A STUDY OF THE TELEVISION VIEWING
HABITS OF CHILDREN UNDER

SIX YEARS OF AGE

Thesis for Ike Degree OI M. A.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
Thomas Lee Banks
1963

LIBRARY

Michigan State:
University

 

ABSTRACT

A STUDY OF THE TELEVISION VIEWING HABITS
OF CHILDREN UNDER SIX YEARS OF AGE

by Thomas L. Banks

This thesis inquired about young children's tele-
vision viewing patterns. The purpose of the study was to
discover information about children's viewing in five
related areas: quantity of viewing, controls over viewing,
viewing situations and children's responses, program
preferences, and parental attitudes toward children‘s
television programs.

In order to accomplish this purpose a telephone
questionnaire was administered to the parents of two, three,
four, and five-year—old children. A random sample of 700
children was selected from county birth records, telephone
listings were secured for the parents of these children,
and interviews were conducted with these parents.

Interviews and questionnaires were completed for
518 of the children and represented different age groups

by the following numbers: 115 two-year—olds; 130

Thomas L. Banks

three-year-olds; 130 four-year—olds; and 143 five—year-olds.
Most of the interviews were completed by the mothers of the
children.

All completed questionnaires represented homes in
which television was viewed by children. In only six other
homes did parents report children watched no television.

Children of all age levels were found to be watching
significantly large amounts of television daily. Viewing
quantity ranged from a median low of one and three-quarters
hours for the two-year-olds to a high of two hours and fifty
minutes for four-year—olds.

Age was found to be the most vital factor in in—
creases in viewing quantity. Seasonal changes, higher
educational level of parents, and presence of older siblings
in the home were influences which tended to decrease viewing
quantity for the different age groups.

Control over program selection was in the hands of
the child in almost half of the homes. Control lessened
with age of the child and tended to increase where parents
had higher education. Some programs were prohibited in over
a fourth of the responding homes.

Children were found to prefer a viewing situation

very close to the set. They usually watched with siblings

Thomas L. Banks

where more than one child resided in a home. This was
particularly true for older members of the survey group.

Most children responded to performers' requests
and used program content ideas in their play activity.
Television commercial messages were reported as frequently
repeated and mimicked and a majority of children had made
requests for purchase of products advertised on television.

Children's program preferences were found to change
from age to age, but, generally, the hosted Children's
variety program and animal cartoon films were of highest
preference.. Children's and parents' preferences for
children's programs were reported as similar.

Parental attitudes toward children's television
programming were rather favorable. A majority of the
parents felt that programs had improved and were helpful.
Only a minority reported prohibition of specific programs
and less than a third cited programs they preferred their

children not watch.

Copyright by

THOMAS LEE BANKS

1963

A STUDY OF THE TELEVISION VIEWING HABITS

OF CHILDREN UNDER SIX YEARS OF AGE

BY

Thomas Lee Banks

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

1963 /R ,
K?
Approved by: Ar¢~/ V ‘<7VL5L?

_' y‘ j .5... .
a."

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to take this opportunity to express
his gratitude for the assistance received from the Communication
Research Center in the coding and computing of the question-
naire. Mr. Jack G. Prather of the staff at the Center was
particularly helpful.

The telephone interviewing was accomplished by several
friends who gave generously of their time and energy. Those
to be remembered for this chore well done are: Mrs. Rolf
Schulze, Mrs. Robert Lockhart, Mrs. Robert Ponzini, and Mrs.
William Chaffee.

Except for the direction, encouragement, and
guidance offered by Dr. Gordon Gray, this thesis might not
have been written. Dr. Malcolm S. MacLean, Jr. was of
great assistance in constructing the questionnaire and in
organizing and evaluating the tables included in this
thesis.

Perhaps the greater debt is owed to my wife for
the help she rendered in every phase of the study. The
encouragement and the motivation she provided have re-

sulted in this thesis.

ii

Chapter

II.

III.

IV.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION
DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY

Purpose

Hypotheses and Questions
Limitations

Method

RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . .
Population Profile
Hypotheses Tested
Questions Answered
Additional Findings

SUMMARY

Review of Findings
Possible Research Applications

BIBLIOGRAPHY

iii

Page

10
12
14

2O
20
23
34
55
59

59
7O

75

Table

10.

ll.

12.

LIST OF TABLES

Responding parents at different levels of
education .

The number of daily viewing hours for
children of different ages

The number of daily viewing hours of five—
year-old children related to kindergarten
attendance

Seasonal viewing differences by age groups

Portions of children's programs viewed by
different age children .

Parents prohibiting some children's programs
related to parental education

Sources of children's program control and
tuning related to parental education

NUmber of daily viewing hours related to
parental education . . . . . .

Ten programs most regularly viewed by all
age children

Parental selections of "the best" children's
program for different ages

Frequency with which children View adult
programs for different ages

Requests for specific programs by children
of different ages

iv

Page

23

24

26

27

31

32

34

36

37

41

43

47

Table Page

13. Frequency with which parents View their

children's programs related to

parental education . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
14. Children's use of program content ideas in

play activities by different ages . . . . 53

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page
I. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . 76

II. AMOUNTS, PREFERENCES, AND RESPONSES
TO VIEWING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
III. VIEWING SITUATION AND CONTROLS . . . . . . 116
IV. PARENTAL ATTITUDES AND VIEWING . . . . . . 122
V. SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE AND MAP . . . . . . . 135

vi

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Most American children under six years of age have
had exposure to and access to television programming for
their entire lives. Over twelve years of accelerated growth
in the television industry have provided these young children
with hundreds of programs on hundreds of stations.

How attentive have youngsters become, and what do
they prefer to watch on television? Who controls what they
watch? What conditions attach to their viewing and what
responses do their parents make to what is available for
them to View? These questions are the focus of this research
study.

There has been considerable study and research about
the relationship of television viewing and children's
reading, television viewing and schoolwork, the amount of
television viewed by youngsters, their program preferences,
and other similar topics of interest to parents, teachers,
and broadcasters. The large bulk of these research materials,

however, has plumbed the habits and responses of school age

children, both on the elementary and secondary level, while
hardly touching on the television experiences of children
under six years of age.

One research study offered some insights into the
television attendance of children between two and five
years of age: this study reported in 1961 that "a child
who has begun to use television by age three typically uses
it about forty-five minutes a weekday. By age five, this
viewing has increased until, on the average, it is a little
over two hours a day."1 The same study indicated that 14%
of the two-year-olds, 37% of the three—year—olds, 65% of
the four-year—olds, and 82% of the five—year-olds had begun
to use television.

Several other studies which dealt almost exclusively
with school age children's use of television mentioned that
preschoolers used the medium, but they did not cite number

. . . . 3
of hours of Vlerng or other such statistics.

 

lWilbur Schramm, Jack Lyle, and Edwin Parker,
Television in the Lives of Our Children (Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 1961), p. 30.

 

2Ibid.. pp. 219—20.

3Paul Witty, for example, in "You and TV: End of
the First Round," National Parent Teacher, LIV (November,
1959), pp. 8-9, writes, "Unfortunately, we have no
statistics on the viewing habits of preschoolers."

Notable among such studies of school age children
is one undertaken in the Chicago, Illinois, area each year
since 1949. During the most recent year reported, 1962,
children watched television "on the average of sixteen hours
per week in grade two, twenty-three hours in grade four,
and twenty—five hours in grade five."4 Although these
children's ages range from seven to ten and eleven, con-
siderably above those of concern to this study, a progressive
increase in viewing can be noted for these elementary school
children. An earlier study reported in 1956 supported the

above figures for elementary school children: "Median

"5

televiewing time . . . is twenty hours a week.
It further noted that "secondary students spend about 20%
less time than elementary pupils" with televiewing ex-
periences.

The Chicago study also reported on the program
preferences of children in the early elementary grades. The

five favorite programs cited by first through third grade

 

4Paul Witty and Paul Kinsella, "Televiewing: Some
Observations from Studies 1949-1962," Elementary English,
XXXIX, No. 8 (December, 1962), p. 772.

5Arnold Leslie Lazarus, "Pupils TV Habits," Educational

 

Leadership, XIII (January, 1956), p. 241.

6Ibid.

 

viewers in 1961 were, in order of their preference: "The
Three Stooges," "The Flintstones," baseball games, "Bugs

Bunny,' and "Dennis the Menace."7 The following year "The
Three Stooges," "Top Cat," "Dick Tracy," "The Flintstones,"
and "Margie" were the five favorite programs for second and
third graders.8 As an indication that parents don't concur
with children in their selection of programs preferred for
their youngsters, it is interesting to note that in 1961
parents selected "Captain Kangaroo," "Father Knows Best,"
"Huckleberry Hound," "Shirley Temple Show," and "The
Flintstones" as the most desirable.9 Only "The Flintstones"
is to be found on both lists.

The research into school age children's viewing is
interesting and valuable, yet little transfer of this know-
ledge Can,be made to the preschooler. The maturity level
difference between a three—year—old and an eight-year—old

child is too great to allow transference of statistics,

inferences, conclusions, or interpretations from the older

 

7Paul A. Witty and Paul J. Kinsella, "A Report on

Televiewing 1961," Elementary English, XXXIX, No. 1 (January,
1962), p. 27.

8

 

Witty and Kinsella, "Televiewing: Some Observations
from Studies 1949-1962," op. cit., pp. 773.

9Witty and Kinsella, "A Report on Televiewing 1961,"
op. cit., p. 27.

to the younger or vice versa.

Therefore, with the hope that a new body of know-
ledge would be made available which would complement that
research now existing for the school age child and would
offer a basis for interpretative judgments, decisions,
and actions by parents, broadcasters, teachers, and students
of child behavior, this research thesis into the nature of
the viewing preferences and responses made by children two,
three, four, and five years of age was initiated.

The results presented by this thesis could serve
as a base of comparison for parents of young children.
Parents might find appropriate levels of control for their
own children's televiewing through studying the use habits
of children of similar ages. The list of programs pro-
hibited and disliked by those parents reporting in the
survey could offer parents whose children are entering
these age groups guidance in choosing better programs for
their children, guidance based on the experience and
knowledge these responding parents have acquired.

Broadcasters and producers of programs for audiences
of preschool age may find, in this study, insights into
the interest, attention span, and responses very young

children make to television. The responses which children

make to particular programs could serve as a criterion for
program content selection and choice. Advertisers should

be very interested in knowing the frequency and response

of children to television commercial messages. Likewise,
these groups, after studying the sources of control of
children's televiewing may want to review their present
programming concepts and determine more direct means of
improving program content quality. The attitudes of parents
toward present programming should be an indication for the
broadcaster of the relative success or failure of his appeal
to this vital family member.

Teachers may wish to review the conclusions of the
study in an effort to examine more fully the nature of
concepts and understandings children bring to school and
class situations after prolonged preschool exposure to
televiewing experience. Where children use considerable
quantities of television, educators and teachers may wish
to study at greater length the nature of the content, under—
standings, and opportunities for learning this medium
presents children before they reach the classroom. Perhaps
television, as a medium which interests and holds the
attention of very young children, can serve as a vital

educational tool in preschool learning. In this area,

educators and broadcasters may find joint means of serving
this young public.

Students of child behavior and psychology may wish
to review the results which report on the social situation
for viewing, the concentration children apply to televiewing
experience, and the responses children make to requests for
such responses.

This study should prove of value to many who deal
with the activities and interests of the preschool child.

The second chapter of this thesis describes the
purposes of the research study, sets forth the hypotheses
and questions, states the limitations attached to the study,
and defines the method by which the study was executed. The
third chapter offers the.results obtained through the
research. It includes a survey profile and an answering and
testing of the hypotheses and questions. The last chapter
is devoted to interpretative summations of the results
encountered in Chapter II and includes suggestions for
possible applications to future research or to current
practical uses. Appendices containing tables, charts, geo-
graphical descriptions, questionnaires, and other materials

are attached at the conclusion of the thesis.

CHAPTER II

DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY

Purpose

This study was undertaken in an attempt to delineate,
document, and offer new research information in the area of
young children's television viewing patterns. In order to
investigate the nature of children's use of television, a
research design was chosen which sought to learn of these
uses through telephone interviews with the parents of young
children.

The specific purpose of the study was directed to-
ward discovering information in five related areas of
interest.

The first of these areas was that of quantity or
amount of viewing in which these children engaged. Earlier
studies, involving older children, have described the extent

and quantity of children's televiewing.10 The amount of time

 

10Two of the more complete studies of American children's
televiewing were reported by Witty and Kinsella, in "Televiewing:
Some Observations from Studies 1949-1962," op. cit., pp. 772-79
and by Schramm, op. cit., p. 30. British school children.have
been extensively studied and reported by Hilde Himmelweit,

8

children spend watching television programs is a gauge of
their interest in the medium as well as an indicator of the
time they are not spending in play or in other activities.
Quantity of televiewing was a primary concern of this study.

Related to, and perhaps regulating, the amount of
television watched by these young children is the external
control exercised over viewing. Determination of the
existence and nature of this control was the second area
probed. Sources of viewing control were seen as either self,
parent, or sibling.

The third area with which this study concerned itself
was an exploration of the conditions attached to the view—
ing experience. Insights were sought into the physical
viewing situations, the nature of any involvement with the
television presentation, and responses made following a
viewing experience.

Although many of the children involved in this study
were not of sufficient age to be cognizant of their own
program preferences, a measure of their preference for
particular children's programs was sought as the fourth area

of interest. Preferences that were solicited were not

 

A. N. Oppenheim, and Pamela Vince, .in Television and the Child
(London: Oxford University Press, 1958).

 

10

intended to reflect the desires of the children for future
viewing experiences, but rather, the preferences for
program materials currently available to them.

The fifth purpose of the study was to inquire into
the attitudes parents hold toward the television programs
intended for their children's consumption.

These five areas of interest constituted the direction
and the purpose of this study and it was to the exploration

of these areas that this thesis was committed.

Hypotheses and Questions

In order to give coherence and direction to the
fulfillment of this study's purpose, a list of hypotheses
and questions was designed for testing and measuring.

This original pre—survey compilation included the following
seven hypotheses and eleven questions.

Hypotheses:

1. Most two year old children do watch television pro—

grams regularly.

2. The quantity of television viewing increases with
age.
3. The quantity of viewing is seasonal and decreases

during Summer months.

11

Nursery school or kindergarten attendance tends

to increase the amount of viewing for children

of any given age.

Children prefer to be physically closer to the
television set than do their parents.

Children's concentration on television experiences
increases with age.

The more education that the parents have completed,
the greater is the likelihood of parental control
and selection of viewing material for children.
Questions:

What programs do children prefer to watch?

What programs do parents prefer that their children
watch?

How frequently do young children watch programs
designed for older children or adults?

At what age do children begin to react to commercial
announcements, in that they imitate them or request
items seen advertised?

At what age do members of the survey group develop
a television program consciousness, in that they
request the set be turned on or a channel selected

for a specific program?

12

6. How many parents watch the content of programs
their children are viewing?

7. Do parents with higher levels of education watch
the programs their children are viewing more fre-
quently than those parents with less education?

8. What are parents' attitudes toward children's
television programming?

9. Do children use the content of television programs
as a basis for play activities?

10. Do children respond to the requests of television
performers to participate in the activities of a
program?

11. In homes where there are older children, do the younger

watch more, or less, television?

Limitations

 

As a means of more sharply defining this study,
several limitations were imposed. The physical age of the
population to be sampled and employed in this survey was
confined to children who were between two and five-and-a-
half years of age on the last day of November, 1962. Thus,
only those children born between June 1, 1957, and November

30, 1960, were considered for the purpose of this research

13

study. Random sampling was limited to the first six months
of each age group, thereby using those just immediately
within an age group to represent that age group.

Only those children of the survey age who were born
within the City of Lansing, Michigan, or the Lansing Township
adjacent to that city were included in this study. This
area includes all metropolitan hospitals. These hospitals
account for almost all births in the urban and suburban
Lansing, Michigan, area, which includes portions of Ingham,
Eaton, and Clinton Counties.

After names and addresses of the parents of the
children of survey age were acquired, those children whose
parents resided in and received telephone service from the
Lansing, Michigan, calling area, as described in the

Michigan Bell Telephone Company Lansing Area Telephone

 

Directory,March, 1962, were included in the survey popu-

 

. ll . .
lation. Only those homes were called where listings were
available in this directory or from the telephone company
information operator.

The cities and towns in the Lansing, Michigan, local

 

11See the telephone exchange map in Appendix V for

specific geographical area included in the Lansing, Michigan,
calling area.

14

calling area include Lansing, East Lansing, Bath, DeWitt,

Dimondale, Grand Ledge, Haslett, Holt, Mason, Okemos,

Potterville, and Williamston, Michigan. Residential tele-
. . . 12 . .

phones in these Cities number 60,516. The Michigan Bell

Telephone Company, which services 54,897 of these homes in—

dicates that "a recent research study shows approximately

95% of the homes in the Lansing area have telephone service.‘

Method

In order to meet the purpose of this study, refute
or substantiate the hypotheses, and find answers for the
outstanding questions about children's television viewing,
thirty-five questions were designed to be asked of the
parents of two, three, four, and five-year-old children.
This instrument was the only means employed to so fulfill
the purpose of this study. Telephone interviews using this
questionnaire were viewed as a means of reaching a large
number of parents over a relatively short span of time and
at a cost which was in line with the resources available

for execution of this study.

 

12See letters from Michigan Bell Telephone Company

and General Telephone Company in Appendix I.
13See letter from Michigan Bell Telephone Company
dated May 9, 1963, in Appendix I.

13

15

The survey population of 700 two, three, four, and
five-year-old children was selected at random from the
Record of Births, City of Lansing and Record of Births, Lansing

14
Township for the years 1957, 1958, 1959, and 1960. These

 

county records indicated that there were a total of 21,988
recorded births in Lansing and Lansing Township between

June 1, 1957, and November 30, 1960. The births in all
Lansing, Michigan, metropolitan area hospitals are reflected
in these documents for the City of Lansing and for Lansing
Township.

To assure that each age group in the survey population
was of the same proportion as that age group in the total
population available for random sampling, every eighteenth
four and five-year—old was selected and every twelfth two
and three—year-old was selected. Thus sampled, this initial
population was composed of 187 five-year—olds, 175 four-year—
olds, 169 three-year-olds, and 169 two—year—olds; a total

population of 700 children.

 

14The county birth records include photostatic

copies of all Certificate of Birth forms for Ingham County,
Michigan. They are located in the office of the County
Clerk at the Courthouse Building, Mason, Michigan, and are
available for public use.

15See Appendix I, Table l.

16

Information extracted from the birth records in-
cluded the full name of the child, full name of both parents
and the local family address at the time of birth of the
child. Using these names and addresses of the parents,
telephone listings were located, where possible, in the
Michigan Bell Telephone Company Lansing Area Telephone
Directory of March, 1962. The mobility of the population
resulted in a large percentage of unsuccessful attempts to
locate telephone listings, particularly in the four and
five-year-old groups. In an effort to make the survey sample
reflect accurately the percentage of homes with no telephone
service, rather than those homes with no service plus those
homes no longer listed due to population mobility, the birth
records were re-sampled for additional lists until the
proper survey population existed within each age group and
the total survey population reached 700.

The questionnaire employed in the telephone inter-
views was constructed in a manner which, when administered,
coded, and analyzed, would offer answers to the questions

16

and hypotheses stated at the onset of the study. The

first series of questions was designed to gather biographical

 

A copy of the questionnaire used can be found in
Appendix V.

17

information about the child and his home. The second group
of questions dealt with the child's Viewing preferences and
the responses he made to televiewing. The third set of
questions requested information about the physical and social
situation in which the child's viewing occurred and the con-
trols exercised over his viewing. The last segment of the
questionnaire involved parent's attitudes toward children's
televiSion programs and secured information about parental
education levels. Other initial sections of the instrument
had included space for numerical and biographical identifi—
cation, respondent's sex, and provision for recall records
in the event of no telephone answer or a respondent asking
for another, more convenient time, in which to complete the
questionnaire. Answers for each question were precoded and
this code information was contained throughout the instrument.
The administration of_the questionnaire was under
the direction of the author, with telephone interviewing
handled by himself and five interviewers. These telephoned
interviews were made beginning January 28, 1963, and con-
tinued seven days a week until February 21, 1963; a period
of twenty-five days. Original calls were made between
9:00 A.M. and 11:30 A.M., 1:30 P.M. and 4:30 P.M., and

7:00 P.M. and 9:30 P.M. daily and Saturday,with telephoning

18

on Sundays from 2:00 P.M. to 4:30 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. to
9:30 P.M. Children were not accepted as respondents.

In some instances when mothers and fathers both worked
during daytime hours and adult baby sitters were available
for interview, those sections of the questionnaire not
dependent upon parental answers were administered to the
sitters.

Telephone re—calls were made up to a total of four
calls where no answer was the result of earlier calls. In
situations where automatic answering devices indicated no
such telephone number or a termination of service for the
number dialed, efforts were made to obtain available
corrected listings from the local telephone company information
operator.

Questionnaires were not completed where a child did
not have access to a television set. This information will
be found reflected in Chapter III.

Each interview required from eight to fifteen minutes
for completion, depending upon the interest and the nature
of the response made by the parent.

With the questionnaire completed, coding was entered
for each answer and all questionnaires were accounted for

and inventoried. At the direction of the author and through

19

the facilities of the Communication Research Center and the
Computer Center at Michigan State University, the coded
information was entered on IBM cards and analyzed by
computer. Upon receipt of the computer data, conversions
were made from the numerically accounted responses to per—
centages which represented the numerical computations.
These numerical and percentage findings were then set

into tables and are presented in the following chapter of

this thesis in the form of results.

CHAPTER III

RESULTS

The results reported herein are gathered from the
completed questionnaires and represent 75% of the total
survey sample of 700 children.

It should be remembered that this study's conclusions
were drawn from a small portion of the youth population of a
limited geographical area of central Michigan. Differences
in cultural and behavioral patterns of children in separate
sections of the United States are not likely to exert strong
influence on the viewing behavior of this young age group;
therefore, the relationships reported here may have broader
and more general application for children of these age groups

on a larger than local scale.

Population Profile

 

From the designated sample of 700 children, inter—
views were completed for 518 children. In addition, six
questionnaires were partially completed by parents who

indicated that their children did not watch any television.

20

21

The remaining 176 questionnaires were incomplete due to
refusal, no answer after four calls, no television set in
the home, no child of survey age, or no telephone service.

The total completed questionnaires included 115
two—year—olds, 130 three-year—olds, 130 four-year-olds,
and 143 five-year-olds. The interviews with the parents
of these 518 children served as the basis for the greater
amount of statements and tables reported herein.

Children in the 518 reporting homes had at least
one television set for viewing; over 17% had two or more
receiving sets at their disposal.18 Television channels
available for viewing ranged in number from one to nine.
Over 95% of those with television could receive programming
from more than one channel, and 65% viewed at least three
channels.

The parental respondents were reporting for 252
girls and 266 boys.19 Boys outnumbered girls at every age

level except at the two-year-old level where 57% of the

 

17See Appendix I, Table 3 for percentage of each
category.

18 . . .
Of the incompleted questionnaires, 2% represented
homes with no television set in working order.

19See Appendix I, Table 5 for percentage of boys and
girls in each age grOUp.

22

respondents represented girls.

Most of the interviews were conducted with the
mothers of the children.20 Only thirty-four of the 518
completed questionnaires were the results of interviews
with fathers.

Terminal education levels of each parent in the homes
reporting were slightly higher for fathers than for the mothers.
Average education for both parents was found to be high school
graduation with 41% of the fathers and 30% of the mothers
having some college instruction.

The education level of the responding parent tended
to follow more closely that of the mother due to the large
number of questionnaires completed by females. This can
be noted in Table 1 below.

This distribution of education levels.was rather
consistently followed for the four age groups.22 A greater
number of parents of five-year-old children were at the

1ess-than-high—school-graduation level: a quarter of these

 

20See Appendix I, Table 4 for the sex of the
respondents.

1See Appendix I, Table 6 for a more complete
parental education level reference.

2 . ' . .
2 See Appendix I, Table 8 for age group distributions
of education by levels.

23

Table 1. Responding parents at different levels of education.
N 518
Males 34 Females 484

 

 

 

Education Level

 

8th High More

Grade School High College Year
or Atten- School Atten- College Grad.
Under danCe Graduate dance Graduate Study

Number 22 77 263 102 36 18
Per cent 4% 15% 51% 20% 7% 3%

 

parents were recorded at that level of education. The
parents of the two-year—old children were lowest in that
level: 15% reported less—than-high-school graduation. In
all, over 80% of those interviewed were parents who had

completed high school education.

Hypotheses Tested

The first hypothesis stated that most two-year-old
children do watch television regularly. An initial and
partially substantiating support for this hypothesis is
found in the low number of twoeyear-olds reported as non—
viewers of television. Of the six parents stating no
televiewing, five were parents of two—year-olds.

In those homes reporting the viewing of two-year—old

24

children, almost one out of two children was seeing be-
tween one and two hours of television during an average
day. Two-year-olds did tend to View fewer hours than did
their older peers. Table 2 shows the distribution of
viewing hours for children of each age group and indicates
that two-year-olds had a larger percentage of their number
in the lower viewing hour averages.

Table 2. The number of daily viewing hours for children of
different ages.

 

 

 

 

N 518*
Hours Viewed Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Less than 1 hour
N 49 21% 12% 4% 4%
9%
1 to 2 hours
N 143 39% 28% 21% 24%
28%
2 to 3 hours
N 160 24% 32% 32% 34%
31%
3 or more hours
N 165 16% 28% 43% 38%

32%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to number of viewing
hours.
Note: percentages total vertically

25

While the parents of the two-year-old children re-
ported that their children viewed television regularly, they
qualified this with reports that only one—third watched
entire programs. Almost all of the two—year-old group
watched half or more of the program being viewed. It would
appear that children in this youngest age group do watch
television regularly, although they tend to watch fewer hours
per average day. Compared to older children, a smaller number
of them watch entire programs.

The second hypothesis dealt with increases in view-
ing hours as a function of age; in other words, the quantity
of televiewing increases with age. This proposition is
supported by Table 2 which traces a rather steady path of
increased viewing for progressive age levels. Daily median
viewing for the two-year-olds falls at one and three-quarters
hours; for the three-year—olds it rises to about two hours;
for the four-year—olds it is up sharply to two hours, fifty
minutes; and for the five-year-olds it recedes to about two
hours and forty minutes.

As will be noted, this hypothesis tends to hold true
through the first three age groups with an indication in
the five-year-old group that attendance to television

viewing is not as strong. A large number of five—year-old

26

children attended kindergarten. It seems quite reasonable
that the absence from home and access to television may have
accounted for some reduction in the amount of viewing for
five-year—olds. This assumption is offered considerable
support in Table 3 which reports the differences in daily
televiewing averages of five-year-old children on the basis
of attendance or non-attendance in kindergarten. The median
daily viewing of those not attending kindergarten is just
over three hours, while for those attending, it is just
under two-and—one-half hours. It appears, therefore, that
kindergarten attendance may be the important factor in the
reduction of average viewing hours of the five—year-old
children, rather than leveling of viewing due solely to an

increase in age.

Table 3. NUmber of daily viewing hours of five-year-old
children related to kindergarten attendance.
N 143

 

 

No. of Hours Viewed Daily

 

 

LeSs than 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 Or
1 hour hours hours more hours
Kindergarten
attendance
N 123 4% 25% 36% 35%
86%
No Kindergarten
attendance *
N 20 2% 20% 25% 53%
14%

 

Note: percentages total horizontally.

27

The third hypothesis is rather dramatically proven
in Table 4 which indicates that the large majority of children
watch more television in the winter than in the summer; only
1% of the parents indicated greater viewing during the
summer. The four and five—year-olds watched more television

during the winter than the two and three-year-olds.

Table 4. Seasonal viewing difference by age groups.

N 518

 

 

Children's Age Groups

 

 

2 . 3 .J 4 ' 5 .
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Winter More '
N 463 79% 89% 96% 93%
89%
Summer More
N l 0% 1% 0% 0%
1%
No Difference
N'36 11% 9% 2% 6%
7%
Don't Know
N'18 10% 1% 2% 1%

3%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

The response made by parents in support of this
hypothesis may not have been stated nearly so strongly had

the survey period not been during the coldest months of the

28

year or had the survey been made in a warmer, more moderate
climate. Most children's outdoor play is tempered by the
weather, which for Lansing, Michigan, during the January and
February survey period was very cold. Temperatures were in
the range of zero to twenty degrees Farenheit for most of
that time.

The influence of kindergarten attendance has been
discussed as it related to the viewing of the five-year-
olds. The fourth hypothesis stated that nursery school or
kindergarten attendance tends to increase the amount of
television viewing for children of any age group. Reports
of parents of two and three-year-old children only yielded
four instances of nursery school attendance and only a small
number of the four-year-olds were attenders.23 Median
viewing of the four-year-olds who attended nursery school
compares closely with that of the five-year-old attenders
which was cited earlier as being just under two-and-a-half
hours. The nursery school non-attenders in the four-year-
old group watched television for an average of over two

hours and fifty minutes a day, while the five-year—olds

 

3See Appendix II, Table 17 for four-year-old
nursery school attendance and viewing.

29

who were non-attenders viewed over three hours daily.24

It would appear from the responses which parents
made in answer to kindergarten and nursery school attendance
and amount of daily televiewing, that there is a noticeable
decline in average daily Viewing for attenders in those age
groups reported. This decline is probably due to increased
hours away from home and the television set.

The fifth hypothesis stated that children prefer
to be physically closer to the television set than do their
parents. From the answers gathered in this survey, it.
appears that this hypothesis is rather strongly upheld.
Most parents reported their preference for viewing distance
as ten-or-more feet from the set, while children preferred
distances closer than seven feet.25 The preference for
viewing distances varied with different age groups. The
number of the two—year-olds who chose to sit within four
feet of the television set was twice as great as the number
of five-year-olds who wanted to view from that distance.

Median viewing distances for all age groups fell within a

 

24See Appendix II, Tables 17 and 18 for comparison of
viewing of four and five-year-old children attending nursery
school and kindergarten.

25See Appendix III, Tables 1 and 2 for specific
distance preferences or for greater definition according to
age group.

30

range of five to seven feet.

The sixth hypothesis suggested that children's con-
centration on their viewing experiences increases with age.
Although not directly connected with quantity of televiewing,
the concentration which children apply to their viewing
experiences appears to have a strong link to the amount of
time spent with the medium. Because there are more oppor-
tunities for concentrated viewing activities where more time
and interest are given to televiewing, it would be expected
that these young viewers watch greater portions of the
programs they view and devote attention more exclusively to
the viewing experience, rather than dividing their interest
between viewing and other activity. Table 5 describes how
children in progressive age levels tend to concentrate more
on the programs they View. It would seem, therefore, that
older children not only View more television daily, but also
attend to larger portions of those programs.

Notice in Table 5 that of the two-year—olds, only
31%.watched all oftfluaprogram being viewed, while of the
other groups increasingly greater percentages of them viewed
all of the program until, at the five-year-old level, over
80% regularly watched all of the program.

The final hypothesis involved parental control

31

 

 

 

 

Table 5. Portions of children's programs viewed by different
age children.
N 518
Portion Viewed Children's Age Groups
2 ‘3 4 5.
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Watch all
N 302 31% 52% 63% 82%
58%
Almost all
N 64 11% 13% 18% 8%
12%
About half
N 122 45% 27% 17% 9%
24%
Very little
N 30 13% 8% 2% 1%
6%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

exercised over children's televiewing: the more education
the parents have completed, the greater is the likelihood
of parental control and selection of their children's
television viewing material. The survey was able to test
this in three areas. First, control of the selection of
programming could be measured through parental prohibition
of specific programs; secondly, control was exercised
through the parent's practice of turning on the set and
selecting a channel for the children; and thirdly, control

was roughly gauged by the amount of televiewing for children

32

whose parents had differing education levels.

In the first area, parental control through prohibition
of specific programs for children of all ages, prohibitive
controls were exercised by almost a third of the parents.
Program prohibition, on the basis of parental education was
greatest for the parents who were college graduates and pro—
hibitions were mentioned considerably less frequently by
those parents who did not complete high school. These
results are described in the following table.

Table 6. Parents prohibiting some children's programs
related to parental education.

N 518

 

 

Education Levels

 

 

Less
than High High
School School College College
Graduate Graduate Attendance Graduate
N 99 N 263 N 102 N 54
Prohibit Pro-
grams 0 O O O
N 151 20% 27% 37% 41A
29%
No Prohibition
N 367 80% 73% 63% 59%

71%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

 

26See Appendix IV, Table 12 for a more complete
analysis of parental prohibition of children's programs
for each age group.

33

Program prohibitions were mentioned by 151 parents
who made 174 responses citing programs not permitted for
viewing: an average of 1.15 responses were made per parent.

The second area of control of children's viewing
involved channel selection or other manipulation of the set
controls. The operators were reported as either the child,
the parent, a sibling, or an adult other than the parent.
Primary selectors and tuners for children of all ages,
without concern for parental education levels, were the child
(49%) and the parent (40%).27 Table 7 shows slightly more
child control of the set with parents of less-than-high-

school-graduation level. In over half of these homes,

children were exercising their own control.

 

7Appendix III, Table 4 serves to describe selector
control of programming for different age groups.

281t might be pointed out at this point that with-
out regard for education levels, selection and tuning
control was greater for parents of two—year-olds (56%).
Parents of the five—year-old children reported control
in only a quarter of the homes. It will be recalled that
the education level of parents of two-year—old children
was reported earlier as 15% who were not high school
graduates while of the parents of five—year—old children,
25%.were in this same education group. Although age is
shown to be a very substantial contributor to parental
selection and tuning (Appendix III, Table 4), the
education level of the parents may be equally as potent
a corollary to parental control of children's televiewing.

34

Table 7. Sources of children's program control and tuning
related to parental education.

 

 

 

 

N 518*
Education Level Source of Control
The The A Other
Child Parent Sibling Person
N 252 N 202 N 56 N 2
Less than
High School Graduate
N 99 52% 37% 11% 0%
19%
High School Graduate
N 263 49% 40% 10% 1%
51%
College Non-Graduate
N 102 46% 41% 13% 0%
20%
College Graduate
N 54 48% 45% 7% 0%

10%

 

*Six respondents gave no answer to the selector of
programs.

Note: percentages total horizontally.

While Table 7 reflects no sharp and well defined
indication that parental control rises with parental edu—
cation, there is a steady increase in this control from the
lower to the upper education levels. Accompanying the
increase of parental selection and control, at higher
educational attainment levels, is a narrowing of separation

between child—parent selection. Children selected programs

35

and channels 15% more frequently than parents in low—
education homes and only 3% more frequently in high-education
homes.

The third area in which the hypothesis was tested
was that of frequency: amount of daily televiewing. Children
of parents who had graduated from college showed a daily
median viewing figure of two hours and ten minutes, while
those of parents who had not completed high school had a
median viewing average of two hours, thirty—five minutes.
This indicates that substantially more televiewing occurred
in homes where parents were of lower-education—level. These
figures are outlined in Table 8.

From this parental reporting of television set
control through channel selection and set adjustment and
through program prohibition, as well as from the figures
on televiewing quantity, it seems reasonable to conclude
that there is a somewhat greater likelihood of parental
control and selection of children's viewing materials in

homes where the education level of the parents is high.

.Questions Answered

The first of the eleven questions which were to be

answered by the study asked: what programs do children prefer

36

Table 8. Number of daily viewing hours related to parental

 

 

 

 

education.
N 518
Educational Level ‘ No. ofoours Viewed Daily
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 or more
1 hour hours hours hours
Less than
High School Graduate 8 24 30 38
N 99
19%
High School Graduate
N 263 7 27 34 32
51%
College Non-Graduate
N 102 13 34 27 26
20%
College Graduate
' N 54 16 29 27 28

10%

 

Note: percentages total horizontally.

to watch on television?29 The ten most regularly viewed
children's programs recalled by parents are listed in
Table 9. Six of the ten are programs composed entirely
of cartoons.

There were changes in the order of preference for

programs with changes in age.30 "Captain Kangaroo" was

 

Included in Appendix I are descriptive statements
about the programs for which responses were made.

‘3OFor a more detailed listing of age by age pre—
ferences see Appendix II, Tables 29, 30, 31, and 32.

37

Table 9. Ten programs most regularly Viewed by all age

 

 

 

children.
N 518
Program Order Per Cent Viewing Regularly

1. Captain Kangaroo 80
2. Mickey Mouse Club 68
3. Huckleberry Hound 64*
4. Romper Room 64
5. Yogi Bear 64*
6. Mighty Mouse 59*
7. Alvin 58*
8. Bullwinkle 42*
9. Felix the Cat 41*
10. Ranger Jim 35

 

*Animated cartoons.

listed as first for children, two, three, and four years of
age, but it was listed fourth for the five—year-old children.
This same preference trend was followed for the "Romper Room"
program which was the second most popular program for all
ages except the five-year-old group, which ranked it seventh.
The favorite program of the five—year—olds, "Huckleberry

Hound,’ was fifth choice of the youngest group and it only
moved up one position for the three and four-year-old
children.

Some programs appeared on only one age group's list
of ten most watched programs: "Land of Play," only the two-
year—olds; "Bozo the Clown," only the two-year-olds; "Rin

Tin Tin,‘ and "The Flintstones," only in the choices of the

38

five-year-olds. "Felix the Cat" and "Ranger Jim" entered
the lists of the three and four-yeareoldegroups, but were
not included in the list for five—year-olds.

It appears that children do change their preferences
with each age level and that only those programs with the
more varied appeals, e.g., "Captain Kangaroo" and "Romper

Room,‘ retain their high rankings for this preschool group.
Even these programs appear to be outgrown, if their drop in
rank at the five-year-old level can be taken as an indication
of the beginning of a trend away from them.

There were several programs which had progressively
greater numbers of viewers as age levels increased. Notable
among those not previously mentioned were "Allakazam,"

"Culver's Clubhouse," "King Leonardo,‘ and "Fury." It
appears that these programs which are growing in number of
viewers among preschoolers might later be listed high within
the elementary children's program preferences.

Several programs not cited earlier were watched
by increasingly larger percentages of children of the
two through four age groups, but dropped a large number of
viewers in the five-year—age group. Included among these

programs were: "Bugs Bunny,' "Clutch Cargo Cartoons,"

"Davey and Goliath," "Deputy Dawg," "Frontier Circus,"

39

"Rae Deane and Friends," "Ruff and Reddy," and "Tam's
Fun Time."31

Only two programs, "Magic Midway" and "Ranger Jim,"
were watched by continuously fewer percentages of children
after the programs reached the height of their popularity
at the three-year—old group. None of the programs listed
in the questionnaire reached its peak percentage of viewers
at the two—year-old level.

In answer to the question about children's program
preferences, therefore, it would appear that the non-
cartoon programs, represented by "Captain Kangaroo" and

"Romper Room,‘ are the strongest choices of two, three, and
four-year-old children. The oldest group of children, how-
ever, expressed slightly greater preferences for the cartoons
such as "Huckleberry Hound" and "Yogi Bear." For children

of all ages in the survey group, the non-cartoon program was
the first preference, but six out of the first ten programs
listed were entirely cartoons. This majority may be due to

the fact that cartoon programs are more numerous than are the

non-cartoon programs.

 

1A profile of each program listed in the question-
naire is traced in Appendix II, Table 27.

40

The second question which the study sought to
answer was: what programs do parents prefer their children
watch? The one children's program which ranked ahead of all
others in its appeal to parents was "Captain Kangaroo."
To the questionnaire's solicitation of "best program,"
it captured almost half of all responses. The second choice
of parents was "Romper Room" with 17% of the responses.
Three other programs were named with some frequency:
"Mickey Mouse Club," "Land of Play," and "Discovery."
Other programs named accounted for a tenth of the replies.
There were a small number of parents who felt that there
was no program which was "best" for their children. In
Table 10 are detailed parental responses for each age
group.

With the exception of "Discovery,' all of the programs
mentioned by parents were included in at least one age group's
list of preferred programs.

When parents were asked to list programs they pre—

ferred their children not watch, they headed the list with

"The Three Stooges." Six other programs, each of which

 

32
See Table 9 and Appendix II, Tables 29-32.

41

Table 10. Parental selections of "the best
program for different ages.

N 518

children's

 

 

Programs Named

Children's Age Groups

 

Captain Kangaroo
N 232
45%

Discovery
N 19
3%

Land of Play
N 20
4%

Mickey Mouse Club
N 26
5%

Romper Room
N 86
17%

Other Programs
N 53
10%

No Program Best
N 26
5%

No Opinion
N 56
11%

 

yearzolds year3olds year4olds yearsolds

N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
38% 56%. 48% 38%

0% 4% 2% 8%

6% 5% 3% 1%

6% 5% 1% 8%

21% 13% 23% 11%

6% 7% 13% 14%

9% 3% 2% 5%

14% 7% 8% 15%

 

Note: percentages

total vertically.

42

received a small number of the responses, were named.
These six included: "Comedy Matinee," "Lassie," "Li'l

Rascals," "Mr. Magic's Open House," “Ranger Jim, and "Rin
Tin Tin." Of these, the last two appear on at least one
age group's list of ten preferred programs.

Parents listed as their major objection to children's
programming, "The Three Stooges"; a fifth of all parents

prohibited their children from viewing it.35 Other pro-

grams which were prohibited by three or more parents included:

"Comedy Matinee," "Lassie," "Mr. Magic's Open House," "Our
Gang," and "Ranger Jim." Only "Ranger Jim" appears on the
36

children's program preference list.

Parental preference for children's programming, in
most cases, appears to be those programs which the children
themselves choose as favorites. It seems that children of
preschool ages generally choose, or have their viewing so
controlled that they only see, those programs which parents

approve.

 

33See Table 11 in Appendix IV.

34See Appendix II, Tables 29, 30, 31, and 32.

35Appendix IV, Table 12 shows age by age prohibitions
to programs. '

36See Appendix II, Tables 30 and 31.

43

The third question was designed to explore the
frequency with which young children watched either adult
programs or ones prepared for older children. Parental
responses to this question indicated that some children
of all age groups had exposure to adult programming. Table
11 presents the variance with different age groups. Of
two-year-olds, for example, 29% never watched adult pro—
programming, but only 4% of the five-year—olds never viewed
it.

Table 11. Frequency with which children view adult programs
for different ages.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Frequency Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
View Every Day
N 121 . 15% 20% 22% 34%
23%
View Once a Week
N 147 26% 25% 26% 36%
29%
View Seldom
N 177 30% 43% 38% 26%
34%
Never View
N 73 29% 12% 14% 4%

14%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

44

For each increased year of age, greater percentages
of children saw adult programs at least once a week. The
adult presentations were viewed by one-third of the
five-year—age group at least once a day.

When frequency of children's attendance to adult
programs is related to parental education, it can be
noted that fewer children of parents with high levels of
education viewed adult programs once a day than did children
of parents of low levels of education. Identical percentages
of children of parents of both upper and lower educational
levels viewed no adult programs. Differences in education
levels of parents appear to be of some small significance
in the frequency with which children View adult programming.37

The second half of this question asked the rate
of recurrence of children's attendance to programs which
older siblings view. It appeared that a significant
majority of the young children with older siblings in the
home watched the programs seen by the older ones at least

once every day. Only a very few never watched the programs

which the older children viewed.

 

37For a more complete analysis of adult program
viewing by children see Appendix II, Table 26.

38For an age-by—age comparison of young children's
viewing of sibling programs, consult Appendix II, Table 25.

45

It can be concluded, therefore, that a very large
majority of young children are watching adult and older
sibling program choices. While increase in age tends to
increase the frequency of this viewing, differences in
parental education levels do not appear to account for
either significant reductions or increases in the frequency
with which these young children attend to adult program
materials.

The fourth question for which an answer was sought
inquired: at what age do children begin to react to tele—
vision commercials and imitate them or request items seen
advertised? Parents reported that three-fourths of the
children had repeated or imitated television commercial
messages and almost half of the parents were able to recall
a particular commercial which their child had repeated.
Even a majority of the youngest group had repeated com-
mercials. Imitation of these messages was highest for the
four-year—old children.39 The percentage of children who
had requested purchase of products seen advertised on tele-
vision was at approximately the same high level as was

imitation of commercials. Over half of the parents recalled

 

39Appendix II, Table 35 details television commercial
imitation according to age groups.

46

a Specific product that had been requested. Children's

age levels played a very large part in requests for products:
67% of the two—year—olds did not request items, while 24%

of the three-year-olds and only 12% of the four and five—
year-olds made no requests.

In answer to this question, therefore, the responses
indicate that a majority of the children imitate and repeat
commercials as early as two years of age with increases in
age adding to that majority. Requests for purchases of
products seen advertised are made by two—year-olds, but only
by one out of three children in that age group. Increases
in age radically change this until, almost nine out of ten
four and five—year-olds request purchases.

The fifth question asked: at what age do children
become selective in their viewing, in that they request
specific programs? Table 12 reports the percentages of
different age groups who requested that a set be tuned or
a channel be selected for a specific program. Even a
majority of the youngest children in the survey did request

particular programs. As age increased, so did the requests.

 

ORequests of different age groups are reflected in
Appendix II, Table 36.

r1

I

(I)

47

Table 12. Requests for specific programs by children of
different ages.

N 518

 

 

Children's Age Groups

 

 

2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Request Specific
Program
N 369 53% 68% 78% 83%
71%

Do Not Request
Specific Programs

N 149 47% 32% 22% 17%

29%

 

Nete: percentages total vertically.

The sixth and seventh questions were similar in
nature. The sixth sought the number of parents who watched
programs which the children viewed and the seventh inquired
into the nature of the frequency of parental viewing as
related to the education of the parents.

Responses concerning the frequency of parental
viewing were in four categories: daily, weekly, seldom,
and never. It was found that once a day 41% of all responding
parents watched a program that their children were viewing.
Only 8% replied that they never saw their children's pro—

grams. A description of these data is found in Table 13.

48

Table 13. Frequency with which parents View their children's

programs related to parental education.

N 518*

 

 

Education Level.

Frequency of Parental Viewing

 

8th Grade or Under
N 22
4%

High School Attendance
N 77
15%

High School Graduate
N 263
51%

College Attendance
N 102
20%

College Graduate
N 54
10%

All Respondents

 

Daily Weekly Sometimes Never

N 210 N 123 N 139 N 45
32% 9% 46% 13%
41% 23% 31% 5%
40% 26% 24% 10%
42% 26% 24% 8%
45% 18% 32% 5%
41% 24% 27% 8%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to frequency of viewing.

Note: percentages total horizontally.

Differences in education levels made noticeable

variations in parental attendance to children's television

programs. While college graduates watched programs as

frequently as weekly in almost two-thirds of the homes,

less than half of those with lowest education were watching

 

49

as often. This low education group also reported the most
frequent non-attendance to their children's televiewing.

When parental viewing was compared on the basis of
children's ages, rather small differences were found.
Although more of the parents of five-year-old children
watched their youngster's programs, they watched with less
frequency. "Sometimes" and "weekly" viewing frequencies
increased gradually between the two-year-olds and five-
year-olds.41

The answers to questions six and seven seem to be
that while the great majority of parents do watch children's
programs, the frequency of their attendance lies in the
"weekly" to "sometimes" ranges, and that parents with
higher levels of education watch with somewhat greater
frequency than do those parents with less education. The
larger and more significant differences in frequency are
obtained between parents whose education is eighth—grade-
or-less and the other levels of education, but not between

parents in groups between high school attendance and college

graduation.

 

1Tables are provided in the Appendix which show
viewing frequency according.to age and education. See
Appendix IV, Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5.

50

The eighth question posed in this study was: what
are parents' attitudes toward children's programming? The
responses of parents, concerning their program prohibitions
and programs which they preferred their children would not
watch, offered some general answers to this question. Of
the 518 parents who responded, 346 named no program which
they wished their children would not watch.42 This large
part of the group, by its silence, accepted children's
programs and voiced no concern. When the same parents were
asked if they prohibited any children's programs, the great
majority answered that they did not.43 This, also, is a
measure of parental acceptance of children's programs as
being of sufficient quality for their youngsters to View.

Parents of children of all ages reported that
programs were worse in only 1% of the responses made to
a question about changes in program quality.44 The largest
group felt that programs had improved; a fourth found no
change; and one—fifth had no opinion. Responses for different

age groups of children showed that a majority of the parents

 

42Appendix IV, Table 11.
43 .
Appendix IV, Table 12.

44Appendix IV, Table 6.

51

of all age groups indicated an improvement in program quality.

When asked whether the majority of programs were
"helpful" or "harmful" for their children, only a very few
replied "harmfuli"45 Almost two-thirds of the responding
parents said "helpful" and one-third offered "no opinion."
As in the improved—worse category, the two-year-olds had
the lowest percentage in the positive attitude group, while
the four-year—olds had the highest percentage of "helpful"
replies. The rather high percentage of "no opinion"
responses may have been due to the positive and negative
strength of the words "helpful" and "harmful." Respondents
may have used the "no opinion" as a middle ground between
the two extremes which were offered.

Where these replies were studied with regard to
parental education levels it was noted that the improved—
worse reactions varied with the levels. At the eighth-
grade-or—less level, one—third felt that programs had
improved, but at the next level, high school attendance,
two—thirds felt that they had improved. This variation was
not accounted for by responses that the programs had gotten

worse, but in a larger number of the lower education group

 

45See Appendix IV, Table 7.

52

registering an undecided answer. Those parents who had
completed a year or more of graduate study generally felt
that programs had not improved or indicated that they were
undecided as to any change in quality of programs.

Although most of the parents found programs
"helpful," this response varied with the education level
of the parents. It ranged from just over half of those
respondents who had attended college and those with a year
or more of graduate study up to almost three out of four
college graduates.47

In answer to question eight, results suggest that
parents tend to regard children's programming as satisfactory
and adequate. Parents in highest and lowest levels of
education are less positive about changes or about the help-
ful nature of today's programs for children. Parents of
two-year—old children are less positive about programming.

Question nine asked if children used, in their
play activities, the content of programs which they viewed.
Parents reported thatcnmn:half of the children did use

television experiences later in their play. The youngest

 

46A table reflecting these and other education level

responses is in Appendix IV, Table 8.

47See Appendix IV, Table 9 for‘education level
responses to "harmful—helpful" programs.

53

children in the survey built on these situations in fewer
of the homes, but the three—year—old children frequently
used ideas derived from television. As Table 14 shows, no
pattern of use.seemed to develop from the younger to the
older children.

Table 14. Children's use of program content ideas in play
activities by different ages.

N 518*

 

 

Children's Age Groups

 

 

2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Use TV in Play
N 294 40% 66% 57% 62%
57%
Do Net Use TV
in Play 60% 34% 43% 38%
N 223
43%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to use of television
in play.

Note: percentages total vertically.

The answer to children's use of television content
in play activities seems to be "yes and no"; "yes" in a

majority of homes for children three, four, and five years

of age, and no in a majority of homes of children two

years of age.

54

The tenth question was: do children respond to the
television performers' requests to participate in programs?
Results showed that most young children did respond to the
television performers' requests and did participate when
asked. The highest response was for the four—year-old group
and the lowest was for the two-year—old group. The percentages
reported for each age group increased until the age of five
when response receded to match the three-year—old level.
Disregarding age, a large majority of the parents reported
that their children responded to the television performers'
requests to participate inprograms.

The last question formally established in this research
study inquired as to whether young children watch more or
less television in homes where there are older children.

There were 373 homes reported as having older siblings and

144 homes as having none. In those homes where older siblings
resided, parents reported that the younger children's daily
median viewing time was two hours, twenty minutes. In homes
with no siblings, viewing was reported as two hours, thirty-

five minutes.

 

48See Appendix II, Table 33 for tabular answer to
question ten.

49Distribution of percentages of children falling
into each hour category can be seen in Appendix II, Table 19.

55

There appear to be somewhat larger differences in
viewing when age groups are considered. For example, two—
year—old children with older siblings had a median daily
viewing of one hour, forty minutes, and those without older
siblings had a median daily viewing of two hours, ten minutes.
Three—year—old children followed the same pattern with a
slightly smaller difference.50 These variations in younger
children were not discernible in the viewing of four and
five-year-olds.51 It appears that, although the presence of
older siblings in the home leads to less viewing on the part
of the very young, by the age of four, differences in amount
of viewing in homes with and without older siblings are not
significant. The variance in amount of viewing of the young
children may possibly be attributed to the control that
older children exercise over program selection. This could
result in a lack of interest on the part of the two and three-

year-olds, in the programs designed for older viewers.

Additional Findings

 

In addition to providing the preceding answers to

 

50Viewing for the two and three-year—olds with older
siblings is recorded in Appendix II, Tables 20 and 21.

51Four and five-year—olds viewing with older siblings
is indicated in Appendix II, Tables 22 and 23.

56

questions and hypotheses, the analyzed data offers information
about the number of sets available and the amount of viewing,
the number of channels receivable and amount of viewing, and
the number of children viewing with other children, with
parents, and alone.

For children of preschool age, more than one set
in the home increases viewing slightly. Those children with
one set available had an average daily viewing figure of two
hours, twenty minutes, compared to those who had multiple
sets and an average daily viewing figure of two hours,
thirty-five minutes.

Children of various ages change in their televiewing
use pattern depending upon the number of sets they have
available: two—year—olds watch less television daily with
multiple sets, three—year—olds view slightly more, four—
year-olds are at the same level whether single or multiple
sets are in the home, and five-year-olds watch more tele—
vision where multiple sets are available.53 The figures
for two-year-olds were based on only fourteen homes with

multiple sets and probably do not adequately represent the

 

52 . . . . . . .
Appendix II, Table 6 details VieWing distribution
with one and with more than one set.

53Comparison of Tables 7, 8, 9, and 10 in Appendix II.

57

two—year-old population.

Comparisons made in amount of televiewing where two
and five channels were available, showed somewhat greater
daily median viewing with the larger number of channels.
Comparisons were made of these numbers of channels because
an approximately equal number of homes reported receiving
two or five channels. Average daily viewing for children
of all ages was two hours, twenty minutes for homes with
two channels and two hours, forty minutes in homes with
five channels.54

Age of the child had little influence on more or
less viewing with two or five channels, except for a rise
in the number of hours viewed in both receiving situations.
For each age group, daily median viewing is greater in homes
where five channels are received than in homes with two
channels.

Viewing experiences which children share with

siblings, parents, or others were also reported in the

 

54Appendix II, Table 11 contains percentages of

viewing per channel.

55Comparison of Tables 12 through 15 in Appendix II
will reflect amounts of viewing with single and multiple
channels for different age groups.

58

questionnaire answers. Televiewing with siblings is the
normal situation in a majority of the homes with parents

or other adults watching with the young children in only

a very few of them. In just over a third of the homes,
children usually watch alone. Increases in children's ages
generally tend to increase viewing with siblings.56 Like—
wise, age increases account for a decline in percentage

of television viewing done alone. Viewing with parents

also tapers off with greater age.

 

6Appendix III, Table 3 shows shared viewing ex—
periences on an age—by-age basis.

CHAPTER IV

SUMMARY

In an earlier chapter the purpose of this study
was outlined as fourfold: first, to discover the quantity
of television viewing of young children: secondly, to deter—
mine the sources of and amount of control exerciSed over
children's viewing; thirdly, to investigate the nature of
the conditions under which televiewing occurs and the responses
or reactions children express in their attendance to the
medium; and lastly, to seek from parents their feelings and
attitudes toward programming materials offered their children.
These purposes have been answered in varying degrees
by the results presented in the preceding chapter. There
follows a review of and comments on the findings and a

statement of possible research applications.

Review of the Findings

The surveyed population consisted of 518 parents
who represented 252 female and 266 male children between two

and six years of age. Television was available to all these

59

60

children (75% of the total original population of 700) and
it was viewed in all homes where questionnaires were com-
pleted. The terminal education level of over 80% of those

interviewed was at least high school graduation.

‘Quantity of Viewing.--Chi1dren of even the youngest
age group were found to be watching significantly large
amounts of television daily. Televiewing ranged from a
median daily attendance of one and three-quarters hours for
the two-year-olds to a high of two hours and fifty minutes
for the four-year-olds.

Although this study was able to substantiate the
viewing of the youngest group of children, a point of
separation between those who View and those who don't
remains to be established. It appears that viewing patterns
havebeen developed for the two—year-olds and they are well
on their way to increasingly greater uses of the medium.
The point at which children first begin attending the
medium and responding to its offerings appears to be lower
than age two. This is even more emphatically brought to
focus when it is remembered that those children included
in the two—year-old group were not from all levels of two—

year-age, but were those in the first six months of the

61

age group. Apparently, viewing begins at some level between
the one and two-year period. Some serious question might
well be raised as to the understanding level of the two-
year-old viewers and this question would be even more
appropriate for those of lesser age.

The materials which interested and held the attention
of the two-year—old were somewhat different from those which
held the older groups. This same difference might be sus—
pected between the two-year olds and those of less age.
Although not accounted for in the questionnaire responses,
several parents of the two—year-olds mentioned the interest
which these youngsters took in commercial messages. Since
the commercials are of much shorter length than the program
segments, involve in many cases sounds and sights not in
other programming, and are highly designed to attract attention,
it might follow that these are the early viewing interests
of those who are two and less than two. The author, prompted
by unstructured parental responses, suspects that this is the
case and suggests that further research be conducted in this
area.

Increases in the age of children increased viewing,
except at the highest age level. The reduction in viewing

at this level was due in large measure to kindergarten -

62

attendance and the lack of time which these children had
available for viewing. Those non—kindergarten five-year-
olds continued the upward trend in viewing quantity.

Since kindergarten is part of the public school
system in Michigan, the large majority of the five-year-
olds were found to be in attendance. The daily length of the
session is between two and three hours. Children generally
attend either a morning or an afternoon class. Those in a
morning attendance pattern were in school during two hours
when stations provide an abundance of children's programming.
Those in the afternoon sessions were absent from home
during a period when children's programs are almost non-
existent. Almost one-fifth of the kindergarten child's
day is spent in a situation of no access to television. The
author feels that the lack of access to television programs
was the most significant cause of a reduction in the daily
viewing hour averages for the five-year-old children.

In addition to kindergarten attendance, three other
factors retarded viewing quantity: education level of the
parents, presence of older siblings in the home, and seasonal
change. Almost 20% less viewing occurred in homes where
education levels were highest. Reduction in televiewing

where siblings resided was substantial for the two and

63

three-year—old groups. The lower level of viewing due to
parental education was expected and can be explained partially
on the basis of larger parental involvements in young children's
decisions and choices. This, in fact, was borne out by the
study since viewing control was greater with greater amounts
of'education.

The reduction in viewing where older siblings were
present was somewhat unexpected. The author began this study
with the notion that younger children with siblings in the
home would more frequently follow the activity patterns of
the older siblings: it ‘was reported that the older youngsters
viewed sixteen hours per week in the second grade, twenty-
three in the fourth grade, and twenty-five hours a week
in fifth grade.57 This, evidently, is not the case for
the youngest group of children. The explanation for this
phenomenon, however, may lie in the separation in maturity
levels which likely exists in these homes.

As has been shown in the preferences children show
for particular programs, age and maturity increases tend
to change viewing preferences. If the older siblings'

program preferences are different, the young children may

 

57Witty and Kinsella, "Televiewing: Some Observations

from Studies 1949—1962," op.cit., p. 772.

64

prefer not to enter into televiewing because of a lack of
interest in, and boredom with, the preferences of older
siblings. This reasoning presumes older sibling control
of the television set. This would seem very likely for
the two and three—year—old children. It is supported by
the survey results, also, in that sibling selection of
programs and channels was reported highest at the two and
three—year—old levels.

Although no fine measure of viewing differences due
to seasonal change was obtained through the study, a
highly noticeable decline in viewing does occur during

the summer months.

Program Preferences.-—Program preferences for these

 

young children were found to coincide rather closely with
those which their parents chose as best for them. Three of
the first five programs named by parents as "best" were ones
children included within the first five programs in their
own list of preferred viewing choices. This contrasts
rather sharply with preferences reported for parents and

school age children in 1961.58 These reports, cited for

 

58Witty and Kinsella, "A Report on Televiewing, 1961,"

op. cit., p. 27.

65

elementary grades one through three, only reflect one program
choice of children which parents also made within the first
five selections of each group.59 The difference, in adult
and child concepts of preferred programs, for elementary
pupils and preschool Children is probably due to a relaxation
of parental viewing controls for schOol age children. As
this study established, parental control recedes with in-
creased age. A continuation of this trend into the school
age years would help explain the variance between parental-
child program selection and preference.

The types of programs which the young children
watched most regularly, in age groups up to five, were
variety programs offering entertainment and instruction on
a quiet, low-key level, with adult performers providing
stories, games, music, and activities on a level commen-
surate with _preschool understanding. A trend toward cartoon
programs begins at the five-year level as the variety,
hosted-presentation recedes in popularity. At the age of
five a program with a story line and actors appears in the
list of ten preferred programs. An earlier study reported
that second and third grade children included three car-

toons, three situation comedies, and adult programs in their

 

591bid.

66

program preferences.

Gradual transitions in children's program selections
and preferences appear to be occurring from age two through
nine. Viewing preferences begin with children's variety
programs featuring "live" adult talent, progress to cartoons
with animal characters, to situational dramas including
animals or children, on to situation comedies of a light
adult nature, and by age nine include rather adult dramatic

presentations.

Viewing Control.--The sources of control over

 

children's television viewing were divided between the parent
and the child, and depended upon both the age of the child
and the education of the parent. The child at two years of
age selected channels or turned on a set in almost half of
the homes. There were indications that he met parental
restrictions which prevented him from viewing specific
programs in less than a third of the homes. As age increased,
the number of children who controlled the television set

and selected programs increased, until at the five—year-

old level only one-fourth of the parents usually helped in

the selection of viewing channels.

 

6OWitty and Kinsella, "Televiewing: Some Observations
from Studies 1949-1962," op. cit., p. 773.

67

While parental control lessens with increased age
of the child, control grows in homes where parental education
levels are high. The prohibition of particular children's
programs was highest among parents of higher education
levels. Also, children of parents with high education attain-
ment watched almost 20% less television than those with
lowest levels.

The education of parents and the age level of
children appear to modify differences in sources of control
and program prohibitions just as they do amounts of tele-
viewing. The major controlling variable tends to be
increased age of the child, with greater education of the
parents acting as a corollary to age. Increases in age are
accompanied by increases in maturity and the assignment of
more responsibility for the child. Parents of higher
education evidently regard increases in maturity and age
as requiring lesser amounts of child responsibility than

do parents of lower education.

Viewing Situations and Responses.—-Viewing situations
vary for children of different ages, but by adult standards,
children prefer to View television programs from a position
very close to the set. This desire on the part of the

children may be an attempt on their part to identify more

68

closely with the performer or an unconscious need to sit
close in order to eliminate visual distractions which
would be noticed from greater distances.

The content of television programs and commercial
announcements both prompted responses from children. The
commercials were repeated and acted upon by a majority of
the children. Greater numbers of the older children responded
to commercials. This is probably due to a larger awareness,
on the part of four and five-year-olds of the link between
announcements and products, brought about by increasing
exposure to the source of products when they accompany
parents to stores. While the younger child is not generally
aware of the process of acquisition of goods and services
and, further, cannot verbalize his requests in a Iorceful
manner, the older child can express his desires, knows that
items are purchased, and can connect the product in the com-
mercial with the item on the shelf. This larger awareness
on the part of the older children probably accounts for the
numerous uses of commercial slogans in conversation and the
requests most parents receive for purchases of advertised
items.

Television program content was responded to and

did provoke activity, both during and after the presentation,

69

for a majority of the children. The three—year—olds showed
greatest use of television content ideas in play situations
following viewing, and four—year-olds most frequently re—
sponded to performers' requests to participate in a tele—
vision program.

The degree of participation in activity and use of
program content in play may mean that performers have a high
credibility rating with children of these ages. These
performers, at times, are primary sources of information
and children tend to hold them in high esteem. This theory
is supported by the five-year—old who resists the programs
which seek such identification and who tends toward programs
which solicit passive attendance. Active involvement and
content use may be a function of the younger child's ability

to "believe in" the performer to a greater degree.

Parental Attitudes.--Responses of parents, which

 

reflect their attitudes toward programs available to their
children, show that a majority feel that children's pro-
gramming has improved and that viewing materials are helpful
to their children. Higher education levels tended to modify
these attitudes, less in the direction of non-favorable
response than toward response of a neutral "no change"

in programs answer. A surprisingly large group of parents

7O

allowed their children to watch any children's program

and made no effort to prohibit particular programs.

Possible Research Applications

Although the findings of this study do offer infor—
mation and data not previously reported, this research
effort was bound to specific limitations of geography,
time, resources, and areas of inquiry. It is to be expected,
therefore, that these results raise as many questions as
they partially answer.

Several facets of the study, which were only briefly
explored, could bear considerably greater probing and research.

Although this study yielded few responses indicating
non—televiewing and dealt almost exclusively with those who
did view television, future research into the nature of
cultural and social differences between the viewing and non-
viewing child would seem appropriate. Do the non-viewers
voluntarily absent themselves from television or do their
parents prohibit televiewing?

A complete area of study which deserves exploration
is that of children's program content: the selectors and
designers of content, the kinds of program materials which

"involve" children in participation while viewing, the

71

frequency and nature of positive-negative appeals in children's
programs, the nature of specific overt responses to program
materials, and the motivations of programmers of children's
television materials; all are areas which directly concern
broadcasters and parents.

In-depth studies of children involved in viewing
situations, where a variety of programs are presented, could
offer the producer of children's programs guides to content
choices.

Another area into which this study probed very
briefly was that of seasonal viewing. Weather and program
availabilities were thought to be the influencing factors.
This assumption, although rather logically founded, is un-
tested. A study which would explore viewing in other climatic
situations during comparable programming periods would help
determine the degree of influence weather maintains over
viewing quantity. A study similar in content and design to
the present one, if undertaken during the summer months,
might disclose the degree of seasonal variations in tele—
viewing.

Control of the viewing experiences of children was
partially gauged in the responses made to questions about

set control, program prohibitions, and amount of viewing,

72

but still lacks the definition which would result from a
study involving exploration of the rules, regulations,
direct supervision, and enforcement patterns which parents
use to oversee their children's television attendance.

Parental attitudes toward the quality of children's
programming materials were gathered on a very narrow positive-
negative scale. A considerable minority of the parents respond—
ing to this study indicated program prohibitions. More search—
ing questions which attempted to determine the motivations
which prompt parents to prohibit children's programs would
offer insights for producers and programmers of children's
television.

The nature of young children's attendance and response
to television, the attitudes and controls which parents apply
to children's television programming, and social and cultural
forces which attach to children's televiewing are largely
un-researched. The present study is no final answer to
these unknown quantities. It may, however, provoke new
questions and help provide partial insights into the nature

of children's televiewing experiences.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Bailyn, Lotte. Mass Media and Children. Washington:
American Psychological Association, 1959.

Himmelweit, Hilde, Oppenheim, A. N. and Vince, Pamela.
Television and the Child. London: Oxford University
Press, 1958.

Moser, Claus Adolf. Survey Methods in Social Investigation.
London: W. Heinemann, 1958.

Nafziger, Ralph O., and White, David M. Introduction to
Mass Communication Research. Baton Rouge: Louisiana
State University Press, 1958.

Parton, Mildred. Surveys, Polls, and Samples. New York:
Harper, 1950.

Schramm, Wilbur, Lyle, Jack, and Parker, Edwin. Television
in the Lives of Our Children. Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 1961.

Shayon, Robert. Television and Our Children. New York:
Longmans, Green, 1951.

Michigan Bell Telephone Company Lansing
Area Telephone Directory, March, 1962. Lansing,
Michigan.

 

Articles and Periodicals

Lazarus, Arnold Leslie. "Pupils' TV Habits," Educational
Leadership, XIII (January, 1956),.pp..241-42.

 

73

74

Witty, Paul. "Yen and TV: End of the First Round,"
National Parent Teacher, LIV (November, 1959),
pp. 8-9.

Witty, Paul and Kinsella, Paul J. "A Report on Televiewing
1961," Elementarnynglish, XXXIX, No. 1 (January,
1962), p. 27.

"Televiewing: Some Observations from
Studies 1949-1962," Elementarnynglish, XXXIX, No. 8
(December, 1962), pp. 772—79.

 

Public Documents

Ingham County, Mason, Michigan. Record of Births, City of
Lansing. June 1, 1957-November 30, 1960.

Ingham County, Mason, Michigan. Record of Births, Lansing
Township. June 1, l957-November 30, 1960.

 

Other Sources

General Telephone Company, Saint Johns, Michigan. Letter
from District Manager W. F. Graef. May 15, 1963.

Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Lansing, Michigan. Letter
from P. L. Werner, Manager. May 9, 1963.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I

BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

DESCRIPTIVE STATEMENTS ABOUT PROGRAMS

FOR WHICH VIEWING WAS REPORTED

The programs for which Viewing was reported are here
divided into five different groups in an effort to briefly
indicate their type and general nature. The five categories
include: children's variety; hosted cartoons; cartoon situ—

ations; cartoon anthologies; and drama-adventures.

Children's variety: These programs included performers and
offered a variety of entertainment and informational features.
They included:
"Allakazam"; a syndicated program offering stories and magic.
"Captain Kangaroo"; a network program with music, games,
stories, pictures, puppets, and cartoon stories.
Very low-key.

"Culver's Clubhouse"; a local program with games, science
subjects, animals, crafts, and information features.
"Discovery": a network informational program with treatments

of various subjects.
"Land of Play": a local live program with games, music,
finger-play, puppets, stories, and animals. Very

low—key.
77

78

"Light Time"; a program considering religious topics with
stories, puppets, and conversation—discussions.

"Magic Midway"; a circus variety show with widely differing
acts and talent.

"MiCkey Mouse Club"; a network program with guest performers
and cartoons.

"Ranger Jim"; a local live program which included puppets,
stories, and cartoons. (terminated during survey)

"Rae Deane and Friends": a local live program involving
puppets, stories, and cartoons.

"Romper Room": a program built around nursery school format
with local production of national scripting.

"Shari Lewis Show"; a network program including puppets,

songs, dances, stories, and guest performers.

Hosted cartoons: These programs were generally built around

 

a variety of different cartoon characters and motion picture
short subjects. They included only limited entertainment
and involved primarily introduction of cartoon subjects

by performers. The programs in this group included:

"Action Theatre" "Diver Dan"

"Bozo the Clown" "Kookie Kat"

"Buckeroo Rodeo" "Mr. Magic's Open House"
"Buffalo Bo" "Sagebrush Shorty"
"B'wana'Don" "Sausage Sinema"
"Cartoon Carnival" "Tam's Fun Time"

"Clubhouse Three"

79

Cartoon situations: These programs were solely cartoon in

 

content and treated the adventures of specific characters

who reappear in almost each episode. These programs were:
"Alvin" "The Flintstones"
"Beany and Cecil" "Heckle and Jeckle"
"Bugs Bunny" "Huckleberry Hound"
"Bullwinkle" "King Leonardo"
"Clutch Cargo Cartoons" "Mighty Mouse"
"Comedy Carnival" "Popeye Theatre"
"Davey and Goliath" "Quick Draw McGraw"
"Deputy Dawg" "Ruff and Reddy"
"Felix and Spunky" "Top Cat"
"Felix the Cat" "Yogi Bear"

Cartoon anthologies: In several instances, these cartoons

 

were similar to the hosted cartoons, but lacked a performer
who appeared with them. They included the following programs:

"Cartoon Capers" "Funews Cartoons"
"Comedy Matinee" "Kid Comics"

 

Drama-adventure: These programs involved story lines with
people or animals as their main characters:
"Frontier Circus" "Rin Tin Tin"

"Fury" "Superman"
"Lassie"

8O

MICHIGAN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY

Lansing 7, Michigan

May 9: 1963

Mr. Thomas L. Banks
5603 Buckingham
Haslett, Michigan

Dear Mr. Banks

In reply to your request the following information
will give the number of residence telephones in the Lansing exchanges:

l - IVANHOE (Lansing) = 31,165 Main residence services

- OXFORD (Holt) = 1,922 Main residence services

- EDGEWOOD (E. Lansing) = 8,657 Main residence services
- FEDERAL (Haslett) = 1,294 Main residence services
TURNER (Lansing) = 8,432 Main residence services

- MADISON (Dansville) = 309 Main residence services

- NIAGRA (Dimondale) = 731 Main residence services

- ORCHARD (Mason) = 2,219 Main residence services

- MITCHELL (Potterville) = 477 Main residence services

\OOOflmU'l-F'WN
I

We do not have the exact percentages of telephone to
the number of homes in these areas. A recent survey shows approximately
95% of the homes in the Lansing area have telephone service. The other
exchanges in the Lansing calling area are serviced by companies other
than Michigan Bell, therefore, we would not have any statistics on these
telephones available to us. Williamston, Bath, and DeWitt are all
serviced by General Telephone Company and Aurelius is serviced by the
Aurilius and VeVay Telephone Company. We are sure these offices will
furnish you with the information you need on these exchanges.

We hope these statistics will be of help to you. If
you have any further questions call our business office, 489-9911.

Yours very truly
/,,-’ '

_/ 7 "f ' I 1

’ , .—‘\ /, '. ‘ I ‘7 ._ A.“ .4

P. L. Werner
Manager

PLW:gm

GENERAL TELEPHONE COMPANY
or MICHIGAN

St. Johns, Michi an
May 15, 1963

Mr. Thomas Banks
5603 Buckingham Road
Haslett, Michigan

Dear Mr. Banks

As of March 31, 1963 the following General Telephone
Company exchanges served main residence telephone as listed
below. The figures exclude all business telephones and
residence extensions.

Bath SS9
DEVI]: UL 973
Grand Ledge 281h
Williamston 1273

We welcome any opportunity to asoist in studies such
as yours. Please let us know if further information is
needed.

Sincerely,

n. F.
District M:nager

81

82

 

 

m¢¢.m hom.m omm.m moa.m HNH.m eao.m mmo.m mayhem HMDOB
N m 0 mm mom mom mmm QHEmCBOB mcflmsmq
ovv.m com.m omm.m H¢H.m mmm.m mmh.m mom.m mCflmcmq
moao mpao mpao mpao mpao mpao mpao
New» Hmmw ummh Hcm> Hmww new» new»

m N\H-e e N\H-m m m\a-m N

 

amneafleo no mam

spasm no woman

 

.masonm mom >9 QHSmCBOB ocm

mm®.HN Z

xoao mnemcmq pom mEDHHQ omumumflmmu mo HmQESZ .H mHQmE

83

 

 

 

Table 2. Number of homes with residential telephone service
in the Lansing, Michigan, local exchanges.
N 60,516
Exchange City No. of Telephones

Edgewood East Lansing 8,657
Federal HasleUt 1,294
Ivanhoe Lansing 31,165
Mitchell Potterville 477

Bath 559
National Grand Ledge 2,814
Niagra Dimondale 731
Northfield 'DeWitt 973
Olympic Williamston 1,273
Orchard Mason 2,219
Oxford Holt 1,922
Turner Lansing 8,432

 

84

.ZHHODOONAHOE annoy mommucoonmm “ODOZ

Xmm "OHQEmm Hmpou mo mmmucmoumma

 

005 Z
$0 Kw RN Km Rm mamfimm HmchHHO
mo ucmu me

one Z
Xmm Xmm Rea Ema Rom mmuflmscoaummso
ODOHQEOUCH
mo undo mom

 

 

 

as Z we Z OH Z mm Z mm Z
mmd >m>u5m Amaamo c Hmpmmv HOQEmZ UmumHHCD HO
Hmmsmmm OHHQU OZ >9 OZ umBmflfl OZ OOH>Hmm mconmmdme OZ
Rona Z

.COHOOHQEOOIOOO MOM common >Q mmwflmccoaummsv OODOHQEOOOH .m magma

85

Table 4. Sex of respondents.

 

 

 

N 518

Males ' Females
Number 34 484
Per Cent 7% 93%

 

Table 5. Children of each sex for different ages.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Sex Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Girls
N 252 57% 48% 46% 46%
49%
Boys
N 266 43% 52% 54% 54%
51%

 

NOte: percentages total vertically.

86

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 6. Education of parents in survey homes by sex of
parents.
N l,036*
Parental Education Level
1 Yr
8th or
Grade High High More
or School School College College Grad.
Under Attendance Graduate Attendance Graduate Study
N 46 N 162 N 459 N 198 N 107 N 64
Fathers 0 o o o o o
N 518 5%: 16%, 38A 19%: 13%, 9%:
Mothers o o o o o o
N 518 4%: 15%: 51%: 19%: 8%: 3/o
*Both sexes for all completed questionnaires.
Note: percentages total horizontally.
Table 7. Education of responding parents.
N 518
Males 34 Females 484
Parental Education Level
1 Yr.
8th or
Grade High High More
or School School College College Grad.
Under Attendance Graduate Attendance Graduate Study
Number 22 77 263 102 36 18
Per Cent 4% 15% 51% 20% 7% 3%

 

87

Table 8. Education of responding parents according to
children's ages.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Males 34 Females 484
Education Level Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Less Than High
School Graduate
N 99 15% 18% 17% 25%
19%
High School
Graduate
N 263 54% 53% 51% 46%
51%
College Non-
Graduate
N 102 19% 21% 23% 16%
20%
College Graduate
N 54 12% 8% 9% 13%

10%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

APPENDIX II

AMOUNTS, PREFERENCES, AND RESPONSES TO VIEWING

Table 1. Number of daily viewing hours for children of
different ages.

N 518*

 

 

Viewing Hours

Children's Age Groups

 

Less than 1 hour
N 49
9%

l to 2 hours
N 143
28%

2 to 3 hours
N 160
31%

3 hours or more
N 165
32%

 

2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
21% 12% 4% 4%
39% 28% 21% 24%
24% 32% 32% 34%
16% 28% 43% 38%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to number of viewing

hours.

Note: percentages total vertically.

89

90

Table 2. Portions of children's programs viewed by different
age children.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Portion Viewed Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Watch All
N 302 31% 52% 63% 82%
58%
Almost All
N 64 11% 13% 18% 8%
12%
About Half
N 122 45% 27% 17% 9%
24%
Very Little
N 30 13% 8% 2% 1%

6%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

91

Table 3. Viewing concentration of children of different

 

 

 

 

ages.
N 518
Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Play while
Watching
N 247 56% 43% 52% 41%
48%
Just Watch
'N 271 44% 57% 48% 59%
52%

 

Note: percentages total vertically-

Table 4. Seasonal viewing differences by age groups.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Seasonal Viewing Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Winter More
N 463 79% 89% 96% 93%
89%
Summer More
N l 0% 1% 0% 0%
1%
No Difference
N 36 11% 9% 2% 6%
7%
Don't Know
N 18 10% 1% 2% 1%

3%

Note: percentages total vertically.

 

C31:

92

Table 5. NUmber of daily viewing hours related to parental
education.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Education Level‘ No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less Than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
Less than High School
Graduate
N 99 8% 24% 30% 38%
19%
High School Graduate
N 263 7% 27% 34% 32%
51%
College Non—Graduate
N 102 13% 34% 27% 26%
20%
College Graduate
N 54 16% 29% 27% 28%

10%
Note: percentages total horizontally.

Table 6. NUmber of daily viewing hours in homes with single
and multiple sets.

 

 

 

 

N 518*
Sets Available No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less Than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours

One Set

N 426 10% 30% 29% 31%

82%
Two or More Sets

N 91 8% 19% 39% 34%

18%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to sets available.
Note: percentages total horizontally.

93

 

 

 

 

Table 7. NUmber of daily viewing hours of two—year-old
children in homes with single and multiple sets.
N 115*
Sets Available No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less Than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
One Set
N 100 19% 41% 24% 16%
88%
Two or More Sets
N 14 36% 29% 21% 14%
12%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to sets available.
Note: percentages total horizontally.

Table 8. NUmber of daily viewing hours of three—year-old
children in homes with single and multiple sets.

 

 

 

 

N 130
Sets Available No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less Than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
One Set
N 103 13% 29% 29% 29%
79%
Two or More Sets
N 27 4% 22% 48% 26%

21%

 

Note: percentages total horizontally.

94

Table 9. Number of viewing hours of four-year-old children
in homes with single and multiple sets.

 

 

 

 

N 130*
Sets Available No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
One Set
N 101 3% 23% 31% 43%
78%
Two or More Sets
N 28 3% 14% 40% 43%

22%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to sets available.
Note: percentages total horizontally.

Table 10. Number of daily viewing hours of five-year-old
children in homes with single and multiple sets

 

 

 

 

N 143
Sets Available No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours

One Set

N 121 4% 26% 34% 36%

85%
Two or More Sets

N 22 4% 11% 39% 46%

15%

 

Note: percentages total horizontally.

ICIII

1‘.

Fc

95

Table 11. NUmber of daily viewing hours in homes with

single and multiple channels.

 

 

 

 

N 518*
Channels Available No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
One Channel
N 25 16% 38% 24% 22%
4%
Two Channels
N 155 10% 31% 32% 27%
3 0%
Three Channels
N 144 14% 28% 27% 31%
2 8%
Four Channels
N 86 5% 23% 37% 35%
1 7%
Five Channels
N 83 4% 26% 30% 40%
1 6%
Over Five Channels
N 20 5% 20% 35% 40%

4%

 

*Five respondents gave no answer to channels available.

Note: percentages total horizontally.

96

 

 

 

Table 12. Number of daily viewing hours of two-year-old
children in homes with single and multiple channels.
N 115
Channels Available No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours

 

One Channel
N 8 25% 38% 12% 25%
7%
Two Channels
N 30 27% 50% 17% 6%
26%

Three Channels

N 33 35% 18% 23% 24%
29%
Four Channels
N 20 5% 45% 40% 10%
17%

Five Channels
N 21 9% 53% 24% 14%
18%

Over Five Channels
N 3 0% 33% 34% 33%
3%

 

Note: percentages total horizontally.

97

Table 13. Number of daily viewing hours of three—year—old
children in homes with single and multiple

 

 

 

 

channels.
N 130
Channels Available No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
One Channel
N 4 12% 75% 13% 0%
3%
Two Channels 12% 28% 32% 28%
N 51
3 9%
Three Channels
N 40 13% 29% 28% 30%
31%
Four Channels
N 18 11% 22% 39% 28%
14%
Five Channels
N 11 0% 18% 27% 55%
9%
Over Five Channels
N 6 16% 16% 68% 0%

4%

 

Note: percentages total horizontally.

98

Table 14. Number of daily viewing hours of four—year-old
children in homes with single and multiple

 

 

 

 

channels.
N 130*
Channels Available No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
One Channel
N 6 8% 25% 17% 50%
4%
Two Channels
N 42 5% 26% 31% 38%
33%
Three Channels
N 34 2% 24% 43% 31%
26%
Four Channels
N 19 5% 5% 35% 55%
15%
Five Channels
N 24 0% 17% 27% 56%
19%
Over Five Channels
N 3 0% 33% 0% 67%

3%

 

*Two respondents gave no answer to channels available.

Note: percentages total horizontally.

99

Table 15. NUmber of daily viewing hours of five—year-old
children in homes with single and multiple

 

 

 

 

 

channels.
N 143*
Channels Available No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
One Channel
N 7 14% 29% 50% 7%
5%
Two Channels
N 32 1% 23% 46% 30%
23%
Three Channels
N 37 6% 38% 18% 38%
26%
Four Channels
N 29 2% 19% 36% 43%
20%
Five Channels
N 27 4% 18% 37% 41%
19%
Over Five Channels
N 8 0% 12% 25% 63%
5%
*Three respondents gave no answer to channels avail—
able.

Note: percentages total horizontally.

 

 

100

Table 16. Number of daily viewing hours related to kinder—
garten attendance.

 

 

 

 

N 518*
Nursery School or
Kindergarten Attendance No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
6 Months or Less
N 135 3% 26% 36% 35%
26%
Over 6 Months
N 11 23% 13% 32% 32%
2%
No Attendance
N 371 11% 29% 29% 31%

72%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to attendance.
Note: Percentages total horizontally.

Table 17. Number of daily viewing hours of four-year—old
children related to nursery school attendance.

N 130*

 

 

No. of Hours Viewed Daily

 

 

3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
Nursery School
Attendance
N 19 5% 26% 37% 32%
15%
No NUrsery School
Attendance
N 110 2% 21% 31% 46%
85%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to nursery school
attendance.
Note: percentages total horizontally.

101

Table 18. NUmber of daily viewing hours of five-year-old
children related to kindergarten attendance.

N 143

 

No. of Hours Viewed Daily

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
Kindergarten Attendance
N 123 4% 25% 36% 35%
86%
No Kindergarten
Attendance
N 20 2% 20% 25% 53%
14%
Note: percentages total horizontally.
Table 19. Number of daily viewing hours in homes with older
siblings.
N 518*
No. of Hours Viewed Daily
3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
Older Siblings
N 373 10% 30% 30% 30%
72%
No Older Siblings
N 144 7% 23% 33% 37%
28%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to siblings in the home.

Note: percentages total horizontally.

Table 20.

102
Number of daily viewing hours of two—year—old
children in homes with older siblings.

N 115

No. of Hours Viewed Daily

 

 

 

3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
Older Siblings
N 89 21% 44% 25% 10%
77%
No Older Siblings
N 26 21% 25% 19% 35%
23%
Note: percentages total horizontally.
Table 21. Number of daily viewing hours of three-year—old

children in homes with older siblings.

N 130

No. of Hours Viewed Daily

 

 

Older Siblings

N 89
69%

No Older
N 41
31%

3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
12% 30% 33% 25%
Siblings
10% 21% 32% 37%

Note: percentages total horizontally.

103

Table 22. Number of daily viewing hours of four—year-old
children in homes with older siblings.

N 130*

 

No. of Hours Viewed Daily

 

 

3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
Older Siblings
N 93 2% 23% 31% 44%
72%
No Older Siblings
N 36 7% 16% 35% 42%
28%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to siblings in the home.

Note: percentages total horizontally.

Table 23. NUmber of daily viewing hours of five-year—old
children in homes with older siblings.

N 143

 

NO. of Hours Viewed Daily

 

 

3 or
Less than 1 to 2 2 to 3 More
1 Hour Hours Hours Hours
Older Siblings
N 102 4% 25% 32% 39%
71%
No Older Siblings
N 41 2% 23% 40% 35%
29%

 

Note: percentages total horizontally.

104

Table 24. Frequency with which children view adult programs
for different ages.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Frequency Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
View Every Day
N 121 15% 20% 22% 34%
2 3%
View Once a Week
N 147 26% 25% 26% 36%
29%
View Seldom
N 177 30% 43% 38% 26%
34%
Never View
N 73 29% 12% 14% 4%

14%

 

Note: percentagestotal vertically.

105

Table 25. Frequency with which children View older siblings
programs for different ages.

N 396*

 

 

Frequency

Children's Age Groups

 

View Every Day
N 317
80%

View Once a Week
N 37
9%

View Seldom
N 35
9%

Never View
N 7
2%

 

2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 90 N 97 N 107 N 102
90%» 77% 73% 82%

3% 10% 11% 12%

6% 11% 13% 5%

1% 2% 3% 1%

 

*Only those of survey age who had older siblings.

Note:

percentages total vertically.

106

Table 26. Frequency with which children View adult programs
related to parental education.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Education Level Frequency of Children's Viewing
Once a
Every Day Week Sometimes Never
Less than High School
Graduate
N 99 26% 24% 32% 18%
19%
High School Graduate
N 263 27% 27% 34% 12%
51%
College Non—Graduate
N 102 16% 33% 38% 13%
20%
College Graduate
N 54 15% 32% 35% 18%

10%

 

Note: percentages total horizontally.

107

Table 27. Children's programs most regularly viewed by
different ages.*

 

 

 

N 518
Children's Programs Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5

year year year year
olds olds olds olds All Ages
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143 N 518

 

Action Theatre 0%, 0% 1% 1% 1%
Allakazam 1% 11% 30% 33% 21%
Alvin 39% 59% 65% 72%» 58%
Beany and Cecil 14% 22% 35% 36% 27%
Bozo the Clown 22% 2% 35% 29% 22%
Buckeroo Rodeo 0% 2% 8% 7% 4%
Buffalo Bo 0% 0% 2% 1% 1%
Bugs Bunny 10% 20%. 37% 29% 24%
Bullwinkle 16% 42% 61% 44% 42%
B'wana Don 0% 1% 1% 2% 1%
Captain Kangaroo 70% 87% 88% 74% 80%
Cartoon Capers 3% 8% 22% 16% 12%
Cartoon Carnival 1% 10% 20% 17% 12%
Clubhouse Three 0% 1%. 4% 8% 3%
Clutch Cargo Cartoons 13% 20% 44% 38% 30%
Comedy Carnival 0% 4% 7% 6% 4%
Comedy Matinee 11% 36% 35% 38% 31%
Culver's Clubhouse 7% 9% 34%, 36% 22%
Davey and Goliath 11% 12% 15% 8% 11%
Deputy Dawg 10% 23% 33% 24% 23%
Diver Dan 0% 0% 3% 2% 1%
Discovery 8% 19% 24% 24% 19%
Felix and Spunky 1% 8% 18% 14% 11%
Felix the Cat 20% 48% 53% 40% 41%
Flintstones 10% 25% 47%. 41% 32%
Frontier Circus 0% 3% 14% 10% 7%
Funews Cartoons 0%» 1% 5%» 2% 2%
Fury 11% 28% 38% 39% 30%
Heckle and Jeckle 13% 36% 37% 36% 31%
ankleberry Hound 40% 59% 72% 82% 64%
Kid Komics 0% 1% 5% 4% 2%

King Leonardo 19% 24% 35% 37% 29%

108

Table 27. Continued.

 

 

 

Children's Programs Children's Age Groups

 

2 3 4 5
year year year year All Ages
olds olds olds olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143 N 518

 

Kookie Kat“ 0% 2% 2% 2% 2%
Land of Play 26% 30% 37% 23% 29%
Lassie 10% 22% 25% 24% 21%
Light Time 0% 1% 1% 1% 1%
Magic Midway 0% 5% 2% 4% 3%
Mickey Mouse Club 54% 58% 74% 82% 68%
Mighty Mouse 37% 7% 65% 73% 59%
Mr. Magic's Open House 11% 10% 29% 27% 20%
Popeye Theatre 7% 15% 27% 24% 19%
Quick Draw McGraw 9% 15% 32% 31% 22%
Ranger Jim 11% 51% 48% 29% 35%
Rae Deane and Friends 16% 28% 44% 34% 31%
Rin Tin Tin 9% 24% 30% 42% 27%
Romper Room 66% 62% 79% 50% 64%
Ruff and Reddy 3% 16% 25% 20% 16%
Sagebrush Shorty 0% 1% 2% 0% 1%
Sausage Sinema 0% 1% 0% 1% 1%
Shari Lewis 8% 21% 21% 24% 19%
Superman 0% 2% 2% 4% 2%
Tam's Fun Time 0% 8% 18% 13% 10%
Top Cat 4% 12% 28% 29% 19%
Yogi Bear 45% 54% 72% 79% 64%

 

*Totals of vertical and horizontal columns do not
reflect total percentages for separate age groups or for
specific children programs.

Note: The table is meant to be read in the following
manner: Using the program "Yogi Bear" as an example, 45% of
the two—year—olds watched the program regularly while 54%
of the three, 72% of the four, and 79% of the five-year-olds
were regular viewers. Of children of all ages, 64% regu-
larly watched "Yogi Bear."

Table 28.

children.

109

N 518

Ten programs most regularly viewed by all age

 

 

Program Order

Per Cent Viewing Regularly

 

 

 

 

 

1. Captain Kangaroo 80%
2. Mickey Mouse Club 68%
3. Huckleberry Hound 64%*
4. Romper Room 64%
5. Yogi Bear 64%*
6. Mighty Mouse 59%*
7. Alvin 58%*
8. Bullwinkle 42%*
9. Felix the Cat 41%*
10. Ranger Jim 35%
*Animated cartoons.
Table 29. Ten programs most regularly viewed by two-year-
olds.
N 115
Program Order Per Cent Viewing Regularly
1. Captain Kangaroo 70%
2. Romper Room 66%
3. Mickey Mouse Club 54%
4. Yogi Bear 45%*
5. Huckleberry Hound 40%*
6. Alvin 39%*
7. Mighty Mouse 37%*
8. Land of Play 26%
9. Bozo the Clown 22%
10. Felix the Cat 20%*

 

* Animated cartoon.

110

Table 30. Ten programs most regularly viewed by three-
year-olds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N 130
Program Order Per Cent Viewing Regularly
1. Captain Kangaroo 87%
2. Romper Room 62%
3. Alvin 59%*
4. Huckleberry Hound 59%*
5. Mickey Mouse Club 58%
6. Mighty Mouse 57%*
7. Yogi Bear 54%*
8. Ranger Jim 51%
9. Felix the Cat 48%*
10. Bullwinkle 42%*
*Animated cartoon.
Table 31. Ten programs most regularly viewed by four-year-
olds.
N 130
Program Order Per Cent Viewing Regularly
1. Captain Kangaroo 88%
2. Romper Room 79%
3. Mickey Mouse Club 74%
4. Huckleberry Hound 72%*
5. Yogi Bear 72%*
6. Alvin 65%*
7. Mighty Mouse 65%*
8. Bullwinkle 61%*
9. Felix the Cat 53%*
10. Ranger Jim 48%

 

*Animated cartoon.

111

 

 

 

Table 32. Ten programs most regularly viewed by five-year—
olds.
N 143
Program Order Per Cent Viewing Regularly
l. Huckleberry Hound 82%*
2. Mickey Mouse Club 82%
3. Yogi Bear 79%*
4. Captain Kangaroo 74%
5. Mighty Mouse 73%*
6. Alvin 72%*
7. Romper Room 50%
8. Bullwinkle 44%*
9. Rin Tin Tin 42%
10. The Flintstones 4l%*

 

*Animated cartoon.

112

Table 33. Children's response to television performers'
requests by different ages.
N 518

 

 

Children's Age Groups

 

 

2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Respond
N 335 58% 64% 72% 64%
65%
Do Not Respond
N 183 42% 36% 28% 36%

35%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

Table 34. Children's use of program content ideas in play
activities by different ages.

N 518*

 

 

Children's Age Groups

 

 

2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Use TV for Play
N 294 40% 66% 57% 62%
57%
Do Not Use TV
for Play
N 223 60% 34% 43% 38%
43%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to use of TV in play.

Note: percentages total vertically.

Table 35.

113

Children's repeating of television commercials
by different ages.

N 518

 

 

Children's Age Groups

 

2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143

Repeat Commercials
(Parents recalled

one)
N 232
45%

29% 62% 53% 35%

Repeat Commercials
(Parents did not

recall)

N 157
30%

25% 23% 34% 38%

Do Not Repeat
Commercials

N 129
25%

46% 15% 13% 27%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

114

Table 36. Children requesting products advertised on
television by different ages.

N 518

 

 

Children's Age Groups

 

2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143

 

Request Purchases
(Parents recall
one)
N 304 25% 68% 63% 73%
59%

Request Purchases
(Parents did not
recall)
N 73 8% 8% 25% 15%
14%

Do NOt Request
Purchases
N 141 67%. 24% 12% 12%
27%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

115

Table 37. Children requesting specific programs by different
ages.

N 518

 

 

Children's Age Groups

 

 

2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Request Specific
Programs
N 369 53% 68% 78% 83%
71%
Do Not Request
Specific
Programs
N 149 47% 32% 22% 17%
29%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

APPENDIX III

VIEWING SITUATION AND CONTROLS

Table 1. Children's viewing distance preferences by different

 

 

 

 

ages.
N 518
Preferred Distance Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Zero to 4 feet
N 153 38% 31% 31% 18%
29%
4 to 7 Feet
N 211 33% 43% 38% 48%
41%
7 to 10 Feet
N 78 14% 15% 16% 16%
15%
10 or More Feet
N 76 15% 11% 15% 18%

15%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

117

118

Table 2. Adults viewing distance preferences.

N 518

 

 

Preferred Viewing.Distance.

 

Zero to 5 feet 5 to 10 feet 10 or more feet

 

Number 3 204 311
Per Cent 1% 39% 60%

 

Table 3. Children's viewing experiences with others by
different ages.
N 518

 

— —
4 ht

 

 

Children's Age Groups

 

2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143

 

Watch Alone
N 194 40% 48% 38% 26%
38%

Watch with
Siblings
N 295 52% 49% 57% 69%
57%

Watch with
Parents
N 20 6% 2% 4% 3%
4%

Watch with All
Others
N 9 2% 1% 1% 2%
1%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

119

Table 4. Sources of children's program control and tuning
for different ages.

 

 

 

 

N 518*
Source of Control Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
The Child
N 252 25% 48% 49% 68%
49%
The Parent
N 202 56% 39% 45% 24%
40%
A Sibling
N 56 19% 12% 6% 7%
10%
Other Persons
N 2 0% 1% 0% 1%

1%

 

*Six respondents gave no answer to the selector or
tuner of programs.

Note: percentages total vertically.

120

 

 

 

Table 5. Sources of children's program control and tuning
related to parental education.
N 518*
Education Level Source of Control
The The A Other
Child Parent Sibling Person
N 252 N 202 N 56 N 2

 

Less than
High School Graduate
N 99 52% 37% 11% 0%
19%

High School Graduate
N 263 49% 40% 10% 1%
51%

College Non—Graduate
N 102 46% 41% 13% 0%
20%

College Graduate
N 54 48% 45% 7% 0%
10%

 

*Six respondents gave no answer to the selector or
tuner of programs.

Note: percentages total horizontally.

121

Table 6. Parents prohibiting some children's programs

related to parental education.

N 518

 

 

Education Levels

 

 

Less than High
High School School College College
Graduate Graduate Non-Graduate Graduate
N 99 N 263 N 102 N 54
Prohibits
Programs
N 151 20% 27% 37% 41%
29%
NO Prohibition
N 367 80% 73% 63% 59%

71%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

APPENDIX IV

PARENTAL ATTITUDES AND VIEWING

Table 1. Frequency with which parents View their children's

programs related to parental education.

N 518*

 

 

Education Level

Frequency of Parental Viewing

 

8th Grade or Under
N 22
4%

High School Attendance
N 77
15%

High School Graduate
N 263
51%

College Attendance
N 102
20%

College Graduate
N 54
10%

All Respondents

 

Daily Weekly Sometimes Never

N 210 N 123 N 139 N 45
32% 9% 46% 13%
41% 23% 31% 5%
40% 26% 24% 10%
42% 26% 24% 8%
45% 18%. 32% 5%
41% 24% 27% 8%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to frequency of

parental viewing.

Note: Percentages total horizontally.

123

124

 

 

 

Table 2. Frequency with which parents View their two—
year—old's programs related to parental
education.
N 115
Education Level Frequency of Parental Viewing
Daily Weekly Sometimes Never
N 50 N 24 N 30 N 11

 

Less than
High School Graduate
N 17 12% 29% 47% 12%
15%

High School Graduate
N 62 53% 21% 20% 6%
54%

College Non-Graduate
N 22 41% 18% 27% 14%
19%

College Graduate
N 14 43% 14% 29% 14%
12%

All Respondents 44% 21% 26% 9%

 

Note: percentages total horizontally.

125

Table 3. Frequency with which parents View their three-
year-old's programs related to parental education.

N 130*

 

 

Education Level

Frequency of Parental Viewing

 

Less than
High School Graduate
N 24
18%

High School Graduate
N 69
53%

College Non-Graduate
N 27
21%

College Graduate
N 10
8%

All Respondents

 

Daily weekly Sometimes Never

N 47 N 31 N 34 N 17
42% 21% 33% 4%
32% 24% 26% 18%
41% 30% 18% 11%
40% 20% 30% 10%
37% 24%. 26% 13%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to frequency of viewing.

Note: percentages total horizontally.

126

Table 4. Frequency with which parents View their four-

year-old's programs related to parental education.

N 130

 

 

Education Level

Frequency of Parental Viewing

 

 

 

Daily Weekly Sometimes Never
N 61 N 28 N 31 N 10
Less than
High School Graduate
N 22 50% 18% 27% 5%
17%
High School Graduate
N 66 49% 21% 20% 10%
51%
College Non—Graduate
N 30 40% 27% 27% 6%
23%
College Graduate
N 12 50% 17% 33% 0%
9%
All Respondents 47% 22% 24% 7%
Note: percentages total horizontally.

127

Table 5. Frequency with which parents view their five-

year-old's programs related to parental education.

N 143

 

 

Education Level

Frequency of Parental Viewing

 

 

Daily Weekly Sometimes Never
N 52 N 40 N 44 N 7
Less than
High School Graduate
N 36 42% 17% 33% 8%
25%
High School Graduate
N 66 27% 37% 32% 4%
47%
College Non—Graduate
N 23 48% 26% 22% 4%
16%
College Graduate
N 18 45% 22% 33% 0%
12%
All Respondents 36% 28% 31% 5%

 

Note: percentages total horizontally.

128

Table 6. Parents' attitudes toward children's program
quality changes by different ages.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Parents' Attitudes Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Programs Improved
N 285 51% 55% 62% 52%
55%
Programs Worse
N 7 1% 2% 1% 1%
1%
Programs Unchanged
N 128 20% 31% 22% 26%
25%
No Opinion
N 98 28% 12% 15%» 21%

19%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

129

Table 7. Parents' attitudes toward positive-negative nature
of children's programs by different ages.

 

 

 

 

N 518*
Parents' Attitudes Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Programs are
"Harmful"
N 16 3% 3% 4% 3%
3%
Programs are
"Helpful"
N 331 59% 63% 68% 65%
64%
No Opinion
N 170 38% 34% 28% 32%

33%

 

*One respondent gave no answer to nature of programs.

Note: percentages total vertically.

130

Table 8. Parents' attitudes toward children's program quality
changes related to parental education.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Parents' Educ ti n Lev ls
Attitudes a 0 e
l or
8th More
Grade High High Years
or School School College College Grad.
Less Attendance Graduate Attendance Graduate Study
N 22 ‘ N 77 . N 263 N 102 N 36 N 18
Programs-
Improved
N 285 36% ' 64% 56% 55% 50% 33%
55%
Programs
Worse
N 7 4% 0% 2% 1% 0% 0%
1%
Programs
Unchanged
N 128 14% 19% 24% 27% 31% 45%
25%
Undecided
N 98 46% 17% 18% 17% 19%, 22%
19%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

131

Table 9. Parents' attitudes toward positive—negative nature
of children's programs related to parental education.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Parents' .
Attitudes Education Levels
1 or
8th More
Grade High High Years
or School School College College Grad.
Less Attendance Graduate Attendance Graduate Study
N 22 N 77 N 263 N 102 N 36 N 18
Programs
are
"Harmful"
N 16 4% 0% 3% 4% 0% 5%
3%
Programs
are
"Helpful"
N 331 59% 65% 67% 56% 72% 56%
64%
No
Opinion
N 171 37% 35% 30% 40% 28% 39%
33%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

Table 10. Parental selections of

132

program by different ages.

N 518

"the best"

children's

 

 

Programs Named

Children's Age Groups

 

Captain Kangaroo
N 232
45%

Discovery
N 19
3%

Land of Play
N 20
4%

Mickey Mouse Club
N 26
5%

Romper Room
N 86
17%

Other Programs

N 53
10%

No Program Best
N 26
5%

No Opinion
N 56
11%

 

yearzolds year3olds year4olds yearsolds

N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
38% 56% 48% 38%

0% 4% 2% 8%

6% 5% 3% 1%

6% 5% 1% 8%

21% 13% 23% 11%

6% 7% 13% 14%

9% 3% 2% 5%

14% 7% 8% 15%

 

Note: percentages total vertically.

133

Table 11. Programs parents prefer their children not watch
by different ages.

 

 

 

 

N 518
Children's Programs Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Three Stooges
N 105 21% 14% 19% 26%
20%
All Other Programs*
N 67 4% 17% 19% 10%
13%
No Program Named
N 346 75% 69% 62% 64%

67%

 

*Other programs mentioned frequently, but no one
totaling more than 2% include: Comedy Matinee, Lassie,
Li'1 Rascals, Mr. Magic's Open House, Ranger Jim, and Rin Tin
Tin.

Note: percentages total vertically.

134

Table 12. Programs parents prohibit their children from
watching by different ages.

 

 

 

 

N 518*
Programs Prohibited Children's Age Groups
2 3 4 5
year olds year olds year olds year olds
N 115 N 130 N 130 N 143
Three Stooges
N 111 9% 23% 28% 23%
21%
All Other
Programs**
N 63 5% 13% 18% 11%
12%
No Programs Pro—
hibited
N 367 86% 68% 61% 69%
71%

 

*In some cases respondents gave more than one answer.
Total responses numbered 541, or 104%.

**Other programs included: Comedy Matinee, Lassie,
Mr. Magic's Open House, Our Gang, Ranger Jim, and others.

Note: percentages total vertically. Totals in excess
of 100% are due to multiple answers by some respondents.

APPENDIX V

SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE AND MAP

 

MICHIGAN B MICHIGAN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY
ELL AND INDEPENDENT COMPANY EXCHAN
LOMER PENINSULA GE AREAS

ii~‘4¥+_yy.44_ _
a c———~——4L. D I Ey_y___i+i‘uV‘iF

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INA! CITY I
JAIES .. ‘
(WAVE/R ISLAND LEVERINO I
751 (0 I EVEN/NC "’1 M) I
I mum CHENOYGAN ‘0
I Hm 8b
' sRRIHGs alums I‘
HWMwmrw
\.
ll/l I TLIAVI'AM INDIAN ‘III' \— I
NIH/NI all m. RIVER I‘ ONAWAV
ro- -.. III RDGERSJEITY >
RETOSMEY 5‘ 7:
W
M \ CHARLEVOIX AW Hump!” MOLvERINE POSEN LAKE V“
§ um: LAKE (rzv ‘fL a; mm (m
N I‘ITY 73,62:
§ 5. . BOYNE W l , n
K § ” WORTH FALLS O _
x E s. EAST Y NDERBILI s I '
\k 3 x I ORDAN (WW m “7) Im II. ,I ALRENA
I § § \ #3: CENTRAL ELMIRA " LACHINE "‘”"“",’“’”"
‘ (3 ‘t Y: 3&- ”Wigs“: mu m M) (6!: In a; ‘73 '7
I \ 8 [m “MM no"; K? m a, Imam, GAV 0 w I 1
2 LAK BAY ELLAIRE ALBA ‘ ." I'D mm“
‘8‘ MINI” ELK my am m :1 (AIM m M) RV 'I‘ "’ "’ ”’ y ”I, fHZ/A/fl[fl E
‘ (I c S 3;. ATLANTA °' I A r
\ I ‘3 ms ‘1“ s\ IW . HuRIIARIT Te '
“.55"..55'?f CEDAR “i we“ MINCELOMA f LEMISTON ”W” ARE 2
\Ix 1...; (III. mu m RIM W. m. L W "I ””55"”: I‘“ "‘ OSSINEK O
«.2936 m to I MAME ,_ ,1 m) A 01’ mm. )1} In I Ir»; {$2.33 I
' '5 WILLIAMS 2" Z
A ' .
1.1 'III'I'IA'I'I'IN BURG “W5“ c4 ,
. (v ‘— MI [I WI TRAVERSE CITY «6 [A‘lRI/rliguw 2.3 Lug
. 4‘ g ( IN" SOUTH GRAYLING I M o g' § 21;
I. A . , . m . .
; BLULAH ffmtg. BOARDMAN I ‘ “ m :L; 2 g. a
I OR 2 1.4mm m " rw'I :1 . E,
\/ «1 KINGSLEY I: U a f t: 5,.
‘ E CDPEMISH Txmcsm 751 m I , I N l ‘0 GLENNIE a:
I,” :. BUCKLEY FIFE LAKE u 14 ‘ 5% (MM/MIRA If;
I BEAR (MES/or r5; :0} H'G‘ms ROSCDMMO 4e“ 7“ “7} “£0 '
3 . ' MOORESTOIIII LAKE ‘I A...“ ROSE F551
$67?" HIE/(Inn. Hou ”max CITY HALL H
I II "‘ {My/E335 M MAN TON P TR W“; A. P Wm. OSCDDA
Mm“ ALEVA J I J ARE CITY "”II" * 5.3.5.3" "‘ m)
rum W ”"75" (AA/(:Jrrmm; ME ITT E \b H W ST TAWAS 3
I HARRIETTA WWW z : ST ”“5“ mm H
"' CAnI ’“ WEST BRANCH mg
L A I. \
MANISTEE YIELLSTON LC FLMOuTII g HOUGHTO g: § mum
”Toff” ”L HOXEVVILLE warm ,3“ LAKE E: s PRESCOTT m M)
(flu/Mt”? 7:1! 41m M‘ BA IN S (m 'L a; Q". m N)
I ALGER
mm" TUSTIN mm... II. TNTNING
ca) (wt/g, AU GRES ‘
MARION HARRISON “’ —
LNOINGION FOUNTAIN LUTHER LE m M Rn GLAONIN L. STER’LIIINIIII “2’55. “”1 v
I “A: 3‘ 0’ A“ man : 1 114a} $ ”214%?!
I c A: A.
4 s OTTVILLE ; STANDISH cIsEYILLE “Elfin...” PORT” HOPE
‘ v H \A an m u m M)
CARR BALONIN REEO CITV E ARI V
IIEAYERTON r I
mm (Nu III II FARWELL CLARE : INCENNING \\ ELK: m H mm
EIN 711 [W I
. O w I“ 2332:... 4
_ HART mm?" m. In ”W. I‘A‘éa’fi’ %' a
(«m m DFM/EM I ma RAPIDS (u WEIDMANM ' ‘ LIN OD SEBE' EN—
__ ‘W Z a, ROSEBUSH SANFORD WAING DAL TY
HE P REMus ”.f‘fifi'” Auau um MINoEN Cl,
SHELBY (G’NSTFEIR'D'IW MECOSTA «swam UNIDNVILLE GAGETOWN «A II. 0 Mod
I m 0, WHITE CLOUD smwm (WI MT PLEASANT BAY CIIY
MI“ } mm: m a) if?“ NH my my MIDLAND AKRON CASS CIT ITY J
BLANCHARD w,“ "M ' DECKERVILLE .—
mMc/mp m (I “SHEPHERD FRI HUNGER RGROVE ( am In or W
FREMONT IIDRLEV m a, m FAI CARD ROVER
WHITEHALL Ham" MENAYGO .u ”Km“ m “,Zfifi’or’fim S _
(5%61,7)0,T(“w4 OWARD CITY 75L Immama LA EONORE 3R: Q [LOUIS DREKEEN- REESE “KINGSTON a
5 (mum/Am rum) mm, Immarw E: 4: "$155,, R106 Ill HEMUICK 5mm”, 1. M/(r/ u}, E
CORAL “W E ; g: ALMA was” MW. ”5115. VASSAR SANOUSKY I
GRANT SM UM mum“ mm" mm as W In WWII ‘ ' FRINKiN- NAYYILLE mm) MARLEWE , ARRLEGATE I
°’, 2 3 Hum LI was» IEL CM.
(MUSKE In arm-x) '3‘ V BRANT ST MILLINGTON cm In a! nr MICK z
A I , CRYSTAL WI
I a GNMM) RAVENNA “SNOW I CEDAR "3;" V, (umu ”T: :A “A“ 3:511:32 CHARLES BIRCH RUN “”ifif‘ifi FOSTO PEEK cROSVIU-L as 5
(an IT; Diva t SPRINGS GREENVILLE 1; mg ”I": TO A LEV rm mm NORTH BRANCH BROWN CITY 2‘ I
. ,. m N ,. c, A r W
SPARTA (1.5., a AsON MW" ROWE” I”... W, stANING names: cm 2‘: COLUMBIAVILLE ,, I A. 4 a I
_" '1“;’,.4',:IKUH ZONE ROCKFORD :1 "VIII , “W” In ma; PIN (MUM/’51 ”0'77! If?!" E33 5” m a, was!) “L “2000 '
”I,” L”. ., . w m 11K” u If”, 1” h?! I. or
‘e GRAND 330553.91“ M 'M ALI: 8mm #2592! .55]? III" 5325'? MT. ORRIs (m m ”7"" "’5;
HAYIR (mm, ‘ ' "‘7 .1, ’1. 7"" FLUSHING mm mm ,
Y END" E H '0 FM“ ST J03“ , lowosso LINT 59% mm 3551'»?sz CAPAC W 65W?) 1'_
Q ”In”, wgompws Ag:E mm mm €57.57, gag: Wm, WI; WM II.9v-'.'.' ,m ,5. 0/ WI mm I, 3.4%, m 0 mg. PT HURON
ZONE I In...“ CREEK m mm M W ,
\ , L _ If; .L
”Mk?” II. “mm” 935‘” 55%.; m AW III II"; 'IME'III'w w :9, ILMONT MEMPHIS . Egg“ A.
E; l HOLLAND in I'M 2"“ ALTO K PORTLAND ’5 ”Em” LAINIGEIIILIIEM 9" ‘5’”? “[Tgflw ”:1 VI mm W: [W Aziéi‘ E
EEIAND AMESIONRL ' (m m or ‘ ORTONYILLE
9 1°“! WE LAK ,, PERRY , ~ , OXFORD AWN
om TOTE CENTENR CALEDONIA ”ESE“ ‘ “m 7‘ ’ '55:... mum! :7. BYRON '.""" ’ .55 '” TONE ., fijffi'fii'f') gI. CLAIR 5
WW REEPORI’ SON- 2 ~ch m :1; A m .1
\ ”L DORA MOUNE FIELD 3 HUGE '"11 IEIIION HOLLY u“ ORION y ,
:I | "000”” (mm 3 m m. arw ”A ‘ “AX CLARKSTON [ONE NEW Y: 6
§ “ MARATHON.“ “mm" "7 ”W W i ““5"“ ' ”22“”) PM” 1°“ AsIIINGTON HAVEN MN MW“
£995., ‘ HOPKINS MAYLANI vuiE LAKE Yum RocNEsTER CA W .§_ I
W LE .. “mm“ vm‘m" ' ”:3 Ho T If, I m Howm ”m‘ “'3. um: 3:? PONTIAC 10 E
H L "a t ”I; L VILLE -II E L ’ ‘ zONE ”Au...“
.'.._‘.. .‘fJAf’ E NASHVILLE JP}. MILFORD .a’ ”n" M" “” LGONAC
2 ALLEGAN MARTIN x: CHARLOTTE ASOI m (em 7:: a! I“: my CLEMENS
I k“ [Ill PULLMAN on m LIA—MI”) j§ SVILLE w”) WALLED m3?“ 1m w???
.mm fiSIuAAELI'IEII a» NY 330": BRIGHTON W “9"” N CW”
m a u PUIII- E§E 7 A m 5% (”AF¢Y WC mm L
\ IIIIII III" 533 GREGG wm A; a 2'1; é. may BELLEVUE mm mm II. a: PINCKNEY :0qu “my ”3'53? m $.33” ROZEOEI‘IE ‘_
‘2‘” :1- ’51!” ‘iés RICHLA 'm ‘ a“ ,“ ”‘ LYON NoRTHVILLE
V m.) I; 603 S N SPRINGPORY mm“ IINIIHGRE
B N §§ {r01 1. or AUGUSTA "Z”WT‘W’ In”; LA“ "m"
'7 covm O... ‘ WI “ BATTLE CREEK "m mm) DEXTER PLYMOUTH "’“ W
V AMI.» z KALAMAZoo 2 m OETR
WEAWL; P i a MARSHALL PARMA CHEIsEA W ”m IONE
OLOIIA': mm LAWRENCE a cum ALBION mm JACKSON Lm WAYNE R
A mm ”"m (m .... VPSILANTI IONE V '
55$?) ”1 4‘0) sea (In: In :0) ‘ 7
‘ we C m misg- Royakhuls my. .;
' I E AT “$7.73. WWW HOM MER ”" CHESTER sALINE ' ‘
I ENIIOA'IIIIOR 5mm Text/Cm '32: J ”‘7 ’1’ j’ VICKSBURG FULTON ATHENS TEgA'I'I'I‘Eu'I/A (MU/ow mm“ HORTON CUIIIKLAKE ”POLE“ “N “’1 W “M!” WILLIS AOS'IIYI'I' mix)? ' I
.L mam ”If: ”” uum III an, m “1 ff” mgwu mm UH— on: CORRECTED
E'IIURE ..-.'73¥.‘3L"W, 1'53““ (m 59305,” W ”CITY ITCHEIELR “W" III" "‘ " WM” MACON MILAN mm CARLE- " II
I IAOGM N BERRIEN REE w”). a JUNES— RTE-3'" ONSTED {my CUISEII (mm TON D g
m” 'c I ”I M w
. W037“ SPRINGS RIVERS “.5391"... "L" NORTH ADDISON " 5mm "m WW“ :TTW OUNOEE 3' " II'I'I'II'IOI'" “
‘ WWW SSOPOLIS VINDAUA ”’7 "1 "WW CENTLIIE- COLDWATERugIgIEY,,1,,,. ”Tum“; 1%,. ,A ”I x'
“ I! um, "” ”‘0’ L ’"N m l l m m I“
1 e ”a.“ BUCHANAN NILES “a w I 11%; "CONSTANTINE @742" am 1 mm ossEo ' W mm" "W" ' E a '9‘ ”WM '
I [W WEN EONARos ’“ "W WNW READING ’5" '5‘qu R I" "I "
0A was I on A, , , I, .w .. HUDSON mm | - H w I
é WILD K' a“... IE'IINIIQ'WI MHITE PIGEDN m IEIGLSI AW) gm 6’ [WW M “m” . ' ”E. a, “” 15:3 "HI SANO Fl 0 A
‘ II. mm , My; mm ”5,55“ "” ”L ”’ LAMBERTVILLE m
" ’ “m MORENCI m " ..
f REVENUES DEPARTMENT / N 0 / A N A (54%”ng Mm (93%" AIJIR (mud mm “a" w '7' I" m n into;
‘ m m) m ”J M m . m m} was" mm, _______
' = Tamar” " "'0'“ H / 0 3mm ”RAIL...
‘ I V’ma/ SHEET I or 2 SHEEYS
I
I
A I .
I B I T
' D I r:
' '- I F I G
L
Key- Outl' -
o l .
ned portion defines the t l
the Lansing Michi l e ephone exchanges within
I an .
9 I ocal calling area.
d“
4
\-f

PRINTING SERVICE E-ZIB7

 

 

137

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(”Thank you, but we are only inter-
(ested in children of those ages in
(our present study."

 

Name Age Quest. No. (4-6)__
. D
Parents Call No ate
2
Address 3
4
Respondent: M F
Tel. No. am
Recall: Day Hr pm
HELLO. WE ARE CONDUCTING A RESEARCH STUDY OF
THE TELEVISION VIEWING OF YOUNG CHILDREN. IF
YOU HAVE A FEW MINUTES' THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS
I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU .
(if busy, ask for a time to call back)
1. How many TV sets do you have in your home that are in
working order?
(if 'None', terminate inter-I
l 2 3 None (view with: "Thank you, but) 9)
(l) (2) (3) (O) (we are only recording infor-)
(mation about children who )
(have access to a TV." )
2. On which channels do you receive a good picture?
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 Don't Know/ 10)
(l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) No Answer
(0)
3. Do you have a youngster between two and five and a
half in your home?
Yes—l No-2 (if NO , terminate interView With: 11)

vvvv

\l
O

138

How old is the youngster?

2 3 4 5 (if more than one child, specify) 12)
(l) (2) (3) (4) (from age as given above. )

A little girl or a boy?
Girl-l Boy—2 13)

Has he(she) attended a nursery school or
kindergarten regularly?

Yes-l No—2 (if 'Yes':) For how long a time? 14)

3 mos 6 mos 9 mos 1 yr Over 1 yr
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 15)

Does your child watch television at all?
Yes—l No—2 (if 'NO', skip to question #30) 16)

How many hours did your youngster watch TV
yesterday (Friday)? (Monday calls)

Less than 1/2 1/2 1 1-1/2 2 2—1/2 3
(l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

17)
More than 3
(8)

How many hours did he(she) watch day before

yesterday (Friday)? (Tues. call)

Less than l/2 l/2 l l-l/2 2 2-l/2 3

(l) (2) (3) b4) (5) (6) (7)

18)

More than 3
(8)

As I read this list of programs which are considered
to be programs for children, will you please indicate
those programs your youngster watches almost every-
time they come on? If you watch any of these programs
with your child, would you also tell me which ones

you watch?

139

Programs Children Adults Both Neither
Watch Watch Watch Watch
Action Theatre 1 2 3 0 l9)___
Allakazam l 2 3 O 20)____
Alvin 1 2 3 o 21)_
Beany and Cecil l 2 3 O 22)___
Bozo the Clown l 2 3 O 23)___
Buckeroo Rodeo l 2 3 O 24)___
Buffalo B0 1 2 3 0 25)___
Bugs Bunny 1 2 3 O 26)____
Bullwinkle l 2 3 O 27)____
B'wana Don l 2 3 0 28)___
Captain Kangaroo l 2 3 O 29)___
Cartoon Capers l 2 3 O 30)___
Cartoon Carnival 1 2 3 0 3l)___
Clubhouse Three 1 2 3 O 32)___
Clutch Cargo Cartoons 1 2 3 0 33L___
Comedy Carnival 1 2 3 O 34)___
Comedy Matinee l 2 3 O 35)___
Culver's Clubhouse l 2 3 0 36)____
Davey and Goliath l 2 3 O 37)___
Deputy Dawg l 2 3 O 38)____
Diver Dan 1 2 3 O 39)___
Programs Children Adults Both Neither
Watch Watch Watch Watch
Discovery 1 2 3 0 40)___
Felix and Spunky l 2 3 0 4l)___
Felix the Cat 1 2 3 O 42)___
Flintstones l 2 3 O 43)___
Frontier Circus 1 2 3 O 44)___
Funews Cartoons 1 2 3 0 45)___
Fury 1 2 3 O 46)____
Heckle and Jeckle l 2 3 O 47)___
Huckleberry Hound l 2 3 0 48)___
Kid Komics l 2 3 O 49)___
King Leonardo l 2 3 O 50)___
Kookie Kat l 2 3 O 51)___
Land of Play 1 2 3 O 52)___
Light Time 1 2 3 O 53)___
Magic Midway l 2 3 0 54)___
Midkey Mouse Club 1 2 3 O 55)___

Programs

Mighty Mouse

Mr. Magic's Open
House

Popeye Theatre

Quick Draw McGraw

Ranger Jim

Rae Dean and Friends

Rin Tin Tin

Romper Room

Ruff and Reddy

Sagebrush Shorty

Sausage Sinema

Shari Lewis

Superman

Tam's Fun Time

Top Cat

Yogi Bear

Lassie

ll. Of the programs

the entire progr

Yes-l No—2 (if

12.

Childr
Watch

1

H PIA)4)AFHFJFJFJFJF‘F’F'F‘P'H

he(she)
am?

'NO':)

140

en Adults Both Neither
Watch Watch Watch

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 0

2 3 0

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 O

2 3 0
END OF CARD ONE

sees, does he(she) watch
How much of these programs

 

does he usually watch?

Almost All-l

television or just watch?

Play and Watch—l

13.

to sing, paint,

Yes-l

Wat

count,

Today-l This week—2

ch-2

Very Little-3

Does he (she) usually play while watching

On some programs the performers ask the children

or respond in some way.
Does your youngster usually respond to such
requests by doing some of the things requested?

things

No-2 (if 'YES':) When has he done these

most recently?

About Half-2

56)

U1
\l
v

58)

ONU'I
OKD
vv

61)
62)

0‘
(.0
V

64)
65)

0"
O
V

67)
68)
69)
70)
71)
72)—
80) 1

9)___

10)—

11)

12)

This month—3 Can't remember-4

13)____

14.

15.

l6.

l7.

l8.

19.

141

After a program has gone off does he (she) play

or pretend things he (she) saw happen on the

program?

Yes-l

No-2

14)

Does he (she) mimic TV commercials by repeating

slogans or singing parts of the commercials?

Yes-l No—2

(if 'YES':) Can you recall a commercial

he (she) mimics?

15)

 

(recall,

score l/no recall, score 3

Do you find your youngster asking for items as
a result of having seen them advertised on TV?

 

Yes-l No—2 (if 'YES':) Can you recall one such
item? 16)

(recall, score l/no recall, score 3)
How does the amount of time your child spends
watching TV during winter months compare with
summer? Which is more?
Winter more-l Summer more-2 No difference-3

Don't Know-4 17)
When your youngster watches television does he
(she) usually watch alone?
Yes-l No—2 (if 'NO':) With whom does he (she) 18)

watch?

Brother/Sister-l Parent-2 Friend-3 Other adult-4

Are there older brothers or sisters living at

home?

Yes-l

No-Z

(if 'NO',

skip to question #21)

19)

20)

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

142

How often does the younger child watch programs
that the older one sees?

Every day—l

At least once a week-2 Not often—3

Never—4

How often does your youngster watch programs
that adult members of the family see?

Every day-l

At least once a week—2 Not often—3

Never—4

When he (she) expresses a desire to watch TV,
who usually turns the set on or selects the
(channel for him (her)?

He/She does-l

Parent-2 Brother/Sister-3

Other adult-4

Does he (she) usually ask to watch a specific

program?

Yes—l No-2

About how many feet from the TV set would you say
your child likes to sit?

1 2 3 4
(l) (2) (3) (4)

5 6 7

8

9 10 or more

(5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (0)

About how many feet from the TV set do you sit
to watch television?

1 2 3 4
(1) (2) (3) (4)

5 6 7

8

9 10 or more

(5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (0)

How often do you get to watch the programs your
child is viewing?

Once a day—l

Once a week-2

Never—4

Once in a while-3

21)

22)

23)

24)

25)

26

27)

27.

28.

29.

143

Of the programs your youngster sees regularly,
which one do you feel is the best program for

him (her) to watch?

 

(categories 1-6)

(if a program is named:) Why do you feel that that

None-7 No opinion-8

program is the "best"?

 

Is there any program you wish he (she) would

not watch?

 

(categories l—6)

No-7

(if a program is named:) Why do you wish he

(she) wouldn't watch
that program?

 

Are there any children's programs you don't allow

your youngster to watch?

Yes—l No-2 (if 'YES':) Which programs are they?

(categories
1—6)

(for each
named)

C.

D.

 

 

 

 

What are your reasons for not allowing him

(her) to watch:

Program A.

 

Program B.

 

Program C.

 

Program D.

 

28)

29)

30)
31)
32)
33)

34)

144

Do you feel that the quality of children's programs
has been improving or has gotten worse in the
last year?

Improved-l Worse-2 No change-3 Don't know-4 35)

Which of these kinds of children's TV programs
are there more of today:

Harmful?-l (or) Helpful?—2 No opinion-3 36)

What is the name of the last school you
attended?

 

What was the last grade in school you completed?

8 or under 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
(0) (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

17 or over
(9)

What is the name of the last school your
husband (wife) attended?

3?)

 

What was the last grade in school your husband
(wife) completed?

8 or under 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
(0) (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

17 or over
(9) 38)

END OF CARD TWO 80)

 

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND COOPERATIONE

THE INFORMATION YOU'VE GIVEN WILL BE OF GREAT HELP

TO US. THANK YOU AGAIN .