H
II
11

" '

"l’l’ I

I
i

J
r

ll: 1|

NIH

:l’

HI

I
’

l

W
I

'II
’I

V
:J

W {
#03

 

.THS

'E'H-E BEEATIDNEJHP SETWEEN A PREFERENCE

FOR WOLENT TELEVISEGN PBQGRMJS AND
MOW?» VEHBCLE BEWIMG BEHAVIOR

'E'HESIS F83 THE DEGREE OF M. A.
MICEEIGAN STA'EE Ua’iWERSfi'Y

QMES’ES 3 SMEH
E 9 5 8

LIBRARY

Michigan 5””

Univcl'SitY

 

TITLE NO.

1

 

DATE

 

VOLS.

 

LOCATION

 

HEIGHT

 

30105:

—_L___

DO NOT COLLATE

 

DO NOT REMOVE

_.__—_w_.—

NONE BOUND BEFORE

 

CRITERION

 

YEAR

_ _I

 

véi.

THIRD PANEL

 

 

MO.

—.- _—..—F_.-L——-— -

DO NOT WRITE ABOVE

THIS LINE

' o

x

A"
,.
.—

 

 

 

BINDING CHG.

 

 

HAND SEW—INC

 

h—‘Pm H

CALL NOS.

 

—_—._ ———__—___..._

EXTRA THIEK

CALL NO.

 

—-—-—n—__-———-—

STUBBING

 

”—1

HINGING

 

LETTERING

 

IMPRINT

 

EXTRA TIME

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

' I;
Nichig iTHE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A PREFERENCE
U11 336131 I - FOR VIOLENT TELEVISION PROGRAMS
. AND MOTOR VEHICLE
33.4.»! DRIVING BEHAVIOR
"(ya—hf" By

0;
si- MI“

ABSTRACT

an Sta :6

  

James R. Smith

The year 1968 has been marred by acts of violence
which have left the peOple of the United States in a
state of bewilderment. The call has gone forth across
our nation to find out what is causing this influx of
violence. The violent content of television programs is
being examined closely to see what relationship, if any,
they have with this increase in violence in our society.
The purpose of this paper is to determine if there
is any relationship between violence on television and
another kind of violence that may be exhibited in driving
behavior.
For the study of this problem it was hypothesized
that:
Bad drivers will have a greater preference for
viewing violent programming than will good
drivers.
The television programs used in the study were those
telecast by the three commercial networks during the prime
evening Viewing hours of the 1967-1968 television season.

To determine which of these programs were violent and

-4,_... _._. v..-i _
I

James R. Smith

which were non-Violent a panel of judges consisting of
graduate students from Television and Radio, Psychology
and Political Science was employed. The panel was sup-
plied with a definition of a violent television program.
Using a five point bipolar scale between "violent" and
"non-violent" they were instructed to rate the degree of
violence for each of the selected programs.

I A questionnaire containing a check list of the
television programs and other questions was then developed.
It was administered to a group of known violators of motor
vehicle laws and to a group of matched drivers with good
records. An analysis of variance was performed, based on
the difference between the two groups. The difference'
was significant at the .0001 level of confidence.

The data indicates that-a bad driver watches pro-
grams of more violent content than good drivers. However,
there is no effect established on the indication of a
positive relationship between a preference for violent

television programming andsdriving violations.

.
-‘ ‘a
-

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A PREFERENCE
FOR VIOLENT TELEVISION PROGRAMS
AND MOTOR VEHICLE

DRIVING BEHAVIOR
By

0‘

James REID Smith

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
' for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Television and Radio

1968

_ A H. *‘fl.._1—4.44

___'-—-_———-'—‘ ' 4

Accepted by the faculty Of the Department of Tele-

vision and Radio, College‘bf Communication Arts, Michigan

' StateIUniversity, in partial fulfillment of the require-

ments for the Master of Arts degr

sv/f/Zflz/W %W"\:

Director of Thesis

ii

K

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author would like to express his appreciation
to the fOllowing individuals for the part they played in
the various stages of this study:

To Dr. Thomas F. Baldwin, my thesis advisor--without
his encouragement this study would never have been under-
taken and without his guidance it would never have been
completed;

To Gerald J. Fedderson, Dr. Robert O. Nolan, J.
Robert Shinn, and Fred Vanosdall, specialists with the
Highway Traffic Safety Center located at Michigan State
University--the technical assistance which they provided
and the doors which they opened cannOt be measured;

To Dale France and James Bond of Lansing, Michigan

and James Sendo, Jack Ford and George Blair of Grosse

‘Pointe Farms, Michigan--a special thanks for allowing me

_to interview the students of their County Driver Safety
School classes;

To Doug Savala of the Driver Services Division of
the Secretary of Statels Office for computer checks on
driving records;‘

111

_.L‘__ __——_.——— —-

A special thanks to the following individuals who

helped with the telephone interviews conducted in this

study; Ann Buchek, Mary Lichtenberg, Patrick McNew and

his wifé Lee, Mary Wiepking and Dr. Baldwin's Broadcast

Research class.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vi
Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . 1

II. THE PROBLEM AND METHODOLOGY . . . . . 5

The Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . 5

The Study Design . . . . 6

Population and Sample Selection
Violence Viewing Index . . .
Construction of Questionnaire .

H
C

III. RESULTS . . . . . . .I . . . . . . 17
IV. CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . 21
APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . .
I. Program Violence Index . . . ., . .' . .' 28
II. Questionnaire . . . .- . . _. . . . . 36

REFERENCES. . o o ' o o o o o o _ o o ' o o _ o o “2

 

LIST OF TABLES.

Matching - Bad drivers and good drivers.

Violence index of programs . .

Analysis of variance data - two tailed test

Program ranking. . . . . .

vi

Page

13
l8

l9

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

The assasinations of President John F. Kennedy,
Dr. Martin Luther King and Senator Robert F. Kennedy,
as well as the urban riots, have caused people of America
to become increasingly concerned with violence and its
impact upon society. In-June of 1968 President Lyndon
B. Johnson established a "National Commission on the
Causes and Preventions.of Violence." All forms of vio-
lence are to be examined. That which occurs on television
appears to be receiving a significant’shareof attention.

Each day_the'degreggta which television influences
'tfié dariy lives of the members of our society increases.
Over nine out of ten, or 56.3 million, American homes-own
L'TV sets. Twenty-eight per cent, or 15.6 million, TV homes
own two or more TV sets. The average viewing time per TV
home per day for the total United States is six hours and
three minutes (1).

Television in the most pervasive of the mass media..
Adult men, daily, spend.the following percentage of their

time with these media: television, 50 per cent; radio,

28 per cent; newspapers, 15 per cent; and magazines, 7
per cent. The time spent by adult women is as follows:
television, “9 per cent; radio, 33 per cent; newspapers,
12 per cent; and magazines, 6 per cent (1).

Americans own more television sets than washers,
vacuum cleaners, telephones, toasters, and automobiles
(1). There is no question that televisionohas an impact
upon our daily lives.

Despite the fact that some defenders of present
television programming practices play down the presence
of violence on television, it does exist throughout the
daily schedule. In a recent article concerning violence
and our way of life, Fredric Wertham, U. S. Senate Con-
sultant on crime, stated, "On one television station in
one week I counted 33“ killings and attempted killings"
(2). '

During the extensive periods of time the average'
viewer spends with television, there is ample opportunity
for exposure to violence. In fact, the viewer with an
appetite for violence can find it available at almost any
time. At the same time, however, the television viewer
can avoid violence in most time periods, if he choses to
do so. _

At the inception of this study, we assumed that

there would be differences_in preference-for violence

3

and that a preference forAtelevision viOlence might be
, direiated-to other behaviors.
”In the concluding statements of one of his studies,
Mwfl“”Leonard Berkowitz said,

As I see it the major social danger inherent in
filmed violence has to do with the temporary
effects produced in a fairly short period immed-
iately following the film. For that period, at
least, a person -- whether an adult or a child --
who has Just seen filmed violence might conclude
that he was warranted in attacking those pe0ple
in his own life who had recently frustrated him.
Further, the film might activate his aggressive
habits so that for the period of which I speak he
would be primed to act aggressively (3).

The behavior of the subjects in the above experiment is
explained by Berkowitz as occurring in a situation which
was conducive to the free expression of aggression; one
in which the subjects.were relatively free of social
control.
In a recent article Robert Turfboer, a psychiatrist,
states
Driving is a form of expressive behavior. It
often expresses the driver's-emotional state of
mind, his attitude toward the world and his
fellow citizens. Driving, then is like‘other
expressive emotions, such as anger, passivity,
confusion, fear, euphoria. Thus, driving can
become an outlet.for a state of mind, a mood,
an attitude (U).-
A United States government sponsored committee
reported "drivers may be using cars-an an outlet for

violent behavior. For some car owners, driving is a

form of aggression" (5).

If film, or television, can activate aggression,
and if driving may be an outlet for aggression, one might
conclude that the viewing of televised violence could
stimulate aggressive or reckless driving. There may also
be a similar set of personal characteristics that deter-
mine program selection and driving habits.

It was on this premise that a pilot study was per-
formed for an audience studies course at Michigan State
University during the winter term of the 1967-68 school
year. The findings of this study indicated that a rela-
tionship might exist.

I

/

a}:

‘V

 

CHAPTER II

THE PROBLEM AND METHODOLOGY

The Hypothesis

For purposes of this study, drivers were dicho-

Umized into persons with "badfiéand "good“ records. A

’1."

Hmd?“driver is defined as any individual convicted of

anmving violation or accident, during a three year

,pmfiod extending from 1966 through 1968, who was assigned

uaattend a.County Driver Safety School in the State of

Imbhigan. A "good" driver was defined as any individual

nmo had not been convicted of a moving violation or had
not been responsible for an accident during this same
period of time.
Preference for violent programming was defined in
terms of a violence index for programs regularly viewed.
With these two terms defined, let the followingbe
hypothesized for purposes of experimental study:

Bad cudyers will have a greater preference for
'wiewing violent_programming,than will good .

drivers.

V._~— '--. ....-._,._. —.

 

 

The Study Design

 

To test this hypothesis, a study was designed using
two groups of motor vehicle Operators to which a tele-
vision preference questionnaire could be administered.
One group, which shall be called the bad driver group,
would receive a self administered questionnaire, while
the other group, the good driver group, would be inter-
viewed by telephone. The same quesionnaire would be used

"

for both groups. “

Population and Sample Selection

 

Because'of the nature of this study it was felt
that the best possible approach would be to first select
the bad driver group. Once this was done, the good driver
group would be selected through a process of matching. As
stated above, members of the "bad" driving group were
selected from County Driver Safety Schools in the State
of Michigan. Individuals are referred to a County Driver
Satety School by the Secretary of State's office or by a
court having Jurisdiction over traffic violations, after
two or more convictions for moving traffic violations

within a twelve month period, and who, in the determina-

.3"

_tion,ofthe court ora‘DriFer Improvement Interviewer,

'__,’

w "'1:

are deemed in need of such remedial education (6).

,_.w1th the help of the Highway Traffic Safety Center,

PM located at Michigan State University, visitation appoint-

ments were set up at County Driver Safety Schools in

’

Lansing and Grosse Pointe Farms, Michigan. In all, five
different classes were visited. Each class member, on a
voluntary basis, was given a self administered question-‘
naire. Here, it should be noted that there were ten
individuals who did not wish to participate. Because only
two of the seventy bad drivers were women it was decided
that only males would be included. The total then was
sixty-eight. The sample of bad drivers was broken into
two groups; those white and those black. These two groups
were then subdivided into married and single. These two
groupings were then broken into three Job classifications;
white collar, blue collar and student, and also into three
age groups; 16-3“, 35_u9 and 50+. Having broken down thev

bad driver group into these classifications the task of

. matching them with a group of good drivers was undertaken.

For purposes of residential matching the R. L. Polk
street index for both Lansing and Detroit were used, as
well as street maps of both cities.

Each member of the good driver group was matched on
all the variables mentioned: age, occupation, marital
status, race and also residence. The results of this
matching are shown in Table 1.

To obtain a matched sample of sixty-eight good
drivers, one hundred and twenty-five telephone calls were

attempted. Due to the large number of blue collar workers

.'4

. .‘JO‘ "c

.xwhieh had to begmatched, it was necessary to make telephone

 

NH

HH

m. H m ecoeasm

H m m m NH m H HH emHHoo
A afldm

H H H H m _ . H .teHHoo
oSan

 

+om maumm aman +om meumm =m-oH

+om o:-mm emuoH. +om oeumm amueH

+om maumm Hman +om oeumm amneH +om maumm.=m-mH +om azumm aman

 

xoeHm

osHe:

xommm

oeHes

xeeHm oech . xoeHm oeHea

 

uoHupmz

oncHw

omeum: . onch

 

mum>HLo aooo

mum>Hpo own

 

.wno>anv voow new npo>HLo pom : mchoumzxn.H m4m<a

r

 

x.-

..,‘
.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, ,.—..

 

cans during both the day time and evening hours to
mmommodate factory shift workers. If a respondent was
mm reached on the first attempt because of his wbrking
:mhedule, it was necessary to call back during another

-:mgment of the day. Fifty-seven of these persons were
rum included for one of the following reasons--the

individual had moved leaving no forwarding address, the

"individual refused to participate, the individual admit-

ted having a motor vehicle violation record, no contact
could be made, or he did not fit the matching scheme.

Only those individuals, contacted by telephone,

of any moving violations or charged with an accident
during the three years of 1966, 1967, and 1968 were con-
sidered good drivers. To obtain this information each
individual was asked the following questions: To the

best of your knowledge, how many automobile accidents

were you involved in and charged with during the follow-L

ing years, 1968, 1967, 1966? To the best of your know-

ledge, how many moving violations were'you charged with

in each of the following years, 1968, 1967, 1966? Moving

violations were defined as one of the following--failure

to yield right of way, running a stop sign or stop light,

Aimproper turn, following too closely, speeding and reck-

less driving.

—who were licensed drivers and who had not been convicted'

-\

. 10 ,-

/“ To check the credibifity of those respondents in
the gogd driver group, ten respondents were selected at
random. The driving records of these ten were then
Wiverified through the Driver Services Division of the
Office of the Secretary of State for the State of Michigan.
The driving records of these ten respondents substan-
tiated that they were, indeed, good drivers, since the
records indicated no moving violations or automobile
accidents. On the basis of the results obtained in veri-
fying the records of these ten individuals picked at ran-
dom, along with the fact that several interviewees were
rejected because of self-acknowledged driving violations,

the sixty-eight members of this group were assumed to be

'good drivers.

Violence Viewing Index

A panel was used to determine the degree of violent
content in 115 television programs. The 39 graduate stu-
dents who comprised this panel were selected from three
academic areas; Television and Radio, Psychology, and
Political Science.

The panel was provided with a definition of a vio-
lent television program and a list of 115 television pro-
grams. They were then asked to read the definition and

mark those programs with which they were familiar on a

five point bipolar scale between violent and non-violent.

11'

This scale is shown below:

Mission Impossible
Violent __: : : __3 ___Non-violent

1

U1
4:?
LA)
N

A violence index for each program was determined by taking
the point total for that particular program and dividing
it by the number of Judges who were familiar with that
program. For instance, the program mentioned above,
"Mission Impossible", was rated by 37 Judges and received
a point total of 170. Its violence index was computed as
being A.595 by dividing 170 by 37. The scale numbers are
used here for illustration. They did not appear on the
tadministered instrument.

A violent television program was defined as--"A
program where usually' at some point the action results
in inJury or destruction to some obJect, animal or human.
The inJury may be psychological or physical . . . a result
of verbal or motor action." The definition was developed
by Thomas Gordon, another Master of Arts candidate, and
the author. The determination by the panel of Judges as
to which programs are violent and which are non-violent
will also be used in Gordon's thesis, where applicable.
There are A3 programs in the instrument which were not
used in this study because they were either "local" pro-

grams or were network programs which were not televised

12

’Iflduring the specified time period. Of the 72 programs
rated, 55 were rated by 19 or more Judges, 1“ were rated
by at least 10 Judges, and the remaining 3 by at least

6 Judges.

Table 2 reports the violence index of each program
used in this study and its position in a ranking which
moves from most violent to the least violent. As pre-
viously mentioned only those 72 programs which were
broadcast by the three commercial networks, ABC, CBS,
and NBC, during the prime time evening viewing hours,
7:30 pm to 11:00 pm Monday through Friday and 7:00 pm
to 11:00 pm Saturday and Sunday, of the 1967-68 tele-
vision season, were used in this study. The instrument
used to measure the violence content of each program may
be found in Appendix I. It contains 115 programs.

At no time in the determination of a violence index
for these programs did there occur a wide variance in the
ratings of the Judges. A case in point being "Hogan's
Heroes." This program was rated by 31 Judges and received
a point total of 97 and a violence index of 3.129.
Twenty-nine Judges rated it as 3, two Judges rated it as

A, and one Judge rated it as 2.

Construction of Questionnaire
The questionnaire which was developed for this study

was designed so that it could be self-administered by the

13

TABLE 2.--Violencc index of programs.

 

 

Violence ‘
Program Index Rank
Garrison's Gorrillas H.867 l
Felony Squad “.688 2
Mission Impossible H.505 ' 3
Gunsmoke “.586 u
N.Y.I‘.D. 1:379, 5
Nannix b.565 6
Wild Wild West H.5U5 7
Avengers b.500 8
Rat Patrol “.500 8
The Saint u N29 9
The Invaders h 36“ 10
The Virginian u 353 11
FBI h 333 12
high Chaparral b.308 13
Cimarron Strip “.273 l“
I Spy “ 235 15
Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea h 22 16
Ironside n.182 17
Guns of Will Sonnett “.167 18
It Takes A Thief “.091 19
Star Trek “.069 20
Bonanza “.033 21
Big Valley U.OOO 22
Dragnet “.000 22
Tarzan 3.867 23
Run For Your Life 3.833 2h
Judd For The Defense 3.833 24
Peyton Place 3.733 25'
Daniel Boone 3.688 26
Get Smart 3.688 26
Lost In Space 3.615 27
Daktari 3.350 28
hogan's Heroes 3.129 29
Cowboy In Africa 3.000 30
Rowan and Martin 2.U6U 31
Smother's Brothers 2.286 32
The Monkees 2.192 33
Newlywed Game 2.120 3M
Mother's In Law 2.050 35
Comer Pyle, USMC 2.000 36
Jackie Gleason 2.000 36
Jonathan Winters 2.000 36
Walt Disney's Wonderful World
of Color 1.962 37
Gentle Ben 1.917 38
Jerry Lewis 1.900 39
Danny Thomas 1.889 U0
Off To See The Wizard 1.833 u1
Bewitched 1.793 U2
Red Skelton 1.786 A3
Lucille Ball 1.762 nu
Carol Burnett 1.708 “5
Beverly Hillbillies 1.700 M6
Andy Griffith 1.690 “7
I Dream of Jeannie 1.6u0 A8
Dating Game 1.625 “9
The Second Hundred Years 1.571 50
That Girl 1.A7“ 51
he and She 1.U35 52
My Three Sons l-“33 53
Green Acres 1.U2 5“
Flying Nun 1.u2 55
Family Affair 1.3“6 .56
Petticoat Junction 1.333 57
Dean Martin 1.323 58
Good Morning World 1.273 59
Kraft Music Hall 1.269 60
Dream House 1.167 61
Hollywood Palace 1.1M3 62
Operation Entertainment 1.111 63
Ed Sullivan 1.098 6H
Hollywood Squares 1.000 65
Lawrence Welk 1.000 65

1U

respondents in the bad driver group. It was also designed
to allow a telephone interviewer to administer it to those
respondents in the good driver group. A copy of the ques-
tionnaire can be found in Appendix II.

The first page of the questionnaire contained a
listing of 72 programs for which a violence index was
established. The members of the bad driver group were
asked to place a check mark beside those programs which
they tried to watch regularly. In the case of the good
driver group the list of programs was read to them. They
were asked to respond "yes" to those programs which they
tried to watch regularly. In several instances a respon-
dent would indicate that he tried to watch two programs
which were telecast at the same time. Those individuals.
who did so explained that they enJoyed both programs.
Which of the two programs they would select to watch
depended upon the listing in their local television pro-

gram guide.

Each respondent's violence viewing index was deter-
mined from this list of programs. Each program checked
by an individual was given its previously determined vio—
lence index number. These violence index numbers were
then combined and divided by the number of programs men-
tioned to provide the average violence viewing index.

number fOr the respondent.

15

The second part of the instrument asked each respond-
ent to list his 10 favorite programs. It was hOped that
each individual would indicate his 10 favorite programs
beginning with the program he liked best and concluding
with the program he liked tenth best. Once this was done,
an arithmetical point value could be assigned to each
position and hopefully a preferential ranking of programs
could be determined for each group.

Because the programming content of network movies
is so diversified, it was felt that it would be impossible.
to arrive at a violence index for this type of program.

For this reason, network movies were not included in the
list of 72 programs given to the respondents of each

group. In the hope that some idea as to the type of movie '
each respondent preferred could be obtained, question

three was inserted into the questionnaire. This question
provided the respondent with a choice of eight different
types of movies: mystery, romance, war story, adventure,
comedy, western, science fiction, and musical. Each.- I
respondent was then asked to check the type of movie which
he liked best. :

Next a series of five multiple choice questions were
asked with the intention of establishing a degree of social
alienation. These five statements concerned an individual's
position in life today, in the future, and his relationship

to others. Each question had five responses; strongly

16

agree, agree, no opinion, disagree, and strongly disagree.
Ftur of these questions are drawn from Srole alienation
scales (7) and the fifth was conceived by Gordon, for his
previously mentioned study.

Two questions directed toward the respondents driv-
ing record conclude the substantive portion of the ques-
tdonnaire. The purpose of theseetwo questions was to
(Iatérm’ine’which of thosefpeople being interviewed by
telephone would qualify for the good driver group. The
affirSt question asked the respondent was to indicate to
the best of his knowledge the number of automobile acci-
dents he had been charged with in each of the following
years; 1968,1967, 1966. The second question asked the.
respondent to indicate to the best of his knowledge how:
many moving violations he had been charged with in each
of the following years; 1968, 1967, 1966.

The last portion of the questionnaire provided the
demographic characteristics used in matching the two
groups. For the good driver group date ofbirth was.
substituted for age because.driver records are filedin

this manner.

CHAPTER III

RESULTS

Variability among the Judges who determined the.
violence index of each program used in this study was
virtually non existent.

Of the 72 programs which were evaluated 33 scored
above the neutral point toward the violent pole. 38
programs scored below the neutral point toward the non-
violent pole. One program, "Cowboy in Africa," scored
at the neutral point on the bipolar scale. The 72 pro-
-grams had an average violence index of 2.811. The 33
"violent" programs had an average violence index of
H.158 and the 38 "non-violent" programs had an averageg
violence index of 1.635.

When the average violence viewing index was com-
' puted for each group, a difference did exist which is
statistically significant. Those respondents in the

good driver group had an average violence viewing index

of 2.68M. The respondents of the bad driver group had
a violence viewing index of 3.287.

To determine the significance of this apparent

difference, an analysis of the varianCe-of the mean

17

 

18

scores for each group was performed. The results of this

analysis appear in Table 3.

TABLE 3.-—Ana1ysis of variance data — two tailed teat.

 

 

Bad Driver Group 6 Good Driver Group
2x3 755.7151 . ' 2x; 503.840u
2x3 223.5390 f 2x1 182.5360
N2 68 _ I N1 68.

X2 3.2873 X1 2.58MB

 

t = 6.9230, p < .0001, two tailed, d.f. 13“.

Table 3 shows that the obtained t of 6.923 is sig-
nificant at the .0001 level. _This indicates that under
-;;thfi given conditions,therprghability“that the results
’ whicherre obtained would occur by chance in less than
xgone in ten-thousand. -
i There were only 17 individuals, out.of the total
136, who chose to indicate a preferential of programs.
For this reason, an alternative method of arriving at a
preferential program ranking for each group was employed.
Each time a program was mentioned by a respondent,

it was given a check mark. After all of the questionnaires

for each group had been tabulated, the number of check

19

marks for each program were totaled. Thus it was possible
to determine to some degree a program ranking for each
group. However, it must be understood that this is not
necessarily a preferential ranking. Table A shows the
ranking of programs for the good driver group and the.
ranking of programs for the bad driver group. This rank-
ing shows only the ten most mentioned programs of each,

group.

TABLE N.--Program ranking.

 

 

 

 

Good Driver Group Bad Driver Group
Program Rank Program Rank
Mission Impossible 1 Mission Impossible 1
Walt Disney's Wonderful FBI 2
' World of Color 2 I Spy 2
Dean Martin 3 Smother's Brothers 3
Jackie Gleason A It Takes A Thief 4
Smother's Brothers 5 Wild Wild West A
Jerry Lewis 6 Invaders 5
Bewitched 7 Rat Patrol 5
mw—vEd Sullivan 7 Rowen and Martin 6
My Three Sons 7 Star Trek 7
Beverly Hillbillies 8 Carol Burnett 8
I Spy 8 Dean Martin 8
Rowen and Martin 9 Get Smart 8
,,Andy Griffith 10 Jackie Gleason 8
39e-I Dream of Jeannie 10 N.Y.P.D. 8
' Run For Your Life 8
“““ * Bonanza 9
Judd For The Defense 9
Voyage to the Bottom
of the Sea 9
Mannix 10

 

1’

20

Because some of the programs in each ranking received
the same number of mentions there are more than 10 pro-
grams in the 10 most mentioned rankings of each group. In

the good drivegflranking,g1§,programs make up the 10 most

.1. y’—

”mentioned. Of these 85 per cent have a violence index

below 3.000 and 15 per cent have a violence index above

ӣ3.000. In the bad driver ranking, 20 programs constitute

the 10 most mentioned programs. Of these 20 programs, 70
per cent have a violence index above 3.000 and 30 per cent
have a violence index below 3.000.

The attempt which was made to determine what type of
movie is preferred by the respondents of both groups was
unsatisfactory. On most of the questionnaires, no pre-
ference was indicated. This might suggest that the re-
spondnets in this study required movie titles for evalua-
tion.

That portion of the questionnaire which sought to
provide some indication of social alienation also proved-
unsatisfactory. Seventy per cent of the respondents of
both groups either disagreed or strongly disagreed with
the five questions. Twenty per cent agreed with the
questions, five per cent strongly agreed and five per
cent had no opinion. It was expected that there might

be a distinct difference between the two groups.‘

CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSIONS

The data presented in the last chapter does statis-
tically support the hypothesis presented in this study.
However, it must be clearly understood that these data do
not provide evidence of a cause-effect relationship. That
is, it cannot-be stated that television has an effect on
driving--only that there is a relationship.

In a paper presented before the 1960 National Safety
Congress (8), William A. Mann of Michigan state University,
stated

The cases in which a retiring, constricted indi-
vidual becomes an aggressive, reckless driver in
the anonymity of a car, might well work out the
same way in any situation in which the individual
feels that he is relatively free of social control.

The concept that an individual might well become
aggressive when he feels he is free from social control
is also brought out in the study conducted by Berkowitz
which was mentioned in the Introduction. Although the
phrase "free of social control" is not used by Berkowitz

rm does use similar terms, "situation allowed the expres—

sion of aggression." In that experiment the subJects

21

22

involved were to give an electric shock to someone each
time that person made a mistake_on a learning task.

In explaining the results of this phase of the
experiment, Berkowitz (3) says

The filmed violence had apparently aroused aggres-
sive tendencies in the men and, since the situa-
tion allowed the expression of aggression, their
tendencies were readily translated into severe
aggressive actions.

The aggressive behavior took place relatively soon after

the subJects had witnessed a violent movie. vBerkowitz

does not stipulate the time lag involved, only that it
was a very short period of time.

The two preceding statements might explain the
appearance of a relationship between television and driv-
ing. It is not beyond the realm of-possibility that an
individual who.has observed violence on television and
later goes to his automobile is in a situation allowing
the expression of aggression. He may seek the anonymity .
of the car in order to release aggressive tendencies
which have developed. It should be noted that there was
a very small time lag between the witnessing of a violent
film and the expression of aggression in the Berkowitz
study. A person is not likely to watch an evening teleL
vision program and then immediately move to his automobile
to release aggressive tendencies. ‘However, in this study
the respondents in the bad driver group watched an average

of sixteen programs a week and thefrespondents-of the good

23

driver group watched an average of thirty programs a
week. Since the members of the bad driver group watch
substantially fewer programs than the members of the

good driver group they must be doing something else with
their time. It is possible that they are a more mobile
group than their counterparts. Seventy-two per cent of
those respondents in both groups are blue collar workers.
Such diverse activities as reading, hobbies, sports,
plays, concerts, etc., are not usually associated with

those individuals who comprise this low socio-economic

4

.~-- ‘4
,—

'cias§} ,chording to Bradley S. Greenberg, of Michigan
State University, in his testimony before the National
Hg, Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence (9),

For the low-income American, television is the
preponderent, if not quite the sole, source of
mass media stimulation. It is his critical
link to the outside world of the 'haves'. He
is far less likely than the middleclass citizen
to have done any magazine reading lately, he
reads it less intensively (focusing on the
'headlines' and ads). For 6 in 10, it's been
at least six months since he saw a movie. He
does own a record player, though, and spent
twice as much time playing it yesterday (about
an hour). This pattern of adult differences in
media usage is reflected almost identically in'
the media usage patterns of their teen-age
children.

Greenberg further states, "The adults in low-income
homes watch TV for more than five hours each and every
day."

As stated earlier in this chapter a member of the

bad driver group watches an average of sixteen programs

2A

a week or approximately two programs an evening. Since
he is not likely to read or attend movies (9) it is quite
possible that he is spending some of his free time in his
automobile.

This study has provided an indication of a charac-
teristic of a bad driver, preference for violent program-
ming. This, along with other established characteristics
(the tendency to be aggressive and intolerant of others,
tendency to resent authority, tendency to be lacking in
responsibility, and tendency to act impulsively) (10)
help to describe the bad driver and perhaps suggest
possible avenues of.treatment.

If we could find, on the other hand, a list of
correlates of "preference for violent viewing," in addi-
tion to the one in this study, we might have a better
indication of the social desirability of violent program
content. That is, if we were to find a series of other
undesirable correlates of preference for violent programs_
it might help to establish a case against violent pro-

m- - grams .
There are two distinct methodoligical innovations
in this study. The first is the violence index determined
‘L"for each program. The panel of Judges used to establish
‘*~~the violence index was consistent in their evaluations.
While we employed no external test of the validity of

their ratings, there was little disagreement among the

25

Judges evaluating each program. There were no unseemly
results. The use of so many people in the panel pro-
vided a stability or reliability in the ratings that
would be unlikely with smaller numbers of Judges, such
'as the use of three television critics in a study reported
in Media/scope. In that study, which we learned about
after completion of this work, three "well known" TV
critics were employed to rate preselected programs on a
five point bipolar scale (11). Unsuccessful attempts
were made to determine if these critics were evaluatihg
the programs on the basis of a pre-determined definition
of a violent program or merely relying upon their own
.Judgment as to what constituted a violent program. The
study directors did not respond to this inquiry.

A second methodoligical innovation in this study
is the program check list used to determine viewing
preferences. This check list proved feasible and much
better than asking the respondents to list those pro-
grams which they tried to watch regularly. In the case
of those respondents in the bad driver group they were
not subJect to embarrassment stemming from the inability
to read or write or the inability to remember all of the
{programs which'they tried to watch. In the case of the
respondents in the good driver group, embarrassment caused
pby,the'inability to remember specific programs_watched was

eliminated. The average time to complete the checklist

26

by telephone was not unreasonable. It was approximately

five minutes.

In order to support the tentative conclusions drawn

from this study and to permit further generalization, it

is suggested that different areas of the nation be studied.

There are other states which maintain complete driving
records. Although they may not operate County Driver
Safety Schools, as in Michigan, some other means, such
as insurance records, could be derived by which a sample
<fi'bad drivers and good drivers could be identified. If
the hypothesis holds in other geographic areas, we would

kmve more confidence in its validity.

 

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I

PROGRAM VIOLENCE INDEX

Following is the definition and list of television programs
used by a panel of graduate students for the purpose of

determining a violence index for those same programs.

28

Below is a working definition for a Violent Television
Program. The attached sheets contain a list of television
Hprograms.

Would you please read the definition and mark those.pro-
grams with which you are familiar as either violent or
non-violent on the scales provided.

Definition of a Violent Television Program--A program
where usually at some point the action results in inJury
or destruction to some obJect, animal or human. The
inJury may be psychological or physical...a result of
verbal or motor action.

29‘:

Violent __

3.

Violent ___

A.

Violent _

5.
Violent ___

6.

Violent _

7.

Violent __

8.

Violent ___

9.

Violent :

10.

Violent :

TELEVISION PROGRAMS

I Dream of Jeannie

Non-violent

Non-violent

Don Messer's Jubilee

Non-violent

George Pierrot

Non-violent

Front Page Challenge

Non-violent

Big Valley

Non-violent

I Spy

Non-violent

Carol Burnett

Non-violent

Peyton Place

: : Non-violent

Family Affair

Non-violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

'Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

11. Felony Squad

Non-violent

12. Danny Thomas

Non-violent

13. Andy Griffith

: Non-violent

1A. Rat Patrol

Non-violent

15. Lucille Ball

Non-violent

16. Cowboy in Africa
__ __ __ __ __ Non-violent
17. The Monkees

: : : __: Non-violent

l8. Gunsmoke"

Non-violent

O.

19. Gilligan's Island

Non-violent

20. Dennis the Menace

: __: Non-violent

21.

Violent __

22.

Violent.__

23.

Violent __

2“.

Violent __

25.

Violent __

26.

. Violent __

27.

Violent __

28.

6 Violent __

29.

Violent __

30.

Violent ___

31

The Way It Is

a 1 z : Non-violent

Man at the Center

Non-violent

Smother's Brothers

Non-violent

Flashback

Non-violent

High Chaparral

__° Non-violent

Mission Impossible

Non-violent

Bonanza

Non-violent

__ __ __ __ Non-violent
F.B.I.
__ __ __ __ Non-violent
Mothers in Law

: : : Non-violent

31. Ed Sullivan

Violent _: _: _z _: _: Non-violent

32. Walt Disney's Wonderful
World of Color

Violent __ __ ___ Non-violent
33. Truth or Consequences

Violent __ __ __ Non-violent
3A. Voyage to the Bottom

of the Sea

Violent __ __ __ Non-violent
35. Lassie

Violent __ __ __ Non-violent
36. Opportunity Line

Violent __ __ __ Non—violent
37. G.E. College Bowl

Violent __; __: __: __: __: Non-violent
38 Maya

Violent __ __ .__ __: Non-violent
39. Pro Hockey

Violent __ __ __ __ Non-violent
NO. Newlywed Game

Violent __: __: ;_: __: __ Non-violent

ul.

Violent __

A2.

Violent __

“3e
Violent __

AA.

Violent __

“5.

Violent __

A6.

Violent __

A7.

Violentl__

A8.

Violent _

“9.

Violent __-

50.

Violent ___

32

Sports Profile

: : : : Non-violent

My Three Sons

Non-violent

Hollywood and the Stars

Non-violent

Dating Game

Non-violent

Rawhide
__ __ __ __ Non-violent
Robin Seymore
__ __ ___ __: Non-violent
In Person
__ __ __ __ Non-violent
Mannix

Non-violent

Petticoat Junction

__: Non-violent

Hogan's Heroes

__: __: __: Non-violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Lawrence Welk

51.

: : : : __: Non-violent.

52. Get Smart

Non-violent

53. Jackie Gleason

Non-violent

5A. Anniversary Game
__ __ __ __ Non-violent
~55. Death Valley Days

Non-violent

56. Michigan Sportsman

Non-violent

57. Grand Ole Opry

Non-violent

58. Rowan and Martin

~\ V.‘

Non-violent

59. Operation Entertainment

: : : : __: Non-violent

__' Non-violent

61.

Violent __

62.

Violent __

63.

Violent __

6A.

Violent __

65.

Violent.__

66.

Violent __

67o

Violent __

68.

Violent'__

69.

Violent __

70.

Violent ___

Dream House

Non-violent

Non-violent

Hollywood Palace

Non-violent

Avengers

Non-violent

Lost in Space

Non-violent

Provincial Affairs

Non-violent

Nations Business

Non-violent

Country Music Hall

__: Non-violent

Traffic Court

: : __: Non-violent

Judd for the Defense

Non-violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

71. Tommy Hunter
__ ‘__ __ __ Non-violent
72. Guns of Will Sonnett
__. __. __.‘__: __: Non-violent
73. Hollywood Squares
__ __ __ __ Non-violent
7A. Star Trek
___ __ __ __ Non-violent
75. Gomer Pyle USMC
__. __ __ __ Non-violent
76. Off to See the Wizard
__ __ gfi __ __: Non-violent
77. Tarzan
__ __ __ __ Non-violent
78. Wild Wild West

Non-violent

79. Horse Racing
__:‘Non-violent

80. Batman

Non-violent

81.‘

Violent __

82.

Violent __

83.

Violent __

8A.

Violent __

85.

Violent __

86.

Violent __

87.

Violent __

88.

’Violent __

890

Violent __

90.

Violent __

Daniel Boone

Non—violent

Michigan Outdoors

Non-violent

Untouchables

Non-violent

Dean Martin

Non-violent

Telescope

__ __ __ __ Non-violent
Dragnet

__ __: __: __: Non-violent
That Girl

__ __ __ __: Non-violent
Bewitched

__ __ ‘__ __ Non-violent
Ironside

__ __ __ ‘__ Non-violent
Flying Nun

: : : Non-violent

3A

Violent __

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent

Violent}

Violent

Violent

91. Cimarron Strip

__: __: __: __: Non-violent
92. The Second Hundred Years
__ __ __ __ Non-violent
93. Festival
__ __ __ __ Non-violent
9A. Juvenile Court
__ .__ __ __ Non-violent
95. Run For Your Life

Non-violent

96. Jonathan Winters

__ __ __ __: __: Non-violent
97. He and She

__ .__ __ __ Non-violent
98. Kraft Music Hall

__ __ __ __ __: Non-violent
99. Green Acres

: : __: Non-violent

100. Beverly Hillbillies

: : __: Non-violent

35

101. Bob Young News ‘- f }. 111. Good Morning world
Violent _’5 __ __ [__:.£:j Non-violentne‘oTViolent __ __ ‘__ __ Non-violent
102. Huntly-Brinkly News 103. It Takes a Thief
Violent‘_;: __ ___ __ Non-violent Violent __: __: __: __: __: Non-violent
103. Walter Cronkite News 113. Red Skelton
Violent __: __: __: __: __: Non-violent Violent __: __: __: __: __: Non-violent
10A. The Virginian ' 11A. Jerry Lewis
Violent __: __: __: __: __: Non-violent Violent __: __: __: __: __:.Non-violent
105. Daktari . 115. Garrison's Gorillas
Violent __: __: __: __: __: Non-violent Violent __: __: __: __=.__: Non-violent

106. Weekend

Violent __: __: : : __: Non-violent

107. Public Eye

Violent __: __: : : __: Non-violent

108. Newsmagazine

Violent __: __: : : __: Non-violent

109. The Invaders

Violent __: __: : : __: Non-violent'

110. N.Y.P.D.

Violent __: __: : : __: Non-violent

APPENDIX II

QUESTIONNAIRE

TV PREFERENCE STUDY

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF COMMUNICATION ARTS
DEPARTMENT OF TELEVISION AND RADIO

TELEVISION RESEARCH CENTER

37

38

From the following list of television programs, please place a check mark (J)
beside those programs which you tried to watch regularly over the past year.

__It Takes a Thief __Star Trek I __Operation Entertainment
__Get Smart __Felony Squad __Hollywood Squares
__Avengers ‘__Danny Thomas . __Cimmarron Strip
__Petticoat Junction __Saint __Second Hundred Years
__Beverly Hillbillies __Dating Game __Wild Wild West
__Smothers Brothers __Andy Griffith __Cood Morning World
__Family Affair . __Flying Nun __Off To See The Wizard
__FBI __Dean Martin __Peyton Place

__Ed Sullivan __Tarzan __Mothers in Law

__Mannix __Green Acres ;_Walt Disney's Wonderful

World of Color

__Hollywood Palace ' __Dream House __Guns of Will Sonnett
__He and She __Gunsmoke __Rowen and Martin
__Daniel Boone ' __Bonanza __Run For Your Life
__Mission Impossible __Jonathan Winters __Virginian
__High Chaparral __Jackie Gleason __Rat Patrol
__Gentle Ben __Lucille Ball L. __Bewitched
__Dragnet __Daktari __Ironside
__Monkees __Carol Burnett __Cowboy In Africa
__I Spy __Newlywed Game __Big Valley

.111- __Gomer Pyle, USMC _ ;_Red Skelton . __Garrison's Gorrillas
__Kraft Music Hall __Lost in Space __My Three Sons . -. -H
__Invaders ' __Hogan's Heroes __N.Y.P.D..
__Judd For The Defense __Lawrence Welk __I Dream of Jeanie

. L” __Jerry Lewis ‘ __That Girl- 5 _4Voyage To The Bottom

Of The Sea

39

From the previous list of television programs, please list
your ten (10) favorite programs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. 7 2.
3. w A.
5. 5.
7. 8.
9. 10.

 

 

For the following questions, please place a check mark
(/) beside your answer.

1. What type of television movies do you like best?

mystery

romance

war story
adventure
comedy

western
science.fiction
musical

AAA/\AAAA
VVVVVVVV

A person's views on the political and social aspect of
life can often be important to their television viewing.
How do you feel about the following statements?

2. In spite of what some people say, the way of life of
the average man is getting worse?- '
( ) strongly agree

agree

no opinion

disagree

strongly disagree

AAAA
VVVV

3. It's hardly fair to bring children into the world
the way things look for the future.
( ) strongly agree

) agree

) no opinion

) disagree

) strongly disagree ,

AAAA

A. These days a person doesn't really know whom he can
count on.
( ) strongly agree
( ) agree
( ) no opinion
( ) disagree
( ) strongly disagree

A0

There's little use in writing to public officials
because they aren't really interested in the problems
of the average man.

( ) strongly agree

( ) agree

( ) no opinion

( ) disagree

( ) strongly disagree

wadays a person has to live pretty much for today
d let tomorrow take care of itself.
) strongly agree
) agree
) no Opinion

) disagree

) strongly disagree

To the best of your knowledge, how many automobile

'accidents were you involved in and charged with

during each of the following years?
1968 1967 1966

To the best of your knowledge, how many moving vio-
1ations (failure to yield the right of way, running a
stOp sign or stOp light, improper turn, following too
closely, speeding, reckless driving, etc.) were you.
charged with in each of the following years?

.1968 1967 1966

 

PLEASE PRINT YOUR ANSWER FOR THE FOLLOWING

 

9..

10.

11.
12.

13.

NAME

 

(last) (first) (middle)

ADDRESS

 

 

(number and street.or RFD)

DATE OF BIRTH

 

OCCUPATION

 

 

lease indicate one Of the following
) single .
) married
) divorced
) widow

) widower

REFERENCES.

REFERENCES

1. "TV Basics #11." Television Bureau of Advertising,
Inc., 1967.

2. Wertham, Fredric.’ "Why Violence Has Become Our Way
of Life." National Enquirer, June 30, 1968,

 

 

p. A.

3. Berkowitz, Leonard. "The Effects of Observing Vio-
lence." Scientific American, February, 196A,
pp. 35-A1.

A. Turfboer, Robert. "Do PeOple Really Drive As They
Live?" Traffic Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 1
(January 1, 1967).

 

\ \‘

5. News item in the Grand Rapids Press, April 8, 1968.

6. Secretary of State. 'Michigan Vehicle Code. Lansing:
‘ Speaker-Hines and Thomas, Incorporated, 1965,

 

p. 71.

7. Srole, Leo. "Social Integration and Certain Corro-
laries; an Exploratory Study." American
Sociological Review, vol. 21, 6 (1956), pp.
709-716.

8. Mann, William. "Building Attitudes For Safety."
Paper read at the National Safety Congress,
1960.

9. Greenberg, Bradley 8. "Mass Media Behavior and
Attitudes of the Urban Poor." Testimony to
the President's Commission on the Causes and
Prevention of Violence, Washington, D.C.,
October 15, 1968.

10. Brody, Leon. "The Psychology of Problem Drivers."
Center for Safety Education New York Univer-
sity, p, l. (Mimeographed.)

HiHllrf "Violence/On Televistn." Media/scope, vol. 12,
-' ' ~ ‘ no. 8 (August, 1968), p. 36.

A2

 

 

 

 

"IMAMAAllI