an important source of information (Feeley, 1974). Greenberg and Reeves (1974, p. 6) point out that: The typical explanation advanced for SES differences in PRTV judgments has been the more restricted Opportunities for both alternative personal and communication experiences among the less advantaged youngsters. A more descriptive rationale based on research findings can be found in Greenberg and Dervin (1972). On these basis the following hypothesis is stated: H3: As SES increases, PRTV will decrease. Agez-Lyle and Hoffman (1972, p. 175) found that: Sixth graders appeared to be considerably advanced over the first graders in rejecting television as an accurate reflection of life, and there was a further increase reflected among the tenth graders. Greenberg (1974) found in his British study that as the child grew older, his PRTV decreased, and Reeves found that in general as age increased, PRTV decreased with the exception of PRTV among black children. 10 This encountered relationship makes sense taking into consideration that the sheer availability of elements of cogni- tive evaluation increases as the child grows older, and con- sequently the tendency to report that TV reflects real life should decrease. Reeves operationalized age as the grade in school the respondents were in, which may be a legitimate Operationaliza- tion when there is a small variance of chronological age with- in grades in school. However, in Mexico it is expected that the variance of ages within school grades will be large, especially for low SES children. Then, grade in school may not reflect the range of experiences that the child accumulates as he grows up. It is then an interesting empirical question to find what is a better predictor of PRTV, grade or age. Both variables will be assessed, and the same relationship is hypothesized: H4: As grade in school increases PRTV will decrease. H4.: As age increases PRTV will decrease. Sex:-Dominick and Greenberg (1970) found some evidence for the notion that girls perceive television as more realistic than boys. Reeves didn't find support for this relationship. Although he didn't offer a rationale for such finding, it is possible to think in terms of socialization practices (Mischel, 1970). Boys and girls in the U.S.A., across differ- ent socioeconomic statuses, ages, and other structural characteristics, can be conceived to have more similar 11 experiences than boys or girls in a country like Mexico, given the larger emphasis that the American society puts on equal opportunities and rights for both sexes. Mexico, follow- ing more traditional patterns of child rearing practices, provides differential opportunities for socialization outside of the home for boys and girls. The place of the girl is at home, and the boy may go play foot ball or do something else outside of his home with friends. One may expect then that for Mexican girls, television can still be a major source of experiences, just because they tend to be more at home, and because the TV set is there. Consequently, H5: Females will perceive television programming to be more real than males. Intelligencez—Reeves hypothesized that as intelligence increased, PRTV would decrease. No past research had dealt with this relationship, but Reeves offered the rationale that "this factor could be important in determining both the amount and the reliability of information about the real world a child has to compare with television content." He adds that even after the information from the real world is gathered by the child, his ability to "compare relevant facts" can be thought also to be a function of intelligence (p. 14). He found moderate support for the hypothesis, and observed that those with the highest IQ scores perceived television to be less realistic, but that differences did not occur across the entire range of IQ scores. Reeves obtained IQ measures for 12 only about 50% (101 respondents) of his sample, where there were no IQ scores at all available for the oldest children (sixth graders). Given the small set of scores, one has reason to believe that if a more complete set of intelligence measures is obtained, some more conclusive evidence may be encountered. For intelligence we may then hypothesize that H6: As intelligence increases PRTV will decrease. Functions andggratifications from television viewing. The analysis of the functions that the media serve to their audience has been a topic of recent concern (Blumler and Katz, 1974). If the gratifications that the audience expects are obtained, the strength of the media usage behavior is ex- pected to be reinforced, and the probability of media usage in the future is increased depending on the frequency of the attainment of satisfactions (Skinner, 1969). Greenberg (1974, p. 88) says that the perception of reality of TV shows "strikes us as an intervening variable in relation to other effects of exposure to television content", and it would theoretically follow the functions sought by the viewer, with behavioral effects being the ultimate ones. Greenberg and Dominick (1969) found, in a preliminary approach to identify the uses that children of different back- grounds made of television, that socio-structural variables made a difference with respect to the reasons that children gave for watching TV. 13 Greenberg (1974) examined the reasons for watching tele- vision that a sample of 726 British children gave, and analyzed them with respect to other variables, PRTV among them. He found seven main reasons for which the children in his sample watched TV: 1. for learning; 2. out of habit; 3. to relax; 4. to forget; 5. for arousal; 6. for companionship; and 7. to pass time. Out of the seven, three of them emerged as strOng correlates of PRTV as follows: learning, r=.28; relaxation, r=.23; and companionship, r=.22. All the correlations were significant beyond the .01 level. Greenberg in the concluding remarks of this same study indicated: We also doubt that these motivations are peculiar to British children. We would expect to find the same kinds of categoriei in similar studies of American children, or 0 any children, for that matter. Indeed, they may be generic across viewing audiences, differing only in emphasis and salience for adults as well as others. Such a major impli- cation obviously requires verification, however, and a follow-up study on such an issue is in order. (p. 89) Reeves proceeded to try to replicate Greenberg's findings as indicated above, and found moderate support for the relation- ship between relaxation and PRTV, and some better support for the relationships between learning and companionship with PRTV. Given Greenberg's and Reeves' findings and suggestions, it seems plausible to search for the relationships encountered in this third study, in a third cultural setting. The use of TV for relaxation:- It has been long argued that the effectiveness of TV for influencing its audience stems 14 from the idea that the audience has its "defenses" down while watching the tube, at home, which is a secure place (see for example Krugman, 1971). There are arguments to the contrary which are highly plausible (see for example Bauer, 1964), however this View is specially tenable when the member of the audience goes to the media specifically for relaxing. In such a case, when the defenses are presumably down, the viewer may tend to believe what he sees more than when he goes to the media for other purposes. Consequently we may hypothesizetfiufl: H7: As the use of TV for relaxation increases, PRTV will increase. The use of TV for learning:-Presumably when one reports going to the media in order to learn, it's because the media, and specifically TV reflect real life in the sense of pro- viding insights into one's own life and the world in general. The viewer would not want to learn misleading ideas, but those that can guide him to a better understanding of things. It seems to be that the person, or in its case child, who goes to the TV set for learning would endorse what he views as reflecting real life, and this same viewer may want to try the "reality" he sees on the screen in his own life. It is hard to conceive of a person trying to learn things that are not perceived as efficacious for dealing with his environment then H8: As the use of TV for learning increases, PRTV will increase. 15 The use of TV for companionshipz—"Young children seek physical contact with or at least seek to be near certain other people." (Maccoby and Masters, 1970, p. 73) However not all children can satisfy this companionship tendency, and their relative deprivation of this social function may result in the substitution of human companion- ship for something that resembles it. This may include the media, and specifically, in this case, television. If tele- vision is conceived of as a friend, it may be thought of as a companion that tells it like it is, at least in a wishful thinking manner. In View of the lack of a more solid theory, the rationale above, as well as the rationale offered for the relationship between relaxation and learning with PRTV, constitute as good a theoretical guess as can be made at this point. With respect to companionship, in this study, it is to be expected then that H As the use of TV for companionship increases, PRTV will 9: increase. Exposure to television. Dervin and Greenberg (1972, p. 200) summarize research evidence that show that low income people watch more tele- vision than the general audience. Greenberg and Dominick (1969) in a study of 392 fourth and fifth graders found that low income children watched longer than high income youngsters, and that children from low income background were more likely to believe that TV 16 content was more realistic than children from higher income families. Furthermore Greenberg in his study of British children found that exposure correlated with PRTV (r=20, see Reeves, 1974, p.17). Greenberg (1972) also found that the frequency of watching ShOWS‘WhiCh feature black people in different roles is related to the perception of reality of those characteri- zations by children. The above findings seem to be consistent. Low income young viewers tend to watch more, and they tend to perceive TV content as more realistic than more privileged children. Those children who watch more seem to be less able to differ- entiate reality from fantasy, since their backgrounds have not equipped them with the kind of information that would permit them to discount as fantasy what they watch. The restricted environment of the economically disadvantaged leads to the seeking for symbolic stimulation in the picture tube, and the lack of other sources of information for the evalu- ation of the information received seems to lead to higher levels of acceptance as real of what is watched on television. Reeves found that as exposure increase, PTRV increased consistently when using a general measure of exposure , although with less consistency when he used a specific measure of ex- posure for content categories (blacks, families , and police) . In this study with Mexican children we expect accordingly that H As exposure to TV increases, PRTV will increase. 10' 17 The influence of significant others. In the sociological literature significant others are conceptually defined as "those persons who exercise major influence over the attitudes of individuals" (see Woelfel and Haller, 1971, p. 75). "Others are significant in direct proportion to the amount of information they convey to an ego about categories he uses to define objects and self... affective factors not withstanding." (Ibid. p. 76) Sociolo- gists have consistently found that the influence of signifi- cant others is decisive in the formation of educational or occupational aspirations (Picou and Campbell, 1975; Duncan, Haller and Portes, 1970; Haller and Woelfel, 1972; etc.), and on other attitudinal or behavioral aspects (Woelfel and Hernandez, 1972, etc.). The work of Woelfel in general assumes a linear model of attitude formation, namely that "an individual attitude equals the vector sum of all information relevant to that behavior an individual receives" (Woelfel, 1972, p. 11). He points out that despite the simplicity of the model, the Woelfel-Haller aggregate expectations show the highest zero order correlations with occupational aspirations (r= .64), and with educational aspirations (r= .66). This model has been recently refined by Woelfel and Saltiel (1975). Reeves found that the information a child receives from significant others about the reality of television program— ming is positively related to the child's perceived reality 18 of such content, at the three levels of abstraction that he studied. It can be argued against this finding that the in— fluence of significant others was measured as perceived by the child. However, recent evidence indicates that children tend to only slightly underestimate the influence they receive from others (Woelfel, 1975). Given the above, it is to be expected that in the Mexican sample H11: The information a child receives from significant others about the reality of television programming, as per- ceived by the child, will be positively related to the child's perceived reality of that programming. THE EFFECTS OF PRTV ON AGGRESSIVE PREDISPOSITIONS Concentrated attention on the perception of television as real, as an intervening variable, could constitute a futile task unless some behavioral effects were anticipated. If such behavioral effects are not to be found, further ex- ploration of the determinants of PRTV are unjustified. Reeves suggested that "it must first be shown that effects of differential reality perceptions do exist. In the absence of any effects, it would seem useless to allocate research effort to defining and predicting perceptions." (p. 70) The present study will attempt to clarify the character of the relationship between PRTV violence and aggressive behavioral predispositions. Given the lack of agreement as to the definition of violence and aggression (Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior, 1972, 19 p. 5), the definition for both terms will be that used by Wood (1974), given his comprehensive synthesis of the literature. physical behavior which is performed with intent to injure another person. The behavior may or may not result in physical and/or psychological injury. The behavior is not condoned by societal values. (p. 5) Berkowitz (1962, pp. 229-255) in a theoretical review of aggressive effects as a result of exPosure to media violence concludes that certain members of the audience of “the media featuring aggressive content may be relatively likely to accept what they see as true and real", because they may not be able to discount what they see as make believe. "The fantasy world does impinge upon them to a relatively great degree and consequently, if the conditions are right, can excite action." Atkin (1971) found partial support for the relationship of violence viewing to aggressive predispositions when mediated by the perception of the violent content as real. The support is said to be partial since he found that the relationship held only for one of the samples that he studied (Maryland), in which the multiple correlation of a set of variables with aggressive predispositions increased from .32 to .39 when PRTV was taken into consideration. Feshbach (1972) conducted three experiments in order to find out, among other things, if children that were presented with a violent program labeled as real showed more subsequent aggression than children who were presented with a violent 20 program labeled as fantasy. His findings can be said to have corroborated his expectations in general. However, the fantasy or reality of the shows was defined a priori by the experi- menter at the time of the presentation of the show, and there was no manipulation check. Thomas and Tell (1974) found an increment of aggression for angered subjects who were told they watched a real scene of violence, as compared with subjects who were told they watched a fictional scene of violence and others who didn't watch any filmed scene at all. Subjects who watched violence labeled as real who were not angered were also more aggressive than the rest of the groups but not as much as those who were angered in addition. There was a manipulation check in this experiment for the anger condition, but non whatsoever for the reality or make believe of the scenes. Greenberg (1974 b) in a study with British children, found a correlation of .16 (p < .01) between items such as "The shows on TV tell about life the way it really is," and "Sometimes a fight is a good way to settle an argument." This finding suggests one more time that the perception of TV violence as real may contribute to the display of aggressive predispositions and perhaps of actual antisocial behavior. Wood (1974) in an exploratory experiment found a signifi- cant association between PRTV and hypothetical aggression. In comparing a fantasy and a news context for the presentation of violence to children he found that: 21 Children who perceived the fight as very real and viewed the fight in the fantasy context were very aggressive, more aggressive than children in the news condition who perceived the fight as very real, or children in either condition who perceived the fight as less real. (p. 71) This result, although tentative, corroborates previous findings to some extent, and emphasizes the importance of the differential perception of stimuli, regardless of the intention of the source of the message. In general, there is enough reason to expect that children , or receivers in general, who perceive TV violence as real will be more likely to relate such violence to their own lives for problem resolution when problems are encountered. A person may not be expected to try to apply to his own situ— ation methods of problem resolution that are perceived as fantasy, since make-believe may prove to be misleading and to aggravate situational conflicts. To the extent that the media is considered to be a school for real life, one may expect in the Mexican sample that: H : As the perception of TV violence as real increases, 12 aggressive predispositions toward problem or conflict resolution will increase. SUMMARY The present study attempts to constitute a systematic replication of Reeves' efforts to predict PRTV, with a sample of Mexican children in this case, and to explore the attitud- inal consequences of perceiving TV violence as real. The theoretical model to be tested here includes the perception of television content as real as a result of exposure, real 22 life experiences with TV content, functions and gratifica- tions from TV, demographic variables, the level of abstrac- tion for the referent on television, and the influence of significant others as perceived by the child. In turn, the perception of TV violence as real is expected to enhance aggressive behavioral predispositions. In a graphic form the model to be tested can be visual- ized as follows: Demographic .> PRTV variables Influence of Predispositions significant ““9 Level of '———‘——9 toward others abstraction problem for the TV resolution Real life "-_‘——§ referent ‘"_-—“"-'"w'"“ experiences I ”P with TV content [Exposure] Functions gand {gratifications In this model only a correlation is implied by the arrows, and given the nature of this study, the interrelation- ships not explicitely stated will not be considered, since that work should await some more solid theoretical basis. CHAPTER 2 METHODS The data for this study were collected during the winter of 1975 from children in two elementary schools in Mexico City. The presentation in this chapter will follow this order: 1. the respondents and their environment; 2. ex- ploratory questionnaire; 3. pretest questionnaire; 4. administration of the final questionnaire; 5. Operation- alizations of the dependent variables; 6. operationaliza- tion of the independent variables; and 7. statistical analysis The data were physically collected in Mexico City by two students of communication at the Universidad Iberoamericana in that city, under the supervision of two faculty members.* Explicit instructions were sent to Mexico City by this writer, and a continuous flow of feedback took place during the entire period of data collection. THE RESPONDENTS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT Three hundred children were administered the exploratory instrument and the final questionnaire. In order to maximize *The present study would not have been conducted without the help of Ms. Patricia Arriaga and Ms. Maria Luisa Acuna, and that of the two faculty members: Professors Josep Rota and Rolf Wigand. Their professional collaboration is highly acknowledged and appreciated. 23 24 the differences among respondents, half the respondents were from very low socioeconomic backgrounds, and the other half from very high socioeconomic families. Half of them were third graders, and the other half were sixth graders. There was a roughly equal number of boys and girls in each sub- division. The distinctive characteristics of the high socioeconomic status children were that their parents paid approximately sixty dollars a month for tuition, the school was located in a residential neighborhood, the children had extracurricular activities in school such as painting lessons, and English and French as foreign languages. The school had a swimming pool, a gymnasium, and the children were required to use a class uniform and a gymnastics uniform as needed. This was a private school. The low socioeconomic status children attended a school where no tuition was paid. The school was located in an industrial area of the city. The children had strictly curriculum activities. The use of uniform was not enforced. About ten per-cent of the children did not wear shoes, most of them wore old clothes, did not have a pencil to work with, and even during the winter season some of them did not wear a sweater. This was an official school. It is to be noted that in Mexico private schools are not unusual, and that most well-off families send their children to that kind of school. 25 EXPLORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE In order to obtain a preliminary overview of the viewing habits of the children in this sample, an exploratory question- naire was adminstered to them in the Fall of 1974. Of all the children, 92% said that there was a tele- vision set in their homes. Of the 5% that said that they didn't have a TV set at home, with the exception of one re- spondent, they either watched TV at the house of some friends, some relatives, or a neighbor. When the children were asked whether they watched a black and white or a color TV set, most of the time, 60% said that they watched a black and white set, 37% said they watched a color set, and 3% didn't answer. Since cable television has been introduced in Mexico City, the children were asked whether they had cable TV at home. The shows on CATV are a direct selection of the U.S. programming on the air. Of all the respondents, 11% said they had CATV at home, 82% said they didn't, and 7% didn't answer. The distribution of ages of our respondents was as follows at the time of the administration of the exploratory questionnaire: Ages Number 1 71 54 21 71 42 17 15 2 % .3 24 18 7 24 14 6 5 .7 26 This distribution confirmed our expectation of having a wide spread of ages within grades in school. Grade, SES, and sex were split almost exactly in halves, as indicated in our description of respondents. The children were presented with a list of 75 shows from which they were to check the ones that they watched every week or almost every week, and the ones they watched every day or almost every day. Of the 75 shows, 48 were weekly and 27 were daily. The purpose of this rating was to enable the selection of those shows to which the children most expose themselves. However, since some of the shows on the air changed at the time of the administration of the final questionnaire, some last minute decisions had to be made. It was found that the average child in our sample watched an average of approximately 60 shows a week, excluding nonscheduled events, feature films, contest or game shows, and newscasts. PRETEST QUESTIONNAIRE A pretest questionnaire was administered to 50 children. Half of them similar to those of low SES in the third grade, and the other half were similar to those of high SES in the sixth grade. Both groups had approximately an equal number of boys and girls. The pretest was to test the understandability of the scales, the use of the response categories, and for general improvement of the questionnaire according to the doubts and 27 questions that the children might point out to. The comments of the teachers were also to be taken into consideration. The timing of the administration was an important criterion for the evaluation of the questionnaire as a whole. 1 The administration of the pretest questionnaire was con- ducted by school groups, and the administrator read each question and response category aloud. He waited until the last child finished in order to continue. The administrator asked the children for any questions they had, and took note of all questions and comments. This served for modifying the questionnaire in terms of language, adapting it as closely as possible to the verbal repertoire of the child. The in- structions for answering the questions had to be simplified for understandability and because the younger and poorest children tried to read everything, and according to the administrators of the questionnaire these children read a word per minute". In some cases, response categories had to be eliminated because the children simply did not use them at all. The time of administration was 25 minutes for the 6th graders, high SES, and an hour and 25 minutes for total completion in the case of the 3rd graders, low SES. Since this last administration time was considered to be too long, it was decided to substantially reduce the length of the questionnaire in order to avoid extreme exhaustion on the part of these children. Nine pages, a page per show, were 28 originally assigned to the measurement of PRTV of specific shows and the influence of significant others with respect to those shows. The final number of pages in this section was reduced to six, a show per paws. Other minor reductions were also implemented. ADMINISTRATION OF THE FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE The final questionnaire was administered to the same children to whom the exploratory questionnaire was given. The shortest time of administration was of 25 minutes for the 6th graders, high SES, and the longest was of an hour and 20 minutes for the 3rd graders, low SES. Despite our efforts at simplifying and shortening the questionnaire, the 3rd graders, low SES children still took a period of time com- parable to those in the pretest. This was due mainly to the larger number of children, and to the personal attention that they required for the completion of their task. All children were guided question by question through the questionnaire, and the administrators walked in between the rows of desks in order to make sure that the questions were being considered and answered, as well as for answering all questions the children had. The children were given the assurance that the question- naire was not a test, and that they would not be evaluated in any form for their responses. The children were told to work independently, and most of them did so. However, some children tried to consult with their friends, and the 29 administrators had to intervene. With the exception of the children in the 3rd grade, low SES, the administration was a smooth operation, in general. With the 3rd graders, low SES, the amount of work required was disproportionate but there were no major problems that would at first impression invalidate the questionnaires answered by them. The teachers of the groups did not participate in the administration of the questionnaires. The reader will find a copy of the final questionnaire in Appendix A. The total number of usable respondents was 273. OPERATIONALIZATIONS OF THE DEPENDENT VARIABLES There were two dependent variables studied in this pro- ject: a. the perception of reality of TV by the child at three levels of abstraction, and b. aggressive predisposi- tions towards problem resolution. a. Perception of reality of television. PRTV was measured at three levels of abstraction: tele— vision in general; content areas on television; and specific television characters or behaviors. The items used to measure this variable were the ones used by Reeves, and the same or similar to the ones used by other researchers. Since the questionnaire was administered in Spanish, the questions and scales used will be translated back for this presentation. PRTV in general was measured with the following items: 1. "TV programs show life the same way you see it in reality." 3O 2. "People on TV shows are like people you know in real life." 3. "The same things that happen to people on TV shows, can happen to peOple you know in real life." 4. "The places you see on TV shows are like the places you know in real life." These items were mixed with the content PRTV items. The response categories for these were: That's true I don't know That's not true coded as 3,2 and 1 respectively from tOp to bottom. The last three items intercorrelated significantly: .12, r23= r24= .17, and r34: .32 (p < .05), and they were summed to form an abstract PRTV index which ranged from 3 to 9, with the higher score indicating higher PRTV. The distribution of scores for the abstract PRTV index were: Score on the abstract PRTV index N % 3 9 3.4 4 19 7.1 5 34 12.7 6 45 16.8 7 65 24.3 8 44 16.4 9 52 19.4 Total = 268 100.0% x = 6.78 s.d. = 1.66 For the second level of abstraction questions were generated for three content areas of television programming. These areas were selected according to their availability and the actual or potential interest that they may represent for theoretical work. The content areas selected were 31 families, Americans,and fights. Families represent an area of experience that is presumably abundant in real life and on TV. Americans in Mexico are relatively scarce in real life, but quite abundant on TV, and represent an area of special interest for the study of the formation of stereotypes. Fights, besides being available on TV and in real life, present the opportunity for studying the hypothesized effect of PRTV on aggressive predispositions. The content PRTV items were: 1. "Families on TV shows are like families you know in real life." 2. "The Americans that appear on TV shows are like Americans you know in real life." 3. "Fights on TV shows are like the fights you have been involved in or you have seen in real life." The scales accompanying these questions and the way they were coded were the same as in the case of the abstract PRTV items. Since only the items for families and Americans intercorrelated significantly (412 = .23), it was decided not to form a content PRTV index, and to study each content category separately. The distributions obtained for the three content PRTV items were: Content PRTV of families N i l 78 28.7 2 82 30.1 3 112 41.2 Total = 272 100.0% 2: 2.13 s.d. = .828 32 Content PRTV of Americans N % l 56 20.7 2 87 32.1 3 128 47.2 Total = 271 100.0% X = 2.27 s.d. = .781 Content PRTV of fights N % l 87 32.3 2 52 19.3 3 130 48.3 Total = 269 100.0% X = 2.16 s.d. = .885 At the last level of abstraction PRTV was measured for six specific characters or behaviors on TV. Two of these characters or behaviors were included for each of the three content areas specified above. The questions for specific families were: 1. "Do you think that the family in 'Hogar Dulce Hogar' is like the families you know in real life?" 2. "Do you think that the Partridge Family is like the families you know in real life?" The questions for specific Americans were: 1. "Do you think that Tony Black 'The Magician' is like the Americans you know in real life?" 2. "Do you think that the children in 'Family Affair' are like American children in real life?" And the questions for specific fights were: 1. "Do you think that the fights on 'Mission Impossible' are like the fights you have been in or you have seen in real life?" 2. "Do you think that the fights on 'Hawaii 5-0' are like the fights you have been in or you have seen in real life?" 33 The possible responses to the six questions were "yes" coded as 3, "I don't know" coded as 2, and "no" coded as l. The shows were selected from the exploratory questionnaire described above, according to the criteria of exposure and suitability to the three content areas. The distributions of PRTV for the six shows were as follows: Hogar Dulce Hogar _N .z The Partridge Family N_ _Z l 94 44.1 1 48 19.3 2 60 28.2 2 75 30.1 3 59 27.7 3 126 50.6 Total = 213 100.0 Total = 249 100.0 I = 1.84 i = 2.31 s.d. = .833 s.d. = .777 The Magician E_ .1 Family Affair N_ ‘Z l 59 29.5 1 29 14.1 2 92 46.0 2 92 44.9 3 49 24.5 3 84 41.0 Total = 200 100.0 Total = 205 100.0 §= 1.95 i = 2.27 s.d. = .735 s.d. = .694 Mission Impossible N_ 2_ Hawaii 5—0 N_ .Z 1 114 53.5 1 85 48.6 2 59 27.7 2 48 27.4 3 40 18.8 3 42 24.0 Total = 213 100.0 . Total = 175 100.0 32: 1.65 X= 1.75 s.d. = .778 s.d. = .818 The average number of children who answered these items was 209, or 77% of the total number of respondents. Answers 34 to these items by children who had previously indicated that they don't watch the show at least sometimes were disregarded as missing observations.* With only one exception, no indexes were formed with these items since their intercorrelations were inconsistent as can be seen on the next page. One index was formed by the addition of all six items divided by three, for a-posteriori comparisons among the means of the perception of reality of television at three different levels of abstraction, as reported in the chapter of results. Ten measures of PRTV have been obtained: An abstract PRTV index; Content PRTV of families, of Americans, and of fights; and six measures of PRTV of specific characters or behaviors. The intercorrelations among the different measures of PRTV were as follows: *Previous to these items in the questionnaire, the children were asked to report their frequency of exposure to each of the six shows, as described in the section of exposure to TV in this chapter. Answers to items about a specific show were disregarded if the child said he "never" watched the show. 35 Abstract PRTV index (1) Content PRTV families (2) .06 Content PRTV Americans (3) .03 .23* Content PRTV fights (4) .14*.08 .06 Hogar Dulce Hogar (5) .07 .08 .02 .24* * * * The Partridge Family (6) .10 .29 .22 .12 .19 The Magician (7)-.07 .05 .21*.06-.oo .03 Family Affair (8)-.05-.01 .10-.04-.05 .13* .26* Mission Impossible (9)—.06 .10 .01 .21*.29*.06 .22* .04 Hawaii 5—0 (10) .02 .18*.00 .13*.32*.13 .18* .08 .57* (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) b. Aggressive predispositions towards problem resolution. This was the second dependent variable in this study. It was operationalized in two ways, the first being a measure of predispositions towards problem resolution, and the second a measure of self report of involvement in fights. The first Operationalization was borrowed from Leifer and Roberts (1971), and adapted to the Mexican children after the pretest. The items consist of situations in which the child may find himself in his everyday life, and several pos- sible modes of conflict resolution are given to him to choose from. Leifer and Roberts rationalize that the child modifies his rank ordering of possible responses depending on a set of variables among which exposure to television violence is one. Findicates that the correlation is significant at p:.05 36 The test retest reliability of the items, as reported by Leifer and Roberts was r=.72, and the correlations between the ratings of two teachers and the responses of physical aggression of the children were r=.33, and r=.49 (pp. 52-59) , which can be con- sidered to be a measure of the validity of the instrument. The validity and reliability coefficients mentioned here are all for physical aggression, and the responses were coded as dy- chotomous variables, e.g., physical aggression response = 1; any other choice = 0. After the pretest with the Mexican children, several of the items were altered, and the category of verbal aggression was deleted since the children didn't use it at all. The situations that remained in the final set were as follows: 1. "You are walking down the street. A child is mad at you. He comes and hits you. What do you do?" 2. "You see that somebody is stealing your sandwich. You catch him. What do you do?" 3. "You are waiting on line to drink water. Somebody comes and pushes you. What do you do?" 4. "Somebody is telling stories about you behind your back. You notice it. You see him after school. What do you do?" 5. "When you are leaving school you see two children hitting your best friend. What do you do?" All references to sex in Spanish were avoided when pos— sible. The responses that the children could give to the situations above were: a. for physical aggression, depending on the item: push back, hit back, kick, or pinch; b. for withdrawal, depending on the item: leave them, and go away; and c. for denounce, depending on the item: tell a grown up, tell the teacher, or that's all right. The response categories were alternated, and the items were scored as 1 when the 37 physical aggression response was used or as 0 when any other response was used. The inter-correlations among the five items were: (1) .25 .39 .41 .44 (2) .14 .37 .30 (3) .29 .32 (4) .39 (5) (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) All the correlations were significant (p<.05) and an index of physical aggressive predispositions was formed by adding the responses to all 5 items. The index ranged from 0 to 5, with 5 the highest aggressive score obtainable. The distribution obtained is shown below: Number of physical aggressive responses N i 0 81 30.2 1 52 19.4 2 44 16.4 3 40 14.9 4 37 13.8 5 14 5.2 Total = 268 100.0 E = 1.78 s.d. = 1.59 The second Operationalization of aggressive predisposi- tions consisted of a self report of frequency of engaging in physical fights. The item used for this purpose was "How often do you get into fights?", and the response categories 38 were many times, sometimes, almost never, and never, coded respectively as 4, 3, 2, and 1. The distribution obtained was: Report of engagement in fights N i l 89 32.7 2 70 25.7 3 83 30.5 4 30 11.0 Total = 272 100.0 E: 2.20 s.d. = 1.02 The correlation of the index of situational aggression items with the self report of fights was .24. In summary aggressive predispositions were measured only with respect to physical aggression, and two different measures were used. It should be clarified that the word "fight" in Spanish, in the way and context used here means fist or other type of physical fight. OPERATIONALIZATIONS OF THE INDEPENDENT VARIABLES The independent variables considered here were: 1. real life experiences with television content; 2. functions and gratifications from TV; 3. exposure to television; 4. the influence of significant others; and 5. demographic variables. Real-life experiences with TV content Two questions were generated for each of the three content areas considered here, with respect to real life 39 experiences the child could have had. The questions with respect to real life experiences with families were: 1. "How often do you play with your friends in their homes?" 2. "How often do you talk to the families of your friends in their homes?" For real life experiences with Americans the questions were: 3. "How often do you see Americans in real life?" (not on TV) 4. "How often do you talk to Americans?" For real life experiences with fights the following questions were used: 5. "How often do you see people fighting in real life?" (not on TV) 6. "How often do you get into fights?" The response categories available to the children were: "many times" coded as 4, "sometimes" coded as 3, "almost never" coded as 2, and "never" coded as 1. It should be noted that item 6 is the same one utilized for the self report of engagement in fights, and it was not correlated or otherwise analyzed, with itself or with an index containing it. The correlation for the two items about experience with families was .33; for experience with Americans r=.33; and for experience with fights r=.18 (all coefficients p<.01). Consequently an index of experience was formed for each pair of items by summing them. The scores could range from 2 to 8 for each index with the higher number indicating more real 40 life experiences. The distributions obtained for each of the indexes were: Families 5 g Americans g g Fights g i 2 9 3.3 2 39 14.6 2 22 8.1 3 8 3.0 3 30 11.2 3 33 12.2 4 29 10.7 4 61 22.8 4 57 21.0 5 62 22.9 5 58 21.7 5 55 20.3 6 105 38.7 6 46 17.2 6 62 22.9 7 40 14.8 7 20 7.5 7 34 12.5 8 18 6.6 8 13 4.9 8 8 3.0 Total = 271 100.0 Total = 267 100.0 Total = 271 100.0 2 = 5.62 E = 4.58 x = 4.87 s.d. = 1.31 s.d. = 1.65 s.d. = 1.56 The intercorrelations among the three indexes were as follows: Families with Americans r=.13 (p<.05); families with fights r=.10 (n.s.); and Americans with fights r=-.02 (n.s.). Functions and gratifications from TV Three items were used for measuring each of these uses or functions of television: relaxation, learning and com- panionship. Children were asked to indicate the frequency with which they went to TV for a certain function or gratifi- cation. For relaxation the items used were: 1. "How often do you watch TV in order to be tranquil?" 2. "How often do you watch TV in order to calm down when you are in a temper?" 3. "How often do you watch TV because it's a nice way to rest?" The items used for learning were: 4. "How often do you watch TV for finding out about the 41 things that happen in the world?" 5. "How often do you watch TV in order to learn how to behave?" 6. "How often do you watch TV in order to learn things about yourself?" For companionship the following are the items that were used: 7. "How often do you watch TV because it's like a real friend for you?" 8. "How often do you watch TV in order not to be alone?" 9. "How often do you watch TV when there is nobody to talk to or to play with?" These items are adapted variations of the items used by Reeves and by Greenberg (1974). The response categories were: "always" coded as 4; "many times" coded as 3; "some- times" coded as 2; and "never" coded as l. The intercorrelations for each of the functions were as follows (the subscripts correspond to the item numbers here): Relaxation: r12=.34; rl3=.27; and r23=.24 Learning: r45=.38; r46=.37; and r56=.46 Companionship: r78=.39; r79=.22; and r89=.43 An index was formed for each of the functions since the intercorrelations were moderately high in general and signifi- cant (p<.01). Each index ranged from 3 to 12, with the higher score indicating the higher reported frequency of occurence of a certain type of function or gratification. The distributions for each of the indexes were: 42 Relaxation N g 3 0 0 4 11 4.1 5 7 2.6 6 57 21.4 7 40 15.0 8 51 19.2 9 38 14.3 10 25 9.4 11 15 5.6 12 22 8.3 Total = 266 100.0 )2”: 8.01 s.d. = 2.07 Learning N % Companionship N g 3 2 .7 3 6 2.2 4 16 5.9 4 3 1.1 5 27 10.0 5 6 2.2 6 51 19.0 6 33 12.2 7 28 10.4 7 35 13.0 8 47 17.5 8 53 19.6 9 27 10.0 9 33 12.2 10 34 12.6 10 40 14.8 11 14 5.2 11 24 8.9 12 23 8.6 12 37 13.7 Total = 269 100.0 Total = 270 100.0 X = 7.79 X = 8.64 s.d. = 2.31 s.d. = 2.21 The intercorrelations among the three indexes were: relaxation with companionship = .48; relaxation with learning = .53; and for companionship with learning = .48. Exposure to TV Exposure to TV was measured in two different ways: First, the children were presented with a list of 22 shows on the air at the time of the administration of the 43 questionnaire. They were asked to put a check to the right of the names of the shows that they watched "every week or almost every week". A check was coded as 1, and no check was marked as 0. Then the shows watched by each child were sum- med to render an index of exposure to 22 shows. The names of the shows were randomized throughout the list. The distribution of this measure of exposure was: Exposure to 22 shows 0 2 1 2 0 0 3 l 0 4 l 0 5 2 l 6 7 3 7 10 4 8 15 5 9 14 5 10 18 7 11 17 6 12 27 10 13 23 8 14 18 7 15 17 6 16 23 8 17 14 5 18 15 5 19 10 4 20 ll 4 21 11 4 22 17 6 Total = 273 100 i = 13.78 s.d. = 4.66 The names of the 22 shows were: Wild Wild West, The Pink Panther,The Flintstones, Tom and Jerry, The Monster Family, Police Trilogy (McMillan/McCloud/Columbo), Land of Giants, Cannon, The Adams Family, The Streets of San Francisco, 44 Laurel and Hardy, El Show de los Polivoces, Toma, I Love Genie, La Criada Bien Criada, El Chapulin Colorado, Bonanza, Gunsmoke, Lost in Space, The Name of the Game (Robert Stack), and Disneyland. The second measure of exposure was the shows in the content areas studied here: Hogar Dulce Hogar, The Partridge Family, The Magician, Family Affair, Mission Impossible and Hawaii 5-0. The children were asked to indicate whether they watched each of these shows "almost every week" coded as 2, "sometimes" coded as l, and "never" coded as 0. None of these six shows were included in the prior index of exposure to 22 shows. An index of exposure to these specific six shows was formed by adding up the scores, and the resulting range was from 0 through 12, with the higher number indicating more exposure. The resulting distribution was: Exposure to six shows N % 0 3 1.1 l 2 .8 2 6 2.3 3 11 4.2 4 24 9.1 5 31 11.8 6 35 13.3 7 42 16.0 8 43 16.3 9 34 12.9 10 12 4.6 11 12 4.6 12 8 3.0 Total = 263 100.0 x u n 0‘ 6o b s.d. 45 The correlation coefficient between these two indexes of exposure was .59 (p<.01). The index of exposure to six specific shows is a measure comparable to the abstract PRTV index. However, for comparison with the PRTV of content areas and of specific shows, different subsets of this index had to be used. For comparability with each of the content areas three subindexes were created: one for exposure to families on TV composed of the sum of the specific measures of exposure to "Hogar Dulce Hogar" and "The Partridge Family"; one for exposure to Americans on TV composed of the sum of the measures of exposure to "The Magician" and "Family Affair"; and another one for exposure to fights as the sum of the measures of exposure to "Mission Impossible" and "Hawaii 5-0". All three subindexes could range from 0 to 4, with the higher number meaning more exposure to the content area. For comparability of the PRTV of each of the shows with specific exposure, the single scores on the scales of exposure to the specific shows were used. The influence of significant others For each one of the shows in the specific content areas, the child was asked to report his sources of influence for evaluating the reality of each of the shows. The items used for each of the six shows were: 1. "Do you talk to your friends about (character or behavior) on (name of Show)?" 2. "Do you talk to your mother or father about (character or behavior) on (name of show)?" 46 3. "Do you talk to your brother or sister about (character or behavior) on (name of show)?" The children were asked to respond to these items for each of the six shows with a "yes" coded as l, or a "no" coded as O. The distribution of percentages of affirmative responses was: Friends Parents Brother or Sister Shows % yes % yes % yes 1. Hogar Dulce 54 66 65 Hogar 2. The Partridge 70 61 68 Family 3. The Magician 62 54 56 4. Family Affair 53 58 64 5. Mission 51 50 55 Impossible 6. Hawaii 5-0 53 58 51 It can be seen that the children tended to be consistent across significant others and across shows. No marked pre- ference for one type of significant other is observed, and the influence seems to be generalized for all shows. The scores for the three items were added in order to render a composite measure of amount of interaction. The average bias about the reality of television characters or behaviors from significant others was operation- alized as follows: 4. "Do the people that you talk to about (character or behavior) on (name of show), think that (the character or behavior on the show) are like (peOple or behaviors) in real life?" 47 To this item the children could answer "yes" coded as 1, "I don't know" coded as 0, or "no" coded as -1. The sum of items 1, 2, and 3 was then multiplied by item 4, and the resulting index ranged from -3 to +3, for each of the six shows. This index represents the amount and quality of in- formation the child receives from significant others with respect to the reality of these television shows. A high positive score represents a large amount of in- fluence in favor of TV reality. The distributions for each of the indexes obtained were: For families: ISO* Hogar Dulce Hogar .N .2 ISO The Partridge Family .N .Z -3 32 15.6 -3 20 8.2 -2 24 11.7 -2 7 2.9 -1 23 11.2 -1 10 4.1 O 84 41.0 0 134 54.7 1 5 2.4 1 8 3.3 2 16 7.8 2 11 4.5 3 21 10.2 3 55 22.4 Total = 205 100.0 Total = 245 100.0 3E= —.327 §= .453 s.d. = 1.78 s.d. = 1.71 For Americans: ISO The Magician N_ Z_ ISO Family Affair N. ‘Z -3 17 8.7 -3 12 6.0 —2 5 2.6 —2 4 2.0 —l 5 2.6 —1 5 2.5 0 138 70.4 0 136 67.7 1 9 4.6 1 8 4.0 2 4 2.0 2 11 5.5 3 18 9.2 3 25 12.4 Total = 196 100.0 Total = 201 100.0 32= .026 i = .279 s.d. = 1.37 s.d. = 1.4 *ISO, hereafter stands for the influence of significant others about. 0 0 . 48 For fights: ISO Mission Impossible .N E_ ISO Hawaii 5—0 N_ .Z -3 29 16.4 -3 16 10.3 —2 21 11.9 -2 14 9.0 —1 16 9.0 -1 10 6.4 0 81 45.8 0 97 62.2 1 8 4.5 1 l .6 2 10 5.6 2 6 3.8 3 12 6.8 3 12 7.7 Total = 177 100.0 Total = 156 X=-.458 §=-.237 s.d. = 1.65 s.d. = 1.47 Four more indexes were created from these same data to provide for adequate comparability with the different levels of abstraction of PRTV. The influence of significant others was summed across all shows to form a general index of ISO for comparability with the abstract PRTV index, and each pair of shows within each content area was summed to form an ISO index for families, Americans, and fights. Demographic or socio-structural variables Socioeconomic status (SES):-Socioeconomic status was operationalized according to whether the child attended the high or low SES school. The distribution of the children by SES follows: SES N 3 Low 134 49.1 High 139 50.9 Total 273 100.0 49 Intelligencez-The intelligence of the children was Opera- tionalized as their grade point average for the school year 1974-1975 as reported by the teacher of each group of children. The tests from which the average was computed were uniform tests for all schools, since in Mexico the Ministry of Edu— cation formulates the tests to be given to all children in all grammar schools in the Country. The grading system in the grammar schools in Mexico ranges from "A" to "D", an "A" representing the best perfor- mance, and a "D" the worst. The distribution of grade point averages obtained was: Intelligence (GPA) N g D 25 9.2 C 85 31.4 B 116 42.8 A 45 16.6 Total = 271 100.0 Age and grade in school:- The children were asked to report their age to their last birthday, and the results were: 522 N i 7 1 .4 8 38 14.0 9 55 20.3 10 22 8.1 11 56 20.7 12 52 19.2 13 26 9.6 14 14 5.2 15 6 2.2 16 1 .4 Total = 271 100.0 ’ 10.72 >4 II II s.d. 1.91 50 The children in this study were either in 3rd or sixth grade in school, and they were distributed as follows: Grade in school N g 3 134 49.1 6 139 50.9 Total = 273 100.0 Sexz-When children were asked to report their sex, they were distributed as show below: Sex N % Boys 127 46.5 Girls 146 53.5 Total = 273 100.0 The intercorrelations obtained for all the demographic variables are in this matrix: SES -.07 .54* —.39* .07 GRADE IN SCHOOL .06 .80* —.05 GPA -.19* .18* AGE -.09 SEX 1—1 0 O :L‘. U m Z H m D m a 4 m N m m U m m o o < m * stands for p<.01. 51 The intercorrelations among all the predictor variables can be found in Appendix B. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The information contained in the questionnaires was transferred to computer cards. The analysis of the data was conducted in a CDC 6500 computer, and the statistical package utilized was SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) in its versions 5.8 and 6.0 (Nie, Bent, and Hull, 1970; and Nie, Hull, Jenkins, Steinbrenner and Bent, 1975; respectively). The hypotheses were tested, and the analysis in general was conducted, using Pearson Product Moment Correlations, Eta correlation coefficients, partial correlations, t tests, one way Analysis of Variance for repeated measures, Scheffe tests, and multiple regression. The analysis conducted in each case is indicated in the results chapter for each of the hypotheses. Results were considered to be significant* when they reached the conventional level of probability of .05 or less. Smaller probabilities are also indicated for information to the reader. Where some specific results are described either in the text or in tables as falling short of significance, they are at probability levels .07

.05. *The word significant in this text only refers to statistical significance, and no other inferences should be made with respect to the importance of the results on the basis of that adjective. CHAPTER 3 RESULTS In this chapter the results of the hypotheses presented in the introduction will be tested in the order specified by the subscripts of those hypotheses. The analysis conducted will be described in each of the twelve sections that encompass the test of each prOposition. Real life experiences with TV content. H1: As real life experiences with TV content increase up to a middle range p01nt, PRTV w111 decrease, and as real life experiences with TV content increase any further, PRTV will also increase. This hypothesis states a nonlinear type of relationship between PRTV and real life experiences with TV content. The Pearson product moment correlation coefficient is a measure of association adequate for linear relationships. The Eta correlation coefficient is a measure of association for any kind of relationship, linear or non~linear, and will tend to be larger than r (see McNemar, 1969, p. 312; and Blalock, 1972, pp. 410-411). In order to test this hypothesis Eta correlation co- efficients were computed, and F tests for deviation from linearity were obtained (for computing formulas see Blalock, 1972, p. 412). The results are shown in Table 1. A relation- ship was considered to deviate significantly from linearity 52 53 if an F value was significant at p': .05, and would then warrant further examination through a scattergram. Since from all the relationships only one was found to significantly deviate from linearity, no further examination was done, and this hypothesis is consequently rejected. It should be mentioned that r coefficients for all relationships in Table 1 were found to be low and non-signi- ficant, except for the correlations between real life experi- ences with Americans and the PRTV of the shows "The Magician" and "Family Affair", which were .22 and .36 respectively (p<.001). However, being positive, these correlations go counter to our expectations that since Americans are rather scarce as a source of real life experiences in the Mexican environment, the more real life experiences with them, the less PRTV. Another exception was found for real life experi- ences with fights and the content PRTV fights (r=.l6; p<.01). The level of abstraction for the referent on TV. H2: Children will perceive specific television characters or events to be more real than content areas of television programming, and the content areas to be more real than television in general. According to the Operationalization of the three levels of abstraction for the referent on TV, the expectation was that the means for the more specific questions would be higher than the means for the content questions, and these in turn would be higher than the means for the abstract PRTV questions. However, the means as presented in Table 2 54 Table 1. Eta correlation coefficients and F values from the test for deviation from linearity for real life experiences with TV content with PRTV. Independent Dependent Eta F value from the Significance variable variable test for deviation of F (p<) from linearity GENERAL INDEX ABSTRACT .20 .75 n.s. OF EXPERIENCE* PRTV INDEX EXPERIENCES CONTENT PRTV .15 .90 n.s. WITH FAMILIES FAMILIES PRTV HOCAR .19 1.37 n.s. DULCE HOGAR PRTV THE .23 2.58 .05 PARTRIDCE FAMILY EXPERIENCES CONTENT PRTV .13 .54 n.s. WITH AMERICANS AMERICANS PRTV THE .25 .72 n.s. MACICIAN PRTV FAMILY .38 .62 n.s. AFFAIR EXPERIENCES CONTENT PRTV .19 .67 n.s. WITH FIGHTS FIGHTS PRTV MISSION .14 .46 n.s. IMPOSSIBLE PRTV .21 1.38 n.s. HAWAII 5-0 * For comparability with the abstract PRTV index, the three indexes of real life experiences with families, Americans and fights were added to form a general index of experience. 55 Table 2. Means, standard deviations, and number of cases for responses to PRTV items at three levels of abstraction. Item Mean Abstract PRTV items: Abstract PRTV index ............ 2.26 People on TV are like .......... 2.27 The same things that happen.... 2.25 The places you see ............. 2.27 Content PRTV items: Families on TV shows ........... 2.13 The Americans that appear ...... 2.27 Fights on TV ................... 2.16 Specific PRTV items: The family on "Hogar'Dulce Hogar" ....................... 1.84 "The Partridge Family" ......... 2.31 "The Magician" is like Americans .................... 1.95 "Family Affair” are like Americans .................... 2.27 The fights on "Mission Impossible" .................. 1.65 The fights on "Hawaii 5—0" ..... 1.75 Standard deviation .55 .81 .83 .78 .83 .78 .89 .83 .78 .74 .69 .78 .82 Number of cases 268 271 272 271 272 271 269 213 249 200 205 213 175 56 .mCOHum>pomno wcfimmaa mo cowumaww omfizumfia umumm muoomnsw no no woman mum mabmu mflnu ca mCOHumusmEou HH< * mm. maw mm.aa swoop am. ems 36.88 Haooaaom Hoo.vo mm.ms o~.m N mm.o monaoaoz amazoom mm. owa ka.km oaooom oaooaz am. as mH.oN osooaa ooosoom mozaoHaHonm a mmaoom zamz so mm oneaHmas to momsom as. mm. mm. zoceacsmo @8723 oo.H aN.N mm.~ zamz Aoo Ame Aav mmoH>Bmm NmozH >Hmm HZmHZOU XMQZH >Hmm HUmH mossy um mamufi >Hmm cu mmmcoamou ca mmucmummmac pom <>oz< mmusmmwa woodmamu Houowm mco .mN oHAMH 57 lead us to reject this hypothesis. In general it can be seen that the higher the level of abstraction for the referent on TV, the higher the mean obtained, with some exceptions, e.g., "The Partridge Family", and the children in "Family Affair". In order to test this tendency a posteriori, three indexes were created: one already formed, the abstract PRTV items consisted of the addition of such items divided by three; and the last one for PRTV of specific characters or behaviors, it being the addition of the six shows in this least abstract category, and divided by six. A one way analysis of variance repeated measures was conducted and the results are shown in Table 2a, where it can be seen that the overall F value is highly significant. In order to determine where the signifi— cant differences were, Scheffe tests were conducted for all 3 possible comparisons (Hays, 1973, pp. 606-612; and Downie and Heath, 1970, pp. 221-222 for computational formulas) between pairs of indexes which represent different overall levels of abstraction. The results of the Scheffe tests were as follows: For A vs. B, F=.01 For B vs. C, F=20.61, and For A vs. C, F=l9.72 The first comparison was not found to be significant at the conventional level of .05, however, the last two compari- sons were significant at the level of p<.001 (with 2 and 120 or infinite degrees of freedom; see Blalock , 1972, p. 572; 58 and taking into consideration that the critical value of F is doubled for this kind of test). In summary then, the research hypothesis was rejected, and by post hoc examination of the data it was found that the abstract PRTV index did not differ significantly from the index formed for PRTV of content areas, and that both these indexes differed significantly from the index formed by PRTV measures of specific characters or behaviors. This last index was the one that rendered the lowest PRTV mean contrary to the original expectation. For comparison purposes, the means of similar measures of PRTV used by Reeves and in this study are presented. Korzenny Reeves' Means Means Abstract PRTV index 6.76* 5.80 Content PRTV index 6.87* 6.71 Specific PRTV index - 5.88* 7.17 Content PRTV families 2.13 1.98 PRTV families in 2.31 2.31 The Partridge Family * multiplied by 3 for comparability. As the results discussed above indicate, the patterns of absolute means between the two studies are quite different. The mean obtained here for the abstract index most closely parallels what Reeves obtained for the specific PRTV index; the reverse is true for the specific PRTV index obtained here 59 and Reeves' abstract PRTV index. The content index and the family content measures are very similar in absolute levels from the two studies, as is the specific family show reality measure . Demographics Socioeconomic status (SES): H3: As SES increases, PRTV will decrease. In order to test this hypothesis t tests were conducted between each of the means corresponding to high and low SES children, for each of the measures of PRTV. The results can be seen in Table 3. In order to confirm this hypothesis positive t values are required. Out of the ten comparisons presented four are significant in the hypothesized direction, and one falls short of significance (p=.06) in the expected direction also. One of the comparisOns is not significant, and the other four are significant in the direction opposite to the research hypo- thesis (even when the exact probability level is multiplied by two in order to render a two tailed test). By examining the pattern of predicted significant find- ings, one can observe that the abstract PRTV index behaved as expected, as well as the items that dealt with PRTV of fights both in the content and in the specific categories for both shows. The results for content PRTV families and Americans, as well as the specific shows in those categories exhibit 60 contradictory tendencies or trends contrary to those ex- pected. In general this hypothesis received partial support. Grade in school: H4: As grade in school increases PRTV will decrease. In this study children in the 3rd and 6th grade of elementary school were administered questionnaires. In order to test the present hypothesis, t tests were conducted between the PRTV means for 3rd and 6th graders, for each of the mea- sures of PRTV. The results are in Table 4. Seven out of ten tests were significant in the hypothe- sized direction, and it can be said that the hypothesis is confirmed in general. An unexpected reversal was encountered for the abstract PRTV index. The content PRTV of Americans as well as the PRTV of Americans in the show "Family Affair" were not significantly different by grade in school. Age: H4': As age increases PRTV will decrease. In order to test this hypothesis Pearson product moment zero order correlations were obtained for age with the dif- ferent measures of PRTV. The results obtained are presented in Table 4a. Seven out of ten correlations were found to be signifi- cant at the conventional level of probability of .05 or less, and two fell short of significance, but both were p<.06. These nine correlations have a negative sign, which indicate that the relationships go in the hypothesized direction. Table 3. t tests for PRTV PRTV MEASURES (MEans) Abstract PRTV index Content PRTV families Content PRTV Americans Content PRTV fights Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar The Partridge Family by SES. SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS Low 7.08 2.11 2.17 2.36 Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician Family Affair Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible Hawaii 5-0 61 High 6.50 2.15 2.36 1.96 t value 2.88 -.40 -2.04 3.80 3.15 -l.93 -2.37 -5.91 1.56 1.93 df 266 270 269 267 211 243 198 203 211 173 One tail P _<_ .01 * n.s. .05 .001 * .001 * .05 .01 .001 .06 * .05 * Since a positive t value is necessary for confirming the hypothesis, only these relationships are significant in the hypothesized direction. Table 4. t tests for PRTV by grade in school. PRTV MEASURES (Means) Abstract PRTV index Content PRTV families Content PRTV Americans Content PRTV fights Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar The Partridge Family Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician Family Affair Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible Hawaii 5-0 3rd .53 .24 .27 .32 .08 .49 .09 .29 .88 .98 62 7 GRADE IN SCHOOL 6th .03 .01 .26 .00 .58 .15 .83 .25 .48 .57 t value .49 .27 .10 .04 .64 .52 .47 .49 .85 .33 df 266 270 269 267 211 247 198 203 211 173 One tail 9: .01 .05 * .001 * .001 * . 001 * .001 * Only these relationships are significant in the hypothesized direction, since a positive t value is required. 63 Table 4a. Zero order correlations for age with PRTV. PRTV MEASURES r N p: Abstract PRTV index .17 266 .01 Content PRTV families -.15 270 .01 * Content PRTV Americans -.10 269 .055 * Content PRTV fights -.10 267 .058 * Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar -.14 211 .05 * The Partridge Family -.24 247 .001 * Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician -.17 198 .01 * Family Affair -.17 204 .01 * Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible -.20 211 .01 * Hawaii 5-0 -.13 173 .05 * Only these relationships are significant at the level indicated in the hypothesized direction, since a negative r value is required. 64 The tenth correlation is significant but in the direction Opposite to the one predicted and it is with the abstract PRTV index. In general it can be said that the hypothesis is con- firmed with the exception of the abstract PRTV index. When comparing the results for the relationships of grade in school and age with PRTV, one can observe that the results are quite consistent: ”the higher the grade in school the child is, or the older he is, the less he perceives TV con- tent areas and specific characters or behaviors to be real, and the more he perceives TV in general like the real world at the highest level of abstraction. A strong inconsistency is noted for the show Family Affair, which shows a significant negative correlation with age, but seems not to be perceived as real in a differential manner depending on whether the child is in the third or sixth grade in school. Content PRTV of Americans and fights are ambiguous across tables 4 and 4a, since the correlations with age fell short of significance. However, if one is willing to make a type I error in favor of the research hypothesis, then it can be said that age seems to be a slight- ly better predictor than grade in school of the perception of reality of TV content areas and specific characters or behaviors, in the hypothesized direction. Equally predictive seem to be grade in school and age of abstract PRTV, but in 65 the direction opposite to that hypothesized. Sex: H5: Females will perceive TV programming to be more real than males. In order to test this hypothesis t tests were conducted between the PRTV means of the boys and girls in our sample, for all the measures of PRTV collected. The results can be observed in Table 5. Since none of the t tests were significant at the level of .05, the research hypothesis is rejected in favor of the null hypothesis of no differences in PRTV between the sexes. Not even a trend is observed since out of ten tests five show a positive sign and five exhibit a negative one. Intelligence: H6: As intelligence increases PRTV will decrease. Zero order correlations were obtained in order to test this hypothesis. The results are in Table 6. The reader should bear in mind that the operationalization of intel- 1igence in this study was the grade point average of the children. Significant negative correlations are required in order to confirm the research hypothesis. Five out of the ten correlations are significant and negative, and it can be said that this hypothesis received partial support. The more intelligent the children the less they perceived TV in general, content TV fights, and specific fights as well 66 Table 5. t tests for PRTV by sex. PRTV MEASURES SEX (Means) Males Females t value df One tail 9: Abstract PRTV index 6.63 6.91 -1.36 266 n.s. Content PRTV families 2.05 2.19 -1.43 270 n.s. * Content PRTV Americans 2.31 2.23 .86 269 n.s. Content PRTV fights 2.20 2.12 .71 267 n.s. Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar 1.90 1.78 1.03 211 n.s. The Partridge Family 2.26 2.36 - .99 247 n.s. Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician 1.98 1.92 .61 198 n.s. Family Affair 2.21 2.31 -1.09 203 n.s. Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible 1.71 1.60 1.02 211 n.s. Hawaii 5-0 1.69 1.84 —l.20 173 n.s. The highest level of significance achieved for any one t test in this table was for this comparison p = .07, and consequently no test here was considered significant. Table 6. Zero order correlations PRTV MEASURES Abstract PRTV index Content PRTV families Content PRTV Americans Content PRTV fights Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar The Partridge Family Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician Family Affair Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible Hawaii 5—0 67 for grade point average with PRTV. -.16 .02 .21 -.19 266 271 269 267 211 248 198 204 212 174 95 .001 .01 * Only these correlations are significant in the direction predicted by the research hypothesis. 68 as the family in the show Hogar Dulce Hogar to be real. How- ever, the more intelligent the child, the more he perceived the children in Family Affair to be like American children in real life. Functions and gratifications from television: The use of TV for relaxation: H7: As the use of TV for relaxation increases, PRTV will increase. This hypothesis was tested by obtaining zero order Pearson product moment correlation coefficients. The results are shown in Table 7. To confirm this hypothesis, positive correlations are required. All the correlations obtained are positive, but only three are significant out of ten. In general this hypothesis is rejected in favor of the null, and it can be said that as the use of TV for relaxation increased, PRTV did not change except in the cases of families in content areas, of the family in The Partridge Family, and in the case of the fights on Mission Impossible. The use of TV for learning: H8: As the use of TV for learning increases, PRTV will increase. Zero order correlations that tested this hypothesis are shown in Table 8. Seven positive significant correlations confirm this hypothesis in general for every measure of PRTV except those items related to the reality of Americans on TV 69 Table 7. Zero order correlations for relaxation with PRTV. PRTV MEASURES r N pg Abstract PRTV index .03 262 n.s. Content PRTV families .14 ' 265 .05 Content PRTV Americans .02 265 n.s. Content PRTV fights .08 264 n.s. Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar .06 208 n.s. The Partridge Family .19 244 .01 Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician .05 196 n.s. Family Affair .04 201 n.s. Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible .14 209 .05 Hawaii 5-0 .11 171 n.s. 70 Table 8. Zero order correlations for learning with PRTV. PRTV MEASURES r N pf Abstract PRTV index .14 264 .05 Content PRTV families .21 268 .001 Content PRTV Americans -.07 267 n.s. Content PRTV fights .29 265 .001 Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar .16 211 .01 The Partridge Family .24 245 .001 Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician -.02 197 n.s. Family Affair -.O9 202 n.s. Specifid PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible .12 211 .05 Hawaii 5-0 .13 173 .05 71 which show no relationship with the use of TV for learning. The more the child watches TV for learning, the more likely he is to perceive TV in general, families and fights, both in content areas and with respect to specific characters or be- haviors, as realistic. The use of TV for companionship: H9: As the use of TV for companionship increases, PRTV will increase. In Table 9 are the correlations that test this hypothesis. Five out of ten correlations are positive and signifi- cant, and two more are also positive but fall short of signi- ficance (the ones indicated with an *). Since positive correlations are required to test this hypothesis, it can be said that in general the hypothesis is confirmed. Notably, as in the case of learning, content PRTV of Americans and the PRTV of Americans in two shows, exhibit little or no relationship with companionship. Also specific PRTV of families in Hogar Dulce Hogar, and specific PRTV of fights on Mission Impossible show little or no relationship with the use of TV for companionship. The use of TV for companionship was related to the per- ception of TV in general as real, with the PRTV of families and fights in content areas, and the PRTV of families and fights in The Partridge Family and in Hawaii 5-0, respectively. In summary, with respect to functions and gratifications from television, it can be said that the function of TV 72 Table 9. Zero order correlations for companionship with PRTV. PRTV MEASURES r N p_<_ Abstract PRTV index .17 265 .01 Content PRTV families .22 269 .001 Content PRTV Americans .06 268 n.s. Content PRTV fights .19 266 .001 Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar .09 212 n.s. The Partridge Family .31 247 .001 Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician .06 198 n.s. Family Affair .11 203 n.s. * Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible .10 211 n.s. * Hawaii 5—0 .14 173 .05 The levels of significance achieved by these two correlations was of .063 and .068 respectively for Family Affair and for Mission Impossible, consequently falling short of significance. 73 which best predicts PRTV is learning followed by companion- ship. The use of TV for relaxation shows no relationship with PRTV. Exposure: H10: As exposure to TV increases, PRTV will increase. This hypothesis was tested by means of zero order cor- relations. The results Obtained are shown in Tables 10 and 10a. The first being for the general measure of exposure to 22 shows, and the second for the specific measures of exposure. In Table 10, out of ten correlations with the measure Of exposure to 22 shows with the different measures of PRTV, five were found to be significant in the predicted direction, while all the other correlations were not significant. It is to be noted that the measure of exposure to 22 shows is consistent in the prediction of the PRTV of fights, since the correlations with content PRTV fights and with the PRTV of fights in Mission Impossible and in Hawaii 5-0 were all significant. With respect to families the same can be said with the exception of the PRTV of The Partridge Family. In Table 10a, in the case of the measures of exposure to specific shows in the content areas, out of ten correla- tions three were found to be significant with: the PRTV of families in the content area, the PRTV of families in The Partridge Family, and with the PRTV of Americans in Family Affair. 74 Table 10. Zero order correlations for the index of exposure to 22 shows with PRTV. PRTV MEASURES r N p: Abstract PRTV index .06 268 n.s. Content PRTV families .13 272 .05 Content PRTV Americans -.02 271 n.s. Content PRTV fights .13 269 .05 Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar .24 213 .001 The Partridge Family .05 249 n.s. Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician .03 200 n.s. Family Affair -.05 205 n.s. Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible .13 213 .05 Hawaii 5—0 .15 175 .05 75 Table 10a. Zero order correlations for specific measures of exposure with PRTV. PRTV MEASURES r N p: Abstract PRTV index1 .03 259 n.s. Content PRTV families2 .11 269 .05 Content PRTV Americans3 .08 264 n.s. Content PRTV fights4 .09 266 n.s. Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar5 .05 213 n.s. The Partridge Family6 .12 249 .05 Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician7 .08 200 n.s. Family Affair8 .13 205 .05 Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible9 -.06 213 n.s. Hawaii 5-010 .02 175 n.s. 1 correlated with the index of specific measures of exposure; 2 with the index of specific exposure to families; 3 correlated with the index of Specific exposure to Americans; 4 correlated with the index of specific exposure to fights; 5,6,7,8,9 and 10 correlated with the correspondent specific measure of exposure to that show. 76 Across the two measures of exposure, only the relation- ship with the PRTV Of families in the content area seems to hold. In all other cases the general index of exposure to 22 shows and the measures of specific exposure do not agree in their association with PRTV. If the question is raised as to which is a better pre- dictor of PRTV, the measure of exposure to 22 shows, or the specific measures of exposure, it can be readily answered that the general measure Of exposure to 22 shows is best, given the number of confirmatory associations. The hypothesis can be said to have received only partial support in the case of the measure of exposure to 22 shows, and no support in the case of the specific measures of ex- posure to the shows in the three content areas of interest in this study. The influence of significant others (ISO): H The information a child receives from signifi- cant others about the reality of television programming, as perceived by the child, will be positively related to the child's perceived reality of that programming. 11‘ Table 11 contains zero order correlations for the in- fluence of significant others with the different measures of PRTV. It is to be recalled here that for comparability with the different measures of PRTV, a general index of ISO was formed for studying the relationship with the abstract PRTV index, and three indexes of ISO were formed for compar- ability with each of the measures of PRTV in the content areas (see the methods chapter). 77 Table 11. Zero order correlations of the influence of significant others with PRTV.* PRTV MEASURES r N 95 Abstract PRTV index .01 69 n.s. Content PRTV families .11 184 n.s.(p=.071) Content PRTV Americans .07 151 n.s. Content PRTV fights .19 119 .05 Specific PRTV families in: Hogar Dulce Hogar .36 204 .001 The Partridge Family .39 245 .001 Specific PRTV Americans in: The Magician .44 194 .001 Family Affair .34 201 .001 Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible .34 177 .001 Hawaii 5-0 .43 155 .001 * For comparability with the abstract PRTV index, an index of all ISO was constructed, and for comparability with each of the content PRTV areas three indexes of ISO were constructed, namely, for families, Americans, and fights. Each of the specific shows was correlated With its measure Of ISO (see the methods Chapter), 78 Seven of the ten correlations are significant and general- 1y quite high in the predicted direction. The correlation of ISO about families with content PRTV families fell short of significance. The index of all ISO when correlated with the abstract PRTV index yielded an insignificant coefficient. Finally the index of the addition of the ISO of the two family shows showed no relationship with the PRTV of families in the content area. It is observed that as the amount of information and/or the bias of significant others, as perceived by the child, increases in favor of the reality of TV fights in general, or in favor of the reality of specific characters or behaviors on TV, the child reports higher PRTV of those TV events. Consequently, given the number of supportive associations, the hypothesis can be said to be confirmed in general. The effect of perceiving television violence as real on aggressive behavioral predigpositions: H As the perception of TV violence as real increases, aggressive behavioral predispositions toward pro- blem or conflict resolution will increase. 12‘ In order to test this hypothesis the following indepen- dent variables were considered: content PRTV fights, and PRTV fights in two specific shows, namely, Mission Impossible and Hawaii 5-0. The dependent variables considered were the index of physical aggressive predispositions toward problem resolution, and the self report of the frequency of the child's engagement in physical fights. 79 In order to test this hypothesis, zero order correlations were computed between the independent and the dependent vari- ables, and the results are shown in Table 12. In the case of the index of physical aggressive predis- positions with PRTV, one out of three correlations was signifi— cant but in the opposite direction to that predicted by the hypothesis. This was in the case of the perception of reality of the fights in Hawaii 5-0. When controlling for SES, grade in school, age, intelli- gence and sex, the correlation of the index with PRTV fights in Hawaii 5-0 dropped from -.16 to -.09 (df=152) and became non-significant, indicating that at least part of the original correlation was spurious. When the same control was carried out for the other two correlations, they remained low and non significant. When considering the correlations between the self report Of the child's engagement in physical fights and the three measures of PRTV it is observed that all three coefficients are insignificant, with one of them at p<.06. Fifth order partial correlation coefficients were also calculated for these three relationships, controlling for demographics, and all the coefficients remained low and non- significant. When considering PRTV as an intervening variable between exposure to violence on television and aggressive predis- positions, conditional zero order correlations were computed and they are presented in Table 12a. 80 In the table, the measures of exposure used are always located on top of the frames, and the measures of aggressive predispositions are located to the left. The levels of per- ception of reality are inside of the frames. The first frame from top to bottom consists of the index of exposure to the shows Mission Impossible and Hawaii 5-0 as the independent variable. The dependent variables are the two measures of aggressive predispositions, and the intervening variable is the content PRTV of fights. It is observed here that for those children high in PRTV of fights the correla- tion between violence viewing and aggressive predispositions, in both cases, is significant. However, for the self report the correlation is also significant for those children low on PRTV, although not as high as for the "true" category. The second frame has as the independent variable the measure of specific exposure to the show Mission Impossible mediated by the perception of reality of the fights in that show. The dependent variables are the same measures of aggressive predispositions. The "don't know" category here is the one for which exposure and predispositions show the highest correlations, which are both significant, which the "true" category also shows a significant correlation in the case of the self report, although not as high as its counter- part for the "don't know" classification. In third place is a similar frame but with respect to the show Hawaii 5-0. Here, for the "not true" column, the 81 correlation between exposure to the show and the self report is significant, and also the correlation is high and falls short of significance for the "true" category. For the index of aggressive predispositions, the "don't know" classification shows a significant correlation. A reversal is observed for the correlation with the index of aggressive predispositions in the "true" category, although this correlation is not significant. At last, in the fourth frame, the content PRTV of fights mediates a newly created index of exposure to violent shows. This index consists of the addition Of positive responses to the general measure of exposure for those shows considered to be violent: The Magician, Mission Impossible, Wild Wild West, Hawaii 5-0, Police Triology (McMillan/McCloud/Columbo), Land of Giants, Cannon, The Streets of San Francisco, Toma, Bonanza, Gunsmoke, The Name of the Game, and Lost in Space. Here, only one significant correlation is found, the one between the measure of exposure and the self report of involvement in fights for the "not true" category. All other correlations are almost zero in general and insignificant. When looking for a pattern in these results, non is found. For the "true" category, in general, three correla- tions are significant in the predicted direction, one falls short of significance, and there is one reversal. For the "don't know" category three correlations are positive and significant, and for the "not true" category there are also 82 three positive significant correlations. The results are at best inconclusive. As can be seen, the results are inconsistent, and some- times contradictory. It cannot be said that for those child- ren who perceive television violence to be real, exposure to that same violence leads to more aggressive predispositions. Furthermore the correlation between the index of 13 violent shows with the index of aggressive predispositions was .02 (n.s.), and with the self report of engagement in fights .09 (n.s.). It follows from these findings that at least with the measures used in this study and with the respondents involved there is no relationship between the perception of reality of television violence with aggressive predispositions toward problem resolution, and the research hypothesis is, of course, rejected in favor of the null: the perception of reality of television fights in general and in two specific shows is not related with physical aggressive predispositions, neither with the self report of the child's involvement in physical fights. 83 Table 12. Zero order correlations for two measures of aggressive behavioral predispositions with PRTV. PRTV MEASURES r with INDEX Of N p: PHYSICAL AGGRESSIVE , PREDISPOSITIONS Content PRTV fights -.01 264 n.s. Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible .03 210 n.s. Hawaii 5-0 -.16 170 .05 PRTV MEASURES r with SELF-REPORT N p: OF FREQUENCY OF ENGAGEMENT IN PHYSICAL FIGHTS Content PRTV fights .05 268 n.s. Specific PRTV fights in: Mission Impossible .11 212 n.s. Hawaii 5-0 .10 175 n.s. * This correlation fell short of significance at the probability level of .055. 84 Table 12a. Conditional correlations for exposure to violence of TV with aggressive predispositions at three levels of PRTV of violence. Index of exposure to Mission Impossible and Hawaii 5-0 Content PRTV of fights Not true Don't know True Index of .03 (N=84) .09 (N=48) .18 (N=130)* aggressive predispositions Self re- .19 (N=85)* .03 (N=50) .23 (N=13o)** port of involvement in fights Exposure to the Show Mission Impossible PRTV of fights in Mission Impossible Not true Don't know True Index of .09 (N=112) .26 (N=58)* -.03 (N=40) aggressive predispositions Self re- .02 (N=ll3) .39 (N=59)** .27 (N=40)* port of involvement in fights Exposure to the Show Hawaii 5-0 PRTV of fights in Hawaii 5-0 Not true Don't know True Index of .13 (N=83) .27 (N=46)* -.16 (N=41) aggressive predispositions Self re- .20 (N=85)* .10 (N=48) .25 (N=42)@ port of involvement in fights Index of exposure to 13 violent Shows Content PRTV of fights Not true Don't know True Index of .02 (N=85) -.02 (N=49) -.03 (N=130) aggressive predispositions Self re- .21 (N=86)* .08 (N=52) -.02 (N=130) port of involvement in fights *p .05; **p .01; @=.058 CHAPTER 4 CONCLUSION The present study constituted a systematic replication of a pioneer study by Reeves (1974), in which he tested the impor— tance of a series of variables designed to predict the per- ception of reality of television by U.S. children. This study tested the same relationships for which Reeves found support, and tested modifications of the relationships for which he did not find support. This study attempted a further step in the theoretical sequence of media effects by testing the effect of the per- ception of television violence as real on aggressive behavior- al predispositions of young viewers. Two hundred and seventy three children in two elementary schools of Mexico City were administered questionnaires in order to tap the variables of importance in this inquiry, during the winter of 1975. The independent variables considered in the predicition of PRTV were: a. real life experiences with television con- tent; b. the level of abstraction for the referent on tele- vision; c. demographics (SES, age, grade in school, sex and intelligence); d. the use of television for relaxation, learning and companionship; e. TV exposure; and f. the in- fluence of significant others. 85 86 PRTV in turn served as the independent variable in the prediction of aggressive behavioral predispositions. The results obtained indicate that: 1. the amount of real life experiences with television content do not consis- tently relate to PRTV; 2. as one moves from the more abstract to the more concrete referent for television PRTV tends to decrease, contrary to what was expected; 3. as SES increases PRTV decreases, except for the case of the PRTV of Americans and of The Partridge Family; 4. as grade in school and age increase, PRTV decreases; 5. sex does not seem to make a difference; 6. as GPA increases, PRTV decreases; 7. as the use of television for learning and companionship increase, PRTV increases also, but not so in the case of the use of television for relaxation; 8. as general TV exposure increases, PRTV increases, but, as specific exposure increases, PRTV does not change in most cases; 9. as the influence of signifi- cant others in favor of the reality of television increases, PRTV increases; 10. as the perception of reality of television violence increases, aggressive predispositions do not seem to vary; and 11. the relationship between exposure to TV violence and aggressive predispositions was inconsistent for those children who perceived TV violence to be realistic. The specific relationships Obtained are summarized in Table 13 for PRTV as the dependent variable. This table also includes the results of a multiple regression analysis con— ducted in order to obtain the multiple correlation of the 87 independent variables with PRTV. Two multiple correlations are reported for each measure of the dependent variable PRTV: the first ones are the R's for all the independent variables with PRTV, these ranged from .51 to .55. The second set of R's was obtained in a forward stepwise multiple regression analysis in which the independent variables are entered in the regression equation, at each step, according to the highest partial correlation for each independent variable with the dependent variable, controlling for all other independent variables not in the equation. The resultant range in R's was from .22 to .53. Those partial regression coefficients that were found to be significant in the stepwise analysis are also indicated in Table 13. It should be noted that due to high collinearity (r=.80) grade in school and age were summated to form an index of academic and chronological growth. When a regression coefficient was found significant for this index, this is indicated in the table for both grade in school and age. The multiple correlations are presented in order to examine the composite predictive power of all the independent variables, and in order to identify those independent vari— ables that alone or in conjunction with a few other variables constitute the best predictors of PRTV. The coefficient of determination (R2) is also presented. The identification of a set of best predictors is only of empirical importance at this stage, and for future theoretical considerations. 88 mo.Wa Amv coHumHouuou sandbags uceofiwucwfim n ® .co«um3ce or“ CH no: nuanmwum> ucoocoauvca cacao HHw no“ mcwfidouucoo .m~nn«»m> ucwpcoaev egg to“: mmabwwum> oceocyamnc« ecu go some new coHumqouuou Hwauuaa “wozwfin ecu ob xcwo»0uom .amow some on .cofiumscm scammoumeu ecu a“ oeogaucw mum ovanmwum> ecu Lean: :« mwmxfiwce conmOuwou emaaamum unw3LOw a CH 0 Oman axe: co caseboOM ecu mom x vooaaocq mum manapcfiu no: uwom .mo.Aavmo. boondocfi Omfim yum uocmufiw«cm«m LO unocm mcwmfimw we pofieaucupd mono use .mpe: oopsdo:« mdfizmcofiucHOH ecu wcoe< u mo.wa u:e«o«wweoo scammOEROH u .ficmcowuaawu ummcuaw>uso sEom a « afizmcofinmdon uomhwu I + awzmcofiucmo» wmhm>ca n I «N. woe. . ow. afin. .+ + + + .I .I .I I cum «fleas: co mucwuw mzh ma. smq. mw. @mq. .+ + + + + I .I .I I vfinwmmoasu sawmmfiz co muzwfiu ugh Na. @qm. ma. @Hq. + + + .+ .I I I I + muzmfim >Hmm ucwucou 2. e2. 2. ~33. .+ + + + I .+ .+ :5: 32.5 cu manuauos< och AN. saw. 3. man. .1. .- .I + .+ sesame: 2: ad maneuuoe< och no. am. I + mcmufiuos< >Hmm “cwucco 2. em... 2. so? .+ + .+ + + .- .- + .. ESE owofiuuuum use QN. goo. om. ®~m. .+ + + .I .I .I I homo: guano . ammo: Cu xHHEam one no. @mm. mo. Om. + + + .+ + + I I mOAAAEeL >Hmm acoucoo mo. mam. NH. enm. x .+ + I .+ .+ .I xmocfi >Pma possumn< . I), mwx2mhmm m m .x x N o opt: .6 3:33 3:621... 2: 2:: co 2528 no“: ucofiodwwooo COMmmomeL fimwupaa muamgms nghowam cow: mzozm nu >H no“: unguawacmam a mewaocm moanmwpg> mofibmwnm> “cmpconopcfi ousmoazm uuzmoaxm awzmsowcmaEOu mahogsog cohuaxnflwm Akmm MC ushzzcza acoumwwwj OLE 3cm msfimeho> uccvcoawccw mzu coaiuwn tweacuno mawzmco«uamom .ma vdnnh 89 In general it is observed that the set of predictor variables is reduced in the multiple regression analysis, without substantially modifying the amount of variance ex- plained in PRTV. The largest difference in variance explained between the two R2 is of only .05. The best empirical pre- dictors of PRTV seem to be: the influence of significant others in favor of the reality of television, and the com- posite of academic and physical growth (grade in school and age), and to a lesser degree intelligence:(GPA) and the use of television for companionship. The average amount of variance explained by all the in- dependent variables in PRTV is 20%, and the average amount of variance explained by only the significant contributors is 19%. This suggests that for practical purposes the number of variables considered in this study as predictors of PRTV can be reduced to the four variables most consistently pre- dictive of PRTV. For theoretical purposes these variables may be used as control variables or predictors in future endeavors, as the work of the theoretician indicates. X Since the general index of ISO contained a very low number of cases (69), it was deleted from the regression equation having as the dependent variable the abstract PRTV index. The low number of cases in this index is due to the overlap of missing observations across all six measures of ISO. It should be recalled that not all the children watched all the shows, and that consequently their responses to items about those shows are not meaningful, and were classified as missing observations. 90 In the case of the empirical prediction of aggressive predispositions a regression analysis was also conducted. For the index of aggressive predispositions the independent variables were: the PRTV of fights in the content area, in Mission Impossible, and in Hawaii 5-0; real life experiences with fights, SES, the index of academic and physical growth, sex, intelligence, the uses of television for companionship, relaxation, and learning, the measure of general exposure, and the index of specific exposure to fights, as well as the index of ISO with respect to the reality of television fights. For the self report of engagement in physical fights, the independent variables were all the same with the exception of the index of real life experiences with fights, since one of the variables in that index was precisely the dependent measure. Consequently the index of real life experiences with fights was replaced with the measure of real life observation of peOple physically fighting. For the index of aggressive predispositions, with all the variables included in the equation, the multiple correla- tion was .47 and the amount of variance explained was 22%. When only the significant contributors were included in the equation the R dropped to .34, and R2 to .12. The significant contributors in this case were sex and SES. When the self report of involvement in fights was con- sidered, with all the independent variables included in the equation, R was .45, and R2 .20. When only the significant 91 contributors were included in the equation R dropped to .35 and the amount of variance explained was 12%. The only significant predictor in this case was sex. For both dependent variables boys were more aggressive than girls (the zero order correlations were -.24 for the index of aggressive predispositions and -.35 for the self report of engagement in fights). For the index of aggressive predispositions the higher the SES, the more aggressiveness (r=.22). DISCUSSION The order to be followed in this discussion will be: 1. a comparison of the results obtained in this study with those obtained by Reeves with respect to the prediction of PRTV; and 2. an analysis of the findings with regard to aggressive predispositions. The present study conducted with Mexican children agrees with Reeves' study with American children in that as PRTV increased, age decreased, exposure to TV in general increased, the use of television for learning and companionship increased, and the influence of significant others in favor of the reality of TV increased. All these findings constitute con— firmations of hypothesized relationships, and they are con- sistent with past research. Both studies also coincide in the rejection of some hypothesized relationships. Real life experiences with tele- vision content and sex did not show to be related to PRTV. 92 The most plausible explanation for the lack of consistent relationship between real life experiences with TV content and PRTV may be the one offered by Reeves and by Greenberg and Reeves (1974, p. 22), that "the standard of judgment used may well be the fictional presentation, against which the true-to-life one is being weighed." Consequently the type of information that the child uses as a standard for comparison, whether symbolic or "real" experiences, should be determined before making specific predictions with regard to the expected behavior of the relationship between real life experiences and TV representations. In the special case of PRTV of Americans in 2 specific shows, the finding that the more real life experiences with Americans leads to more PRTV may be due to the artifact that only those children who have had real life experiences with Americans in Mexico knew what we were talking about when asking them about the reality of Americans on those two specific shows. The rest of the children might have received the first news about the nationality of the characters when we mentioned it to them. The primacy of experience may not prove to be the only consideration. If children do go to the media, and in this case to TV, for learning, they may just take for granted that TV is one more source of experience that can be efficacious for dealing with the world in which they live, and may not even raise the question about the reality of what they see. 93 In this case real life experiences and symbolic experiences may be melded into a common set of information, which in their particular situation may or may not be effective for dealing with their own circumstances. If such information proves to be effective for dealing with their environment, if it enables the children to be successful in their every day activity, it may then constitute the determinant for the evaluation of the incoming information they receive in general. A question can also be raised with respect to the items used to measure real life experiences. We don't know to what extent two questionnaire items actually tap the amount of real life experiences a child goes through, which involve the referents of interest. With respect to sex, it is specially noticeable that no differences were found in two different cultures with respect to the same, or similar, measures of PRTV. The explanation for such occurrence may be that socialization practices for the sexes, and across the two cultures, do not differentially affect the way in which children evaluate the reality of TV programming, at least up to the highest age of children studied here. As infants their treatment and the rules under which they are raised may not substantially differ. Adolescents or adults may still show differences in PRTV according to their sex, since the social climate surrounding them is expected to be more definitively different, specially in a country like Mexico. For example, the evaluation of the 94 reality of soap-Operas by adolescent or adult males and females is expected to differ. For the replicative part of this study, several incon- gruencies were found with respect to Reeves' findings. Marked differences were found for the relationship of PRTV with the level of abstraction for the referent of television, SES, intelligence, the use of television for relaxation, and speci- fic exposure. Reeves found that as the referent for television went from the abstract to the more concrete, PRTV increased. In this study the relationship not only did not hold but some reversal was observed. The more concrete the referent the less PRTV, with the two highest levels of abstraction showing no difference between themselves. This difference of findings may well be a function of the shows inquired about, the refer- ents of concern (families, Americans, and fights), or the cultural background of the respondents, or a combination of these factors. Possibly, the lack of difference between the two higher levels of abstraction can be attributed to the fact that they were defined a priori by the researcher. We do not know whether the children actually perceived a difference in the level of abstraction between, for example, "People on TV shows are like peOple you know in real life" and "Families on TV shows are like families you know in real life". The specific shows inquired about were all with one exception of foreign origin to the Mexican children. They 95 may in general be evaluated with respect to the National tele- vision in general. This National TV may on the average contain more elements that the Mexican children can relate to, as com- pared with American shows that reflect a style of life that can not be found in their environment, with some few exceptions. The referents asked about (families, Americans, and fights) in the specific American shows might have possibly seemed esoteric to the Mexican children. For example, the fights on Mission Impossible use automatic weapons that the children might have never seen except in that or similar shows, render- ing the low PRTV means observed. However, when the children were asked whether fights on TV are like fights in real life in a more general sense, they might have averaged their per- ceptions in a general agree that they correspond to some extent. A study in which the children were only asked about the reality of Mexican shows should replicate Reeves' findings, other things being equal. SES in the present study did make a difference with re- spect to the perceptions of reality of TV programming, con- trary to Reeves' lack of differences, but consistent with past research. The explanation for this had already been offered by Reeves. He suspected that lack of differences was due to the absence of well differentiated subsamples with respect to socioeconomic status in his sample. The sub- samples in the Mexican study were well differentiated, they actually represented extremes along the continuum of social class. 96 In the Mexican sample, however, the SES results were not very consistent. The inconsistencies observed can be due to the specific referents inquired about. Looking at the rela- tionships encountered (see Table 13), for fights in all cases the research hypothesis is confirmed: the higher the SES the lower the PRTV, as well as in the cases of the family in Hogar Dulce Hogar, and in the case of the abstract PRTV index. However, in the cases of The Partridge Family, and in the two instances of PRTV of Americans the relationship is positive. Let's recall the discussion with respect to real life experiences with TV content, and with respect to the levels of abstraction for the referent on television. It can be argued that we do not know what is the standard of comparison that the children use for evaluating TV reality, and that the referents of interest in the American shows may not cor- respond to the kind of experiences that the children can have in one or the other socioeconomic strata. Considering these, it can be said that the richer children can more easily dis- count what they see in general, and the fights they witness on TV. Their broader range of experiences (symbolic or real) may enable them to do so. It could be argued that the poor children may in fact be exposed to more fights than their counterparts. However, the fights inquired about, with auto- matic weapons or other sophisticated armaments, are not the fights the poor children witness. The more well-off children may still have more information for evaluating these fights. 97 They may more frequently go to the movies, read, travel, etc.. Since the richer children might have been the only ones that had any accurate meaning for nationality, they were more likely to evaluate TV Americans as real. In the cases of the family in Hogar Dulce Hogar, and of The Partridge Family, no ready explanation is available. It was in general found that the more intelligent children , the better they did in school, they tended to consider that TV does not reflect real life, contrary to Reeves' findings, which although in this hypothe- sized direction, were not significant. Reeves' results can be explained by the fact that he could only gather IQ scores for half of his sample (101 respondents), where there were no scores for the oldest children. It should be mentioned here that a matter of definite concern was the correlation between GPA and SES (.54) which indicates that the richer children do better in school than the poorer ones, and this issue should definitely be pursued, outside of the limits of this study however. The hypothesis that the more the child goes to television for relaxation the more he perceives it to be real, was rejected. Reeves,however, confirmed this relationship. In comparing the findings for all three uses of television (relaxation, learning and companionship) in both studies, it can be observed that the findings are consistent, nevertheless. Reeves found only moderate support for the use of television for relaxation, and support for the other two functions. 98 In this study, although three of the relationships were signi- ficant in the predicted direction, the hypothesis was rejected, but the other two were said to have received support. In both studies, relaxation was the least supported function with respect to PRTV. Since the difference in confirmation of the hypothesis may be due to differential interpretation of the findings, it can be said that the variable behaved similarly, in general. The interpretation offered here is that perhaps the relaxation function accompanies many functions that tele- vision serves, and it becomes one seemingly obvious reason for watching television as a socially acceptable response. In fact, in this study,the standard deviation for the dis- tribution of this function was the lowest of all three functions investigated (2.07 vs. 2.21 and 2.31). In the case of specific exposure to television, in the content areas, as a direct predictor of PRTV, Reeves confirmed the hypothesis, but it was rejected in this study. Reeves used an index of exposure to the shows in each specific con- tent area for comparison with the specific PRTV of each show in it. In this study, the specific exposure to each show was used for comparison with the PRTV of that show. However, when an index similar to Reeves' was used for comparison with each show with these data, the present results were unchanged. The fact that Reeves used three shows in each content area as compared to two in this study, may explain the results to some extent. He tapped a wider range of exposure to TV, 99 approximating so the index of general exposure for which con-- firmatory results were found in both studies. Also, a larger variance in the measure of exposure was to be expected with his indexes. The general patterns of exposure of the children may differ from their exposure to some specific shows. This specific exposure may not reflect the kind of symbolic ex- perience that the children use for evaluating the reality of a show or a set of them. Since both studies used multiple regression analysis in order to uncover the best predictors of PRTV according to the amount of variance explained by a reduced set of variables, a comparison of the results is in order. In the American and Mexican studies, the influence of significant others and the age of the children were found to be the variables that accounted, consistently and signifi- cantly for most of the explained variance in PRTV as compared with the other variables. To a lesser extent, the use of television for companionship was shared by both studies as a significant contributor. Some minor differences were observed, which chance may explain, or some of the rationales offered above, for the differences found (see Reeves, 1974, p. 62). The fact that the influence of significant others was one of the best predictors, consistently across both studies, deserves further consideration. The results are quite straightforward if in fact the perception of the ISO by the child reflects the actual influence exercised over him. 100 The issue that remains to be resolved is whether the children in a projective act do reflect the influence of their signifi- cant others to be consistent with their own views. If such is the case, these results may not be meaningful. However, if the children do try to estimate the influence they receive instead of simply projecting their own perceptions, we may have an even more powerful tool than the direct report of significant others with respect to their influence over a child. The way we perceive the messages is what theoretically should influence behavior, and not the message as intended by the source. At any rate, the scarce available evidence in- dicates that children tend to underestimate the influence they receive instead of exaggerating it (Woelfel, 1975). The irregularities across both studies, and within the studies are suggestive. It may prove more fruitful to study individual types of referents (e.g., families, Americans, fights, etc.) in individual shows with respect to PRTV, rather than speak of PRTV too generally. The dimensions that a child uses for evaluating the reality of TV may vary from show to show. The referent of relevance in talking about PRTV can in its own right constitute the unit of analysis, for example, the PRTV of violence only, and what is that makes it predictable from certain independent variables. Some unique characteristics may be uncovered which may then serve for generating a theory with a stronger explanatory power. The time dimension (Gordon, 1973), the context of the violence, 101 the identification of the child with a character, etc., or a combination of the above may explain marked differences in prediction. Global approaches like this one, may be profit- able in an exploratory sense since some of the variance has been explained by significant contributors (average=19%). However, the study of the determinants of more specific PRTV issues, in detail, can be the best follow-up. In Appendix C the reader will find the zero order cor- relations that were common to both Reeves' and this study, in the cases where comparable measures were used. For the non-replicative part of this study, when looking at the effects of PRTV on the behavioral aggressive predis- positions of young viewers, we have witnessed a lack of relationship, and more so when controlling for demographic variables. It has been seen that the variables that significantly accounted for most of the variance explained in aggressive predispositions were SES and sex for the index of aggressive predispositions, and sex for the self report of engagement in fights. That boys tend to be more aggressive than girls is not surprising. However, the more well off children seemed to be more favorably predisposed to display aggression with respect to the index of behavioral predispositions. Perhaps with the situational items of the index, some type of assertiveness was tapped. Lacking more substantive evidence, an anecdote may illustrate the point. When the present 102 writer was an elementary school student in a private school in Mexico, he recalls several instances in which the teacher would complain about the behavior of the group by making reference to children in official schools who were said to behave better than the "rich" children in the private schools. So, for the less well off children, compliance with the authority may be more salient: "I'll tell the teacher what “ you did to me." This, of course, may not necessarily mean that outside of the school the more disadvantaged children would not fight. The correlation between the self report of ‘1‘.. engagement in fights and SES was null, meaning that if the report is truthful, the children of both socioeconomic classes fight the same. It can also be, that in the context of the school, the richer children felt more confident in reporting what they would do if confronted with the situations described to them, while the poor children might have felt more pressure towards conformity with the established rules. Cultural differences may account for the lact of relation- ship between PRTV and aggressive predispositions. We don't know to what extent the Mexican culture aproves of certain types of aggressive acts in comparison to Anglo- Saxon cultures. However, we may expect more tolerance for certain aggressive acts. The types of behavior attempted to be tapped in this study may simply not represent antisocial acts, and consequently find that the children, regardless of their PRTV of violence, manifest what we call aggressive 103 predispositions. Perhaps the use of more extreme aggressive options might have better differentiated those children who believe that TV violence is real. This is assuming that they would answer according to their true predispositions. The actual observation of the aggressive behavior of the children, as defined in their own culture, might have been the best measure. However, the scarcity of resources such as time and money prevented such observations. At this point, a question that arises is whether mere exposure contributes to aggressive predispositions. Although this was not one of the research questions in this study, as a post hoc issue it deserves consideration. When the index of exposure to 22 shows was correlated with the two measures of aggressive predispositions, the coefficients were low and non—significant and the lack of relationship persisted when demographic factors were controlled (.06 for the index and .03 for the self report). It was already seen that the index of 13 violent shows correlated .02 (n.s.) with the index of aggressive predispositions, and .09 (n.s.) with the self report of involvement in fights. Furthermore it was observed that the relationship between exposure and aggressive predispositions at different levels of the perception of TV violence as real were quite inconsistent across several measures. However, when the index of exposure to the two shows in- volving fights (Mission Impossible and Hawaii 5-0) was 104 correlated with the two measures of aggressive predispositions, and also controlling for demographics, it was found that the coefficient for the index of aggressive predispositions was .10 (p<.05), This finding, tentatively, is an indication of the pos- sible effects of violence viewing on the screen. IMPLICATIONS The relative success achieved in this study in pre- dicting the perception of reality of television is emphasized, since a replication in a different culture has given general- ity to some of the findings. The incongruencies found suggest that more specific attempts be made to study PRTV. Concentrated efforts in one specific type of show,paying closer attention to other possible intervening variables that may mediate PRTV could be fruitful, e.g., identification with a character. Closer scrutiny of the kinds of experiences that a child has in his environment may lead to a better predictability of the way in which the child interprets what he sees on the tube. The cumulative effect of continuous exposure to tele- vision may also determine how new symbolic information is processed. One kind of experience that the child undergoes is the influence of his significant others. In this study, such influence, as reported by the child has shown to be a strong determinant of the way in which the child decodes the messages that the media offers. More definite evidence is 105 needed that shows whether such influence, as reported by the child or by the significant others themselves, is in effect a principal determinant. If this is the case, parents and teachers would be the targets of attention by those who are in charge of the design of the society. The determination of the dimensions on which children evaluate the reality of television is a further tOpic for consideration. Is reality evaluated along a time dimension? an effectiveness one? or is reality on television evaluated at all, as a spontaneous activity of the child? If the child does not spontaneously evaluate the reality or make believe of what he sees, then he may not use such information for attitude formation and for subsequent behavior. In this study, no evidence was found for a relationship between the perception of reality of TV violence and aggres- sive predispositions. It may be in fact that PRTV is not an issue of consideration by the child, or it may be that other variables should be explored which may interact with it for rendering the behavioral effects we hypothesized. Justifi- cation may be one such variable. If what is seen on TV is not only real, but justified, then it may be acceptable for imitation. Other effects of PRTV should be explored. Is helping behavior enhanced when helping on TV is perceived to be realistic? Do the sex roles portrayed on television, when perceived as real, promote stereotyping of the behavior of, 106 for example, males and females? Is the male supposed to be a "macho?" We have seen that boys manifested more aggression than girls. Is TV contributing to that "male" or "female" behavior, mediated perhaps by PRTV? Boys and girls may per- ceive TV to be equally real. However, they may learn differ- ent things, according to the sex of the characters. The concern for TV effects on antisocial behavior remains in this study a live issue. The perception of reality may not be important, but we have seen that sheer exposure to two violent shows, controlling for demographics, does make a difference. How much of a difference is substantial for dis- rupting the functioning of a society, is not a question to be resolved here. However, the relationship deserves further consideration by researchers and policy makers. PRTV, as well as exposure, may have cumulative effects, or effects over time. If the same children in this study could be given a similar questionnaire in a year or two, or when they are out of school, some more evidence could be found that would confirm or disconfirm the findings of this study. It may well be that what the children perceive to be real in their early years contributes to how they behave latter in life. The same applies to mere exposure. Is ex- posure to violence during childhood a determinant of adult antisocial behavior? Hopefully, the deficiencies of this study will be over- come in subsequent endeavors, as suggested above, or in 107 other forms, and the evidence encountered in this study serve towards the formation of more solid human knowledge of the behavior of human beings. The perception of reality of tele- vision and its possible effects on the behavior of the receivers is by no means a concluded research endeavor, and the merit of replications across cultures has been demon- strated here, by the discovery of regularities and irregular- ities across political and language boundaries. APPENDICES APPENDIX A QUE PIENSAS TU DE LA TELEVISION? éQUE PROGRAMAS VES EN LA TELEVISION CADA SEMANA O CASI CADA SEMANA? PON UNA PALOMITA JUNTO A TODOS LOS PROGRAMAS QUE VEAS. NUESTRO UNIVERSO LAS CALLES DE SAN FRANCISCO EL MAGO ______ HOGAR DULCE HOGAR _____ MISION IMPOSIBLE _____ EL GORDO Y EL FLACO _____ ESPIA CON ESPUELAS _____ LA PANTERA ROSA _____ LOS PICAPIEDRA _____ EL SHOW DE LOS POLIVOCES _____ MIS ADORABLES SOERINOS_____ TOMA _____ HAWAII 5-0 _____ MI BELLA GENIO _____ TOM Y JERRY _____ LA CRIADA EIEN CRIADA _____ LA FAMILIA MONSTER _____ EL CHAPULIN COLORADO _____ TRILOGIA POLICIACA _____ BONANZA _____ TIERRA DE GIGANTES _____ LA LEY DEL REVOLVER _____ CANNON _____. PERDIDOS EN EL ESPACIO _____ LOS LOCOS ADAMS _____ AUDACIA Es EL JUEGO _____ LA FAMILIA PATRIDGE DISNEYLANDIA EN ESTA HOJA ESTAN ALGUNAS COSAS QUE LA GENTE DICE DE LA TELEVISION. PIENSA SI TU CREES QUE SI SON CIERTAS.O NO SON CIERTAS. PON UNA PALOMITA JUNTO A LO QUE TU PIENSES. 1. LOS PROGRAMAS DE TV MUESTRAN LA VIDA COMO TU LA VES EN LA REALIDAD. SI ES CIERTO NO SE NO ES CIERTO 2. LA GENTE EN LOS PROGRAMAS DE TELEVISION ES COMO LA GENTE QUE TU CONOCES EN LA VIDA REAL. NO ES CIERTO NO SE SI ES CIERTO 108 ' l W FAMILIAS QUE TU CONOCES SI NO NO LAS MISMAS COSAS QUE LE 109 LAS FAMILIAS EN LOS PROGRAMAS DE TELEVISION SON COMO LAS EN LA VIDA REAL. ES CIERTO SE ES CIERTO PASAN A LA GENTE EN LOS PROGRAMAS DE TELEVISION, LE PUEDEN PASAR A LA GENTE QUE TU CONOCES EN LA VIDA REAL. NO NO SI LOS AMERICANOS ES CIERTO SE ES CIERTO (GRINGOS) QUE SALEN EN LOS PROGRAMAS DE TELEVISION, SON COMO LOS GRINGOS QUE TU CONOCES EN LA VIDA REAL. SI NO NO COMO LOS LUGARES QUE TU NO NO SI LOS LUGARES QUE VES EN LOS PROGRAMAS DE TELEVISION, LAS PELEAS EN LOS PROGRAMAS DE TELEVISION, ES CIERTO SE ES CIERTO SON CONOCES EN LA VIDA REAL. ES CIERTO SE ES CIERTO SON COMO LAS PELEAS EN LAS QUE TU HASESTADO O HAS VISTO EN LA VIDA REAL. SI NO ES CIERTO SE NO ES CIERTO AQUI ESTAN ALGUNAS RAZONES POR LAS QUE LA GENTE VE TELEVISION. DINOS QUE TAN SEGUIDO VES TU LA TELEVISION POR ESTAS RAZONES. PON UNA PALOMITA JUNTO A TU RESPUESTA. 8. EN EL MUNDO? éCADA CUANDO VES LA TV PARA CONOCER LAS COSAS QUE PASAN NUNCA ALGUNAS VECES MUCHAS VECES SIEMPRE éCADA CUANDO VES TU LA TELEVISION PARA ESTAR TRANQUILO? SIEMPRE MUCHAS VECES ALGUNAS VECES NUNCA 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. aCADA CUANDO VES PARA TI? éCADA CUANDO VES ENOJADO? éCADA CUANDO VES COMPORTARTE? éCADA CUANDO VES DESCANSAR? éCADA CUANDO VES éCADA CUANDO VES MISMO? ECADA CUANDO VES HABLAR O JUGAR? TU TU TU TU TU 110 TV PORQUE ES COMO UN VERDADERO AMIGO NUNCA ALGUNAS VECES MUCHAS VECES SIEMPRE LA TV PARA CALMARTE SIEMPRE MUCHAS VECES ALGUNAS VECES NUNCA LA TV PARA APRENDER NUNCA ALGUNAS VECES MUCHAS VECES SIEMPRE LA TV PORQUE ES UNA SIEMPRE MUCHAS VECES ALGUNAS VECES NUNCA LA TV PARA NO ESTAR NUNCA ALGUNAS VECES MUCHAS VECES SIEMPRE LA TV PARA APRENDER SIEMPRE MUCHAS VECES ALGUNAS VECES NUNCA LA TV CUANDO NO HAY NUNCA ALGUNAS VECES MUCHAS VECES SIEMPRE CUANDO ESTAS COMO DEBES MANERA BONITA DE SOLO? COSAS DE TI NADIE CON QUIEN 111 AQUI ESTAN ALGUNAS COSAS QUE A VECES TE PUEDEN PASAR. PON UNA PALOMITA JUNTO A LA RESPUESTA QUE SE PAREZCA A LO QUE TU HARIAS. 17. TU VAS CAMINANDO POR LA CALLE. UN NINO ESTA ENOJADO CONTIGO. VIENE Y TE PEGA. QUE HACES? PEGARLE IRME DECIRLE A UNA GENTE MAYOR 18. éTU VES QUE ALGUIEN SE ESTA ROBANDO TU TORTA. TU LO CACHAS. QUE HACES? LO ACUSO CON LA MAESTRA LO DEJO LE PEGO 19. TU ESTAS ESPERANDO EN LA COLA PARA TOMAR AGUA. ALGUIEN VIENE Y TE EMPUJA. QUE HACES? LO EMPUJO ME VOY DIGO "VAS A VER" 20. ALGUIEN QUE ES TU AMIGO ANDA DICIENDO CHISMES DE TI, SIN QUE TU SEPAS. TU TE DAS CUENTA. LO VES DESPUES DE LA ESCUELA QUE HACES? LE DIGO A LA MAESTRA ME VOY LE DOY UNA PATADA 0 L0 PELLIZCO 21. ALGUIEN TE DICE UNA GROSERIA. QUE HACES? LE PEGO LE DIGO OTRA GROSERIA ME VOY LE DIGO A UNA GENTE MAYOR 22. CUANDO VAS SALIENDO DE LA ESCUELA VES QUE DOS NINOS SE ESTAN GOLPEANDO CON TU MEJOR AMIGO. QUE HACES? LE DIGO A LA MAESTRA LO DEJO LOS EMPUJO O LES PEGO EN ESTA HOJA ESTAN COSAS QUE A LO MEJOR TU HACES. DINOS QUE TAN SEGUIDO LAS HACES. PON UNA PALOMITA JUNTO A TU RESPUESTA. 23. CCADA CUANDO JUEGAS CON TUS AMIGOS EN SUS CASAS? NUNCA CASI NUNCA A VECES MUCHAS VECES 112 24. éCADA CUANDO HABLAS CON LAS FAMILIAS DE TUS AMIGOS EN SUS CASAS? MUCHAS VECES A VECES CASI NUNCA NUNCA 25. éCADA CUANDO VES TU AMERICANOS (GRINGOS) EN LA VIDA REAL? (NO EN TELEVISION.) NUNCA CASI NUNCA A VECES MUCHAS VECES 26. éCADA CUANDO HABLAS CON AMERICANOS? MUCHAS VECES A VECES CASI NUNCA NUNCA 27. éCADA CUANDO VES GENTE GOLPEANDOSE EN LA VIDA REAL? (NO EN TV) NUNCA CASI NUNCA A VECES MUCHAS VECES 28. éCADA CUANDO TE PELEAS A GOLPES? MUCHAS VECES A VECES CASI NUNCA NUNCA AQUI ESTAN UNAS PREGUNTAS MAS SOBRE PROGRAMAS DE TELEVISION éCADA CUANDO VES TU EL PROGRAMA DE TELEVISION "HOGAR DULCE HOGAR?" CASI CADA SEMANA A VECES NUNCA 1. éCREES TU QUE LA FAMILIA EN "HOGAR DULCE HOGAR" ES COMO LAS FAMILIAS QUE TU CONOCES EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO 113 éPLATICAS CON TUS AMIGOS ACERCA DE LA FAMILIA EN "HOGAR DULCE HOGAR?" SI NO éPLATICAS CON TU MAMA O TU PAPA ACERCA DE LA FAMILIA EN "HOGAR DULCE HOGAR?" SI NO aPLATICAS CON TU HERMANO O HERMANA ACERCA DE LA FAMILIA EN "HOGAR DULCE HOGAR?" SI NO éLAS PERSONAS CON LAS QUE PLATICAS ACERCA DE LA FAMILIA EN "HOGAR DULCE HOGAR", CREEN QUE ELLOS SON COMO LAS FAMILIAS EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO éCADA CUANDO VES TU EL PROGRAMA DE TELEVISION "EL MAGO?" CASI CADA SEMANA A VECES NUNCA éCREES QUE TONY BLAKE EN "EL MAGO" ES COMO LOS AMERICANOS (GRINGOS) QUE TU CONOCES EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO éPLATICAS CON TUS AMIGOS ACERCA DE TONY BLAKE "EL MAGO?" SI NO éPLATICAS CON TU MAMA O PAPA ACERCA DE TONY BLAKE "EL MAGO?" SI NO éPLATICAS CON TU HERMANO O HERMANA ACERCA DE TONY BLAKE "EL MAGO?" SI NO 114 5. éLAS PERSONAS CON LAS QUE PLATICAS ACERCA DE TONY BLAKE "EL MAGO" CREEN QUE EL ES COMO LOS AMERICANOS (GRINGOS) EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO éCADA DUANDO VES TU EL PROGRAMA DE TELEVISION "MISION IMPOSIBLE?" CASI CADA SEMANA A VECES NUNCA 1. éCREES QUE LAS PELEAS EN "MISION IMPOSIBLE" SON COMO LAS PELEAS EN LAS QUE TU HAS ESTADO O HAS VISTO EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO 2. éPLATICAS CON TUS AMIGOS ACERCA DE LAS PELEAS EN "MISION IMPOSIBLE?" SI NO 3. éPLATICAS CON TU MAMA TO TU PAPA ACERCA DE LAS PELEAS EN "MISION IMPOSIBLE?" SI NO 4. éPLATICAS CON TU HERMANO O HERMANA ACERCA DE LAS PELEAS EN "MISION IMPOSIBLE?" SI NO 5. gLAS PERSONAS CON LAS QUE TU PLATICAS ACERCA DE LAS PELEAS EN "MISION IMPOSIBLE" CREEN QUE SON COMO LAS PELEAS EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO éCADA CUANDO VES TU EL PROGRAMA DE TELEVISION "LA FAMILIA PATRIDGE?" CASI CADA SEMANA A VECES NUNCA 115 1. éCREES TU QUE LA FAMILIA PARTRIDGE ES COMO LAS FAMILIAS QUE TU CONOCES EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO 2. éPLATICAS CON TUS AMIGOS ACERCA DE LA FAMILIA PARTRIDGE? SI NO 3. éPLATICAS CON TU MAMA O TU PAPA ACERCA DE LA FAMILIA PARTRIDGE? SI NO 4. éPLATICAS CON TU HERMANO O TU HERMAN ACERCA DE LA FAMILIA PARTRIDGE? SI NO 5. aLAS PERSONAS CON LAS QUE PLATICAS ACERCA DE LA FAMILIA PARTRIDGE CREEN QUE ELLOS SON COMO LAS FAMILIAS EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO éCADA CUANDO VES TU EL PROGRAMA DE TELEVISION "MIS ADORABLES SOBRINOS?" CASI CADA SEMANA A VECES NUNCA 1. éCREES TU QUEiLOS NINOS EN "MIS ADORABLES SOBRINOS" SON COMO LOS NINOS AMERICANOS (GRINGOS) EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO RJ 2. éPLATICAS CON TUS AMIGOS ACERCA DE LOS NINOS EN "MIS ADORABLES SOBRINOS?" SI NO «I 3. éPLATICAS CON TU MAMA O TU PAPA ACERCA DE LOS NINOS EN "MIS ADORABLES SOBRINOS?" SI NO 116 éPLATICAS CON TU HERMANO O HERMANA ACERCA DE LOS NINOS EN "MIS ADORABLES SOBRINOS?" SI NO LAS PERSONAS CON LAS QUE PLATICAS ACERCA DE LOS NINOS EN "MIS ADORABLES SOBRINOS" CREEN QUE ELLOS SON COMO LOS NINOS AMERICANOS (GRINGOS) EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO éCADA CUANDO VES TU EL PROGRAMA DE TELEVISION'HAWAII 5-0?" CASI CADA SEMANA A VECES NUNCA éCREES TU QUE LAS PELEAS EN "HAWAII 5-0" SON COMO LAS PELEAS EN LAS QUE TU HAS ESTADO O HAS VISTO EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO gPLATICAS CON TUS AMIGOS ACERCA DE LAS PELEAS EN "HAWAII 5-0?" SI NO éPLATICAS CON TU MAMA O TU PAPA ACERCA DE LAS PELEAS EN "HAWAII 5-0?" SI NO éPLATICAS CON TU HERMANO O HERMANA ACERCA DE LAS PELEAS EN "HAWAII 5-0?" SI NO éLAS PERSONAS CON LAS QUE TU PLATICAS ACERCA DE LAS PELEAS EN "HAWAII 5-0" CREEN QUE SON COMO LAS PELEAS EN LA VIDA REAL? SI NO SE NO M aQUE EDAD TIENES? (EN ANOS CUMPLIDOS) CERES NINO O NINA? NINO NINA 117 APPENDIX B INTERCORRELATIONS AMONG ALL PREDICTOR VARIABLES A000 00. AoNC mm. 00. mev NN. 0N. NN. ANNV MN. NN. NN. on. . AoNv N0. 0N. N0. m0. N0.- AmNV AN. N0. A0. 00. 0N. NN. ASNV NN. NN. NN. N0.- 00. 00.- NN.- ANNC 0N. NN. 00. AN. 0N. 0N. N0. 0m. ANNC 0N. 0N. 0N. NN. 0N. AN. no.- N0. 0N. ANNC N0. 00.- 0N.- N0.- 00. AN.- m0. m0. NN. 00.- AoNC Ho... mo. 00.: .1. 2. mo. :0.- NN. 3. 00. mm. 33 m0. 00.- 0N.- No.- N0. 00.- N0.- 0N. NN. 0N. NN. NN. Ava 0N. 0N. NN. 00. NN. NN.- m0. N0. 0m. 00.- N0. 10. NN. ANNC NN. NN. N0.- NN. NN. AN. N0. 00. m0. NN. N0. 00. 0M. 0m. NoNC 0N. 0N. N . 00. N0. «0. 00.- SN. 0m. 0N. MN. AN. 0N. 0N. NN. AmNV 0N. 0N. SN. 00. SN. m0.- «0. N. 0N. AN. AN. 00. N0. AN. 00. No. ASNC 0N. NN. nN. NN. 0N. mo. NN. 0N. No. cc.- no. 00. 0N. NN. «o. m_. «N. Ava 0N. mN. 0N. 0N. N0. NN. 0N. N0. AN. N. N0.- N0.- N0. No. 00. NN. 00. m0. ANNV NN. NN. n . 0N. m0. NN. NN. 00. N0. AN. 0N.- NN.- N0.- 01.- N0.- N0.- 00.- NN. 00. ANNC 0N. NN. NN. 00. N0. 00. 00. no. 00.- 00. 0N.- 00. N0.- 00. N0.- 00. m0. 00. 0N. 00. AoNv 0N. NN. NN. NN. N0. NN. 0N. m0. «0.- 00,- N0. N0.- 00. 00. m0.- N0. 00. 00. 00. 0N. 0N. x00 0N. NN. 00. N0. 00. N0.- N0. 10. 0N.- NN.- m0.- N0.- 00.- 00. 00.- 01.- SN.- NN. 00. L0. 0.. m0. A00 0N. NN. NN. 0N. 0N. 0N. 0N. m0. N0. 00. 00.- m0.- m0. N0. 00.- NH. 00. N0. NW. 04. m0. m0. m0. ANC Nn. 0N. 0N. NN. 0N. N0.- 00. NN. 0N. N0. N0.- N0. SN. NN. 0N. NN. NN. N0. 0N. NN. 0m. m0. ON. on. x00 00. no. 00. NN.- NN.-N0.- 00. 00.- n0.- 00. 00. 00.- 00.- 10. 00.- N0. NN. 0N.- SN. 00.- NN.-.N.-N0. 01.-NN.- Amy 0N.- 0N.- MN.- N0.- m0. 0N.- N0. 00.- NN.- SN.- NN. N0. 00.- 00. N0.- N0.- N0.- N0. NN.- NN.- NN. 00. N0. 00.-NN.-00.- x00 0m.- N0.- <0.- NN.- 0N.-0N. m0.- NN.- 00.- L0.- AN.- N0.- SN.- NN.- 20.- AN.- SN.- 0N.- NN. mN. N0. M0. 00.-m0. 0N.-0N. 0N.--|||-|||||IINNV NN.- NN.- 0N.- N0.- 00.-N0.- N0.- NN.- AN.- NN.- «0.- 00.- NN.- NN.- SL.- 0N.- NN.- 00. NN.- 00.- 00. 00. No.-00.-NN.-00.-00. 00. --||||NN0 NN.- «0. 00. 0N. NN.-0N. N0. NN.- 00. 0N. 0N.- m0. NN.- N.- 0N. MN.- NN.- «1.- EN. m0. 00.-00. NN.-NN. 0N.-N0. 0m.- an. N0.- --NNV Aomv AoNv AON0 xNNC Aoviva ASNV ANNC ANNC ANNC AoNc x010 mec ANNC Aoav Ava Nady Amfiv ANHV ANNV AONV A0, Amy ANV Acv Any Acv Amy Amy ANV oszmH mo mm: muzmzo~zH mo um: onH8 no mm: uuzmummmxm AA< mo xmoz~ mHIUHm mmozmemmxm mmuq q4Hz4H24~Z