I"!"Hill"JIIIUIIHHIHHHI!ll!!!IIIHIIIHHIIHHIHII 93 10486 0980 This is to certify that the dissertation entitled SEXUAL SOCIAL LEARNING VIA TELEVISION: AN EXPERIMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE POSSIBLE IMPACTS OF "VIDSEX" presented by Kimberly A. Neuendorf has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Pb - n - degree in Jonmnnination Date l/‘l’ fl MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 mum Michigan State University . ‘W‘P RETURNING MATERIALS: 1 IVIESI_J Place in book drop to I lJBRARJES remove this checkout from ‘ JgsziggzsL. your record. FINES wilI K __I, be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. x“ P' .'_ 1. .‘T‘ ,m i ' l- L I i t “m5, : a “ . ¢ ‘,,w,¢4?’" 4 - n " 7 .'._ 1‘ -v I A I i J . i 1 ~ , ”‘ 3,»; '- ’ "M'fi res-«l . 1.; . V . u t" .. ‘3 “I SEXUAL SOCIAL LEARNING VIA TELEVISION: AN EXPERIMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE POSSIBLE IMPACTS OF "VIDSEX" By Kimberly A. Neuendorf A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Communication 1982 ©1983 KIMBERLY ANN NEUENDORF All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT SEXUAL SOCIAL LEARNING VIA TELEVISION: AN EXPERIMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE POSSIBLE IMPACTS OF "VIDSEX" By Kimberly A. Neuendorf Against a backdrop of social and political concern over sexual content on television, this research explores the cognitive, affective, and behavioral consequences of the viewing of "vidsex." A sample of 234 college students were each individually experimentally exposed to one 15-minute televised "mini-movie" containing either highly explicit (R-rated version), low explicit (PG-rated version), or negligibly explicit (G-rated version) content portraying consensual sexual intercourse. A control group saw no stimulus tape. The results Show little evidence for the predicted social learning of perceptions, expectations, attitudes, and anticipated behaviors. Where support is gained, it applies only to the low explicit condition; the high explicit condition displays a trend of counter-supportive findings. Additional self-report measures do, however, show a relationship between voluntary exposure to media sex over time and some sexual attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I'd like to acknowledge the contribution of my committee members to both this dissertation and to my graduate education as a whole. My advisor, Dr. Bradley S. Greenberg, was an invaluable guide through the mysteries of graduate school. He has been all a good advisor should be and more. I am eternally grateful for his continued support through thick and thin. Dr. Charles Atkin's support throughout our long association is very much appreciated. My years working with him have been rewarding, and usually a lot of fun--providing me with many unforgettable moments in research! Dr. Thomas Muth was there when it all began for me--as one of my first professors, he encouraged me to pursue my interest in media research . . . and look where it got me!‘ Finally, how can one give credit to the contribution of a unique individual such as Dr. Felipe Korzenny? Not only has working with him been a great learning experience, but the vast enthusiasm with which he approaches each task makes long hours seem short, and difficult tasks seem easy. He continued to believe in me at moments when I felt no one else did, and is heavily responsible for the successful continuation of my graduate career. The research presented in this dissertation could not have been conducted without the tireless aid of four undergraduate research assistants--truly my partners in this crime--Tom Cutler, Pat LaBarbara, Jan Shultz, and Shari Francis Smith. Shari's continued participation in the research is especially appreciated and deserving of credit. And, as always, I must dedicate this effort to Robert Owen Neuendorf, who makes all my life's endeavors meaningful. m Accepted by the faculty of the Department of Commuhication, College of Communication Arts and Sciences, Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy ‘_€§irector 6f Th :is (d) Guidance Conmi ttee: gm Chair w () degree. Chapter II TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION ........................................ 1 Cognitive development theories as applied to sexual learning ...................... , ........... 3 Sexual learning in young people ..................... 7 Moral development theory as applied to sexual development ..................................... 10 Social learning theory as applied to sexual role development ..................................... 13 Young people's comprehension of televised content... 20 Effects of TV content: Evidence of social learning. 24 Sex on TV: Content Analyses ........................ 25 Effects of exposure to sex in the media: Empirical investigations .................................. 31 Development of a study of sexual social learning.... 34 Hypotheses. ......................................... 43 Amount of sex on TV and public reactions as indicated in popular literature ................. 44 Public reactions to sex on TV: Empirical investigations .................................. 53 The special case of research on pornography ......... 57 Bases for regulation of sexual content in the media. 63 Recapitulation of hypotheses ........................ 7O METHODS ............................................. 71 Experimental design.............. ................... 71 Pretest 1: .Five possible stimuli compared .......... 72 Pretest II: Edited stimuli compared ................ 74 The final stimulus tapes ............................ 82 Questionnaire devel0pment ........................... 83 The final study questionnaire ....................... 89 The sample .......................................... 100 Data collection procedures .......................... 102 Handling of completed questionnaires ................ 106 Index construction .................................. 107 Dependent variables ................................. 107 Mediating variables ................................. 113 The final indexes ................................... 117 Cell sizes .......................................... 117 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd.) Chapter Page III RESULTS ............................................. 120 Analysis procedures ................................. 120 Results for hypothesis testing: Affective outcomes. 122 Results for hypothesis testing: Cognitive outcomes. 130 Results for hypothesis testing: Behavioral outcomes ........................................ 134 Summary Of hypothesis testing ....................... 138 IV CONCLUSION .......................................... 142 Discussion of hypotheses tested: Summary and conclusions ..................................... 142 Unhypothesized findings ............................. 150 A methodological clarification ...................... 154 Comparison with past research ....................... 162 Future research. .................................... 163 Implications for policy ............................. 166 FOOTNOTES .................................................... 167 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................. 168 APPENDIX A: PRETEST I QUESTIONNAIRE ......................... A1 APPENDIX B: PRETEST II QUESTIONNAIRE ........................ BI APPENDIX C: TRANSCRIPTS OF STIMULUS TAPES ................... C1 APPENDIX D: PRETEST III QUESTIONNAIRE ....................... Dl APPENDIX E: FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE ............................. E1 APPENDIX F: SAMPLE PAGE FROM RANDOM ASSIGNMENT SCHEDULE ..... F1 APPENDIX C: PICTURES OF VIEWING ROOM ............. ' ........... 61 APPENDIX H: DIAGRAM 0F VIEWING ROOM ......................... H1 APPENDIX I: DATA COLLECTION PROTOCOL ........................ I1 APPENDIX J: DEBRIEFING HANDOUT .............................. J1 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Mean Scores for Pretest I: Five Possible Stimuli Compared ........................................ 75 2 Mean Scores for Pretest II: Edited Stimuli Compared ........................................ 79 Lengths of Stimulus Tapes (in Minutes) .............. 83 Items Measuring Dependent and Mediating Variables... 92 Descriptive Statistics for Dependent and Mediating Indexes ......................................... 118 6 Two-way Analyses Of Variance (Dependent Variables by Treatment by Film) ........................... 121 7 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV1: General Sex Attitudes ........................... 123 8 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV2: Casual Sex Attitudes ............................ 127 9 Analyses Of Variance and Covariance for DV3: Anti-gay Sex Attitudes .......................... 129 10 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV4: Perceptions of Sexual Intercourse (including ages)--As Shown in the Stimulus Tapes ........... 131 11 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV5: Perceptions Of Sexual Intercourse (excluding ages)--As Shown in the Stimulus Tapes ........... 132 12 ' Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV6: Expectations for Self re Sexual Intercourse-- As Shown in the Stimulus Tapes .................. 135 13 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV7: Perceived Likelihood of Engaging in Sexual Intercourse ..................................... 136 14 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV8: Eagerness for Engaging in Sexual Intercourse.... 139 15 Summary of Patterns and Significance Testing in the Tests of Hypotheses ......................... 140 16 Results of Multiple Regressions ..................... 152 vi Chapter I INTRODUCTION The development of sex-related awareness and knowledge in young people has received considerable attention from researchers in recent years. But this attention has focused mainly on 53; 5215 development (Romer and Cherry, l980: McCandless and Evans, l973; Roberts, l980). that is. learning what sets of behaviors are deemed appropriate for each sex in a given culture. No research has been done concerning the development of what one might term! égxggl Lglg§--learning what sexual behaviors are deemed appropriate for given situations and/or individuals. First and foremost, no theoretical perspective has been developed for or applied to the question of how young people acquire sexual knowledge. perceptions. and attitudes. The little normative research that has been conducted on the development of sexual knowledge. attitudes, and behaviors in young people has examined only briefly the sexual knowledge of children. their reported sources of sexual information, and their masturbatory activities (Elias and Gebhard, l969; Thornburg, l972). While some research has been done on children's reported interpersonal sources of sexual information, their knowledge of sexuality, and their sexual attitudes and behaviors (Roberts, l980a; Conn, l939; Conn, l950; Dickinson, 1978; Elias. 1969; Ellis, l966). and content analyses have documented the types and frequencies of sexual references in media (Greenberg, et al., l980), virtually 29 research has seemingly been 1 done which examines young people's exposure to. nor their comprehension of, sexual content in popular media. Likewise, few studies have addressed the issue of media imgacts on young people's sexual knowledge. perceptions, attitudes. or behaviors. The choice of the examination of possible mgglg impacts is not arbitrary. It strikes one who reads the reports of those few surveys on sources of sexual information (Angelino and Mech, 1955; Dickinson, l978; Farrell and others, l978. Spanier, l977; Thornburg, 1972) that mention of media sources is conspicuously lacking, having for some reason been excluded as an option by the researchers. Further, one must be cognizant of the fact that media (especially television) are freely available to the vast majority of children and young people. While parents may make a point of refraining from sexual behavior and from verbal sexual reference "in front of the children." parents typically cannot censor sexual content on TV prior to viewing by their children. Sexual behavior and verbal sexual references, of both low and high explicitness, do occur in noneducational television broadcast entertainment programming (Greenberg et al., l980). The content is there, most people are exposed to it to some extent, and the possible impacts of such exposure have not been examined, among children or adults. In this chapter, relevant theoretical and empirical works are examined in a consideration of people's development of sexual awareness, knowledge. and attitudes. Since no concise theory for sexual development has been brought forth. application of existing theories relating to psychological development will be considered. Secondly, social learning theory will more specifically be applied to the realm of sexual roles in a similar manner to the way it has been applied to conceptualizations of the acquisition of sex roles via media. Descriptive empirical works will be extensively reviewed, and a groundwork will be laid for proposing a study which examines the possible acquisition of sexual knowledge and attitudes through exposure to video content of a sexual nature. Finally, the social, legal, and political environments in which sexual roles are learned will be described. Cognitive development theories 2; agglied £2 sexual learning One psychological view of learning which assumes cognitive activity on the part of the individual is the cognitive development perspective (Strommen, McKinney, and Fitzgerald, 1977: Kohlberg, 1969). This set of theories has as its basis a number of assumptions, including the following: 1. Development involves basic transformations of cognitive structure which cannot be defined or explained by behaviorist learning concepts (reinforcement, repetition, etc.), and which must be explained by parameters of organizational wholes or systems of internal relations. For example, it allows for cognitive links among concepts and rules for the formation of these links, something which a behaviorist approach would not recognize. (e.g., If a child is afraid of dogs, knows that dogs are animals kept as pets, and also knows that cats are animals kept as pets, his/her initial reaction to a cat would be likely to be fear. A key issue is that the child would be capable of understanding why he/she felt fearful of the cat.) 2. Development of cognitive structure is the result of processes of interaction between aspects of the individual and aspects of the environment, rather than the direct effect of either alone. In other words, the environment does not work alone, imposing its structure upon the individual, as a behaviorist approach would stipulate. Nor is heredity all-important. (e.g., A child's performance on a Binet test may be in part attributable to the . heredity of general intelligence, but is likely to depend also on culturally learned behavior (e.g., knowing the word ”parallel").) 3. The direction of development of cognitive structure is toward greater eguilibrium in the individual-environment interaction. This implies greater balance through development between what is perceived by the individual and what is being perceived. This balancing, as opposed to a static correspondence of a concept to an object, manifests itself as processes: Logic, knowledge, adaptation. or development of "truth." (e.g., If a child's image of his mother proves to be "wrong" (discrepant from actual behaviors by the mother), the child will, a bit at a time. change his image to conform with the "real-world“ manifestations.) A. Affective development/functioning and cognitive development/functioning are parallel, not distinct realms. They represent different perspectives for looking at structural change. (e.g., A child may like ice cream. If he/she learns that sherbert is very similar to ice cream (a cognitive development), then he/she is likely to like sherbert also (an affective development).) (Kohlberg, l969, pp. SRO-3&9) Obviously, such a perspective is quite broad, and in fact a number of variations on the perspective have been forwarded by theorists. The most widely accepted theorist has been Piaget, who conceptualized the process of intellectual development as occurring in discrete stages. He saw the intellectual structure as changing when the individual encounters new information or circumstances with which the present intellectual structure is not equipped to cope. Adaptation then results, consisting of two simultaneous processes, accommodation and assimilation. Accommodation refers to the reshaping of intellectual structures so that they can now handle new information or a new event, whereas assimilation refers to the incorporation of the event or information into the intellectual structure (Strommen, McKinney, and Fitzgerald, 1977, p. h9). It may be seen that a cognitive development perspective of sexual learning would 39; rely primarily on a biological, deterministic interpretation of the development of sexuality in young people. Nor would it allow for an interpretation of sexual development in which learning does not include cognitive awareness and adjustment, but relies on simple conditioning. It should be noted that the development process, in the sexual realm and elsewhere, is not generally conceived of as ending abruptly at age eighteen or some other arbitrary marker of adulthood. Recent trends in developmental psychology include the recognition of "whole life" development. While little of the literature examines sex-related issues for any group older than young adults, and hence this chapter will not provide evidence for sexual development among older adults, it should be kept in mind that processes of development and change are variable as to time of occurrence across individuals, and are likely to continue in some form throughout an individual's lifetime. As Roberts (1980) notes in her discussion of sexual learning, "It is a life-long process that begins in earliest childhood and continues into old age. It involves not only the acquisition of factual information, but also the development of attitudes, values. beliefs and behavior patterns,” (p. l) and that "very little of the information and few of the attitudes relevant to understanding sexuality are learned by children (or by adults) through fggmgl_ (emphasis added) channels. Sexual learning takes place in many informal and incidental ways," (p. 2) including through the mass media. Recognizing that sexual development includes an essential cognitive component. a fair amount of research has been conducted on how and when children become aware of their own sexuality. Unlike pre-Freudian "sexology," which viewed sexuality as suddenly appearing with the onset of adolescence, the cognitive developmental approach assumes sexuality as developing over time as a groces . Although most of the research is aimed less at sexual development than "gender-role" learning, it is indirectly linked to sexuality in several aspects. Much of what appears under a label of sex-role learning involves elements that become associated with sexuality, but only gigs; sex becomes a salient and comprehensible issue in adolescence or later. For example, the meanings of and behaviors associated with masculinity and femininity are rehearsed and assimilated in many nonsexual ways, being applied sexually at a later relevant time (Simon and Gagnon, l969, p. 739). Obviously, sexuality is rooted in biological processes, capacities, and possibly even needs. Yet the interface of the biology with cognition is crucial from a developmental standpoint. For example, the infant playing with his penis does not engage in sexual activity in the sense of adult masturbation. The behavior is merely generally pleasurable as are many other activities. The adult observer imputes to the child the complex set of states that are usually associated with comparable adult sexual behavior. It is only though the processes of maturing and learning adult labels that the child is able to masturbate in the fuller sense of that behavior. Indeed, some scholars have held that the sexual area may be one of the few realms in which sociocultural influences are more important thatn biological cues (Simon and Gagnon, l969, p. 73h). Keeping this in mind, a brief review will be made of some of the research conducted on the questions of "when" and "where" individuals develop gender awareness and sexual knowledge. Sexual (gender) identity--one's sense of being male or female--is established before the age of three. About this time, children also learn the sex-role standards of the culture and acquire a set of sex-typed behaviors (Strommen, McKinney, and Fitzgerald, l977). For the normal child, such acquisition is not sexual in an erotic/reproductive sense. (Nor is it a dichotomous development; mutual development of "feminine" and "masculine" behaviors, called androgyny, is thought by many psychologists to result in a more adaptive individual.) As the child progresses to the stage of inquiring about "where babies come from," many parents are apprehensive to answer, fearing possible sexual experimentation on the part of the child. But these early orientative tendencies are not ”'sexual' in the adult sense of the word” (Conn, l9h0, p. llll). Nor is the matter-of-fact discussion of sexual topics with children likely to stimulate children to explore sexually beyond their own capacity to do so at the time (Conn, 1939). Only as various situations occur, and through accommodation and assimilation sexuality is incorporated into the individual's sex-role schema, does the erotic/reproductive nature of the child's gender become recognized and relevant. Sexual learning in young geogle A cognitive perspective would assume the ability of an individual to recognize his sexual learning. A great deal of descriptive work has been done analyzing youths' reported sources of sexual information, unfortunately without attempting to discern the mechanisms .by which information may be incorporated. Elias and Gebhard (l969) reported on data gathered by Alfred Kinsey in the pre-l955 time period. They note, relevant to the above discussion, that "(T)he sexual behavior of younger children often lacks the erotic intent attributed to similar adult activities, raising the question, in some cases, of the validity of labeling some childhood activities as sexual" (p. #02). With regard to sources of sexual information, the Kinsey data indicate that peers serve as the most frequently reported source, followed by mother and then father. There were found socioeconomic (SE5) differences, however, with the role of peers diminishing for those whose parents were deemed white-collar. For all, teachers were reported as unimportant as a source of sexual information. Film and electronic media were notably neglected as response options. SES differences were also reported for sexual knowledge and masturbation. Blue-collar children had more knowledge of sexual activities and were more likely to have masturbated. White-collar children had more abstract knowledge of regroductive functions. One recent exception to the rule that media have been ignored as possible sources of sex information for children is 3 I977 study conducted by the Project on Human Sexual Development. Over lhOO parents of children ages 3 through ll were interviewed about the sources of sex information that they felt played an important part in their child's life. Over 50% of the sample stated that they thought their children learned most about sexuality--other than from themselves--from television (Roberts, 1980, p. 10). However, no evidence was gained as to where the children actually gag obtain their sex information. Other studies of sources of sexual information have surveyed young adults (Thornburg, l972; Angelino and Mech, l955) with similar findings. Peers and the mother were reported as important sources. Fathers were not, however, and literature was reported as an additional frequent source of sexual information. Data over time (l96h-l97h) showed a general change from parents to friends as the stated sources of major sex information (Dickinson, 1978). With regard to the impact of sex information sources. there is evidence that for both males and females. there exists a moderate negative association between sexual activity and citing one's mother as a source of sex information. For females, sexual activity seems to be related positively to information from male friends and to independent reading. For males. sexual activity is associated with less input from clergy, and more from male and female friends and independent reading (Spanier, l977). Following the l97O report by the U.S. Commission of Pornography, which stated in part that the lack of sexual knowledge is related to the proclivity to engage in sex crimes, sex education courses were found to effectively provide essential sex information to young people who might not obtain it in any other manner (Monge. Ousek, and Lawless, l977; Farrell and Others, l978). A recent review of 33 empirical studies by Kilmann, Wanlass, Sabalis. and Sullivan (l981) found the research consensus to be that formal sex education efforts tend to result in gains in sexual knowledge and changes toward more liberal sex attitudes. although it was inconclusive as to effects on behaviors. There was a surprising shortage of studies on pre-college subjects due to difficulties in gaining access to these age groups. One study which did examine behavioral outcomes of sex education for college-aged individuals found no effect on premarital heterosexual involvement (Spanier, I978). The enlightenment of adults concerning such sex-related near-taboo topics as venereal disease 'has also been attempted in recent years. even on TV (Resnik, l972), with some success at changing knowledge and attitudes. 10 Greenberg and Gantz (1976) utilized both a field survey and an experiment to assess specific impacts of exposure to the PBS special, "VD Blues"--a serio-comic show hosted by Dick Cavett which tried, through skits and comedy, to break down barriers about talking about VD. In both the survey and the experiment, the researchers found exposure to be significantly related to greater knowledge about VD and also greater perceived knowledge. In the survey, it was additionally found that exposure was related to less perceived tabooness of the topic of VD, although this relationship was not found with the experiment. Adolescents' sexual interests were examined by Rubenstein et al. (1976). Ninth graders were given 112 sexual words and were asked to indicate their degree of interest in learning more about each. The top interest words for boys and girls were the same, showing a great similarity of interest in sexual intercourse, its consequences, and its contexts. Girls were more interested in words concerning control over sex and pregnancy (p. #87). The idea that sexuality is developed cognitively, and as an interface between biology and environmental cues, indicates that the awareness of these cues and the development of full consideration and understanding of these cues is crucial to sexual development. -A related development theory, that of moral development, may be called upon to provide a framework for considering social cues. Moral develogment theory 35 applied £2 sexual develogment According to Hoffman (1979). the legacy of Freud and Durkheim resulted in the agreement among social scientists that most people do not 11 go through life viewing society's moral norms (e.g., honesty, justice, fair play) as external, coercively imposed pressures. Moral internalization does occur, implying that a person is motivated to weigh his or her desires against the moral requirements of a situation. The research which originally focused on the role of parents has since expanded to include peers and popular mass media (e.g., radio, TV) as well as cognitive development and arousal of affects such as empathy and guilt (Hoffman, 1979: Hoffman, 1975; Hoffman, 1980). Lawrence Kohlberg has explicated a theory of moral development which views morality as cognitive in nature, and its development as moving through six stages of moral thinking, representing distinct successive degrees of internalization of socially-based moral sanctions: Stage 1: Obedience and punishment orientation. Stage 2: Naively egoistic orientation (action is justified if it satisfies needs of self or occasionally needs of others). Stage 3: Good-boy orientation, orientation to approval and to pleasing and helping others. Stage A: Authority and social-order maintaining orientation ("doing one's duty"). Stage 5: Contractual legalistic orientation (duty defined by contracts, recognizing notion of the good of the majority). 6: Conscience or principle orientation, orientation to mutual respect trust. (Ryan, 1976. PP. ilk-115) Stage The theory suggests that people make transition from stage to stage as a result of cognitive conflict. "Grappling with moral dilemmas and listening to the arguments at higher stages are key ingredients to moving up. However, . . . people can only 'take in' or fully understand moral reasoning at one level above their own“ (Ryan. 1979, p. 117). Not everyone reaches the final stages of the model; some may remain "Stage 2" people for life. For example, Kohlberg holds that ex-President Nixon's 12 problem was that not being a Stage 5 person, he really did not understand the Constitution (a ”Stage 5 document"). Nixon's public statements portray him as a "Stage A Law and Order Authoritarian,” while the presidential tapes reveal him to actually be a ”Stage 2 Naive Instrumental Hedonist" (p. 117). Ryan (1979) proposes that exposure to print or electronic media may speed up or inhibit the stage-transition process, by exposing an individual to real or fictional characters who operate at levels above or (below his own. Moral development theory has apparently not been applied to the development of sexuality and sexual behavior. Such an application makes sense only in a sense of considering how one learns cultural sanctions regarding sex, progressing from avoidance of sexual behavior (e.g., masturbation) or sex-related speech due to fear of punishment (Stage 1) to conformity with social standards of appropriate sexual behavior out of regard for others and one's own integrity (Stage 6). In this vein, it is obvious that indeed, not all individuals make it to Stage 6; many people remain at Stage 2 for the greater portion of their lives-~behaving sexually in a manner to maximize personal rewards. Implications for encounters between people of widely separated stages (sexually) are intriguing-~for example, could and would a long-term sexual relationship develop between a Stage 2 and a Stage 5 person? Would the Stage 2 person learn sexual morality from the Stage 5 person? The validity of applying such a theory of moral development is obviously important to creating a unified view of an individual's sexual development, in that it allows for the development of a person's sexual) '13 morality. In the U.S., this means the development of restrictive attitudes and values toward sex. The status ggg for adult Americans is a public system of values which are supportive of only adult marital coitus as a legitimate expression of sexuality (Gagnon, 196k, p. 21h). Thus, as a young person develops a sexual morality, it is likely to be a restrictive morality. The above applications of cognitive development and moral development theories to sexual development were made not in an attempt to 555; the assumptions of these theories, but rather to provide a theoretic background upon which tests of sexual 325121 learning might be made. Cognitive development principles imply that sexual social learning would be most likely to occur among those individuals who are cognitively capable of understanding the sexual nature of events and stimuli. Moral development principles note the restrictive nature of the sexual sanctions which people develop over time, and also the different successive degrees of internalization of socially-based moral sanctions. Keeping these background theories in mind, the following sections will develop a theoretic framework for and quantitative test of sexual social learning. Social Learning Theory 25 Agglied 59 Sexual Role Develoggent Social learning theory developed out of psychologists' need to explain the apparent acquisition of behaviors without direct or obvious reinforcement (Bandura, 1977). Unlike the classical behaviorist approach to learning, or drive theories ‘of learning, social learning ascribes importance to cognitive functioning. While behaviorism deems environmental forces all-important and drive theories hold that a person's 14 inner forces wholly determine learning activity, social learning theory holds that "psychological .functioning is explained in terms of a continuous reciprocal interaction of personal and environmental determinants. . Within this approach, symbolic, vicarious, and self-regulatory processes assume a prominent role" (PP. 11-12). Traditionally, psychological theories have held that learning of behaviors can occur only by performing behaviors and experiencing their results. Social learning theory allows additionally for learning by observing the behaviors of others and their consequences, recognizing the possibility of learning without tedious (and often dangerous) trial and error. The more costly and hazardous the possible errors, the greater the reliance on observational learning from competent models. Modeling of behaviors is an indispensable aspect of learning when certain novel forms of behavior can be conveyed effectively only through social cues, and at least a more efficient manner of learning in most situations. The capacity of humans to use symbols further enhances the effectiveness and efficiency of observational learning by allowing for verbal descriptors (Bandura, 1977, pp. 12-13). The entire iprocess of observational learning includes: (1) attentional processes, which are influenced by characteristics of the stimulus being modeled (e.g., complexity, distinctiveness) and characteristics of the observer (e.g., sensory capacities, perceptual set): (2) retention processes, including symbolic coding, cognitive organization, symbolic rehearsal, and motor rehearsal: (3) motor reproduction, being influenced by the observer's physical capabilities, availability of component responses, self-observation of the reproduction. 15 and accuracy of feedback; (h) motivational processes, consisting of external reinforcement, vicarious reinforcement. and self-reinforcement (p. 23). In brief, observational learning includes not only attention to and retention of behaviors, but also the possibility of reproducing such behaviors in appropriate settings. Reinforcement does play a part in this theory, however--such reproduction of behaviors would be mediated by internal and external motivations and perceived reinforcements. We may thus see how social learning theory combines personal and environmental factors to formulate a cohesive theory of learning. We may also see how developmental processes may alter the individual components (e.g., physical capabilities, cognitive organization) in the process of observational learning. ‘ Observational learning with a behavioral outcome may result in. two types of effects; Direct imitation (or counterimitation) and disinhibition (or inhibition). In direct imitation, the individual attempts to copy the model's behavior as closely as possible. Disinhibition refers to the increased likelihood of performing behaviors which fall into the same slag; as the modeled behavior. Also, the individual does not just learn new behavior from watching others, he also learns whether and when it is appropriate to act or avoid acting in certain ways. Two factors--vicarious consequences and the status of the modeI--are important in this regard. Vicarious consequences (rewards or punishments) are afforded the model as a result of his behavior, and are recognized by the observer and help determine whether the behavior will be perceived as being deemed appropriate. Behavior of a model is also more likely to be seen as appropriate by the observer when the model is of high 16 status as perceived by the observer (Liebert, Neale, and Davidson, 1973). Social learning theory may be applied to the acquisition of sexual knowledge, expectations, perceptions, and attitudes. While intuitively many of us might predict that for sexual activity to occur, no previous exposure to models need occur (i.e., Sexual success will result if we "let nature take its course.”), there is evidence from extremely restrictive societies that intercourse does not take place between married couples with no sexual education whatsoever (Byrne and Byrne, 1977). Also, studies on rhesus monkeys have found adult monkeys reared in isolation from mothers and peers completely incapable of adult heterosexual sex activity (Gagnon, , p. 216). It does seem that modeling may be very important in the learning of sexuality and sexual behaviors. A number of possible outcomes may accrue from social learning of sexual behaviors: 1. An individual may learn £25 to behave sexually, and which variations on the behavior are socially acceptable. For example, from watching his parents and others embrace, a child may find that kissing on the lips is acceptable but that kissing on the feet is not a socially acceptable sexual behavior in our culture. 2. An individual may learn under what conditions and with whom different sexual behaviors are deemed appropriate. For example, he may learn that intercourse in private is rewarded, while public displays are punished. He may find embracing by a. 17 heterosexual couple is accepted, while embracing by a homosexual couple is not. 3. An individual may also derive certain perceptions about the nature of sexual activity, such as frequency of occurrence of intercourse between a typical married couple, from observing models. Of course, these outcomes may further result in: 1. Expectations about how people will feel or behave sexually. This has implications for one's communicative interaction with others. For example, if a young woman has been consistently exposed to models who engage in extramarital affairs, and she meets a married man to whom she is attracted, she may expect the man to engage in intercourse with her. The man might be put off by this "unexpected” behavior, and terminate further communication with the woman. 2. Perceptions about how other people feel or behave sexually. This may have implications for one's own self-concept and evaluations of others. For example, if a teen-aged boy perceives that virtually no other teenagers are virgins, he may feel self-conscious about his own virginity. 3. Actual changes in sexual behavior. A woman, for example, might 18 use techniques for love-making described in a novel for her own sexual activities. Taken all together, such effects may form learned sexual roles--sets of expectations, perceptions, and behaviors attributable to a certain .role, including specifications for interaction with others. For example, from a variety of sources a woman might learn how a prostitute is expected to behave sexually, and use this set of information in dealing with prostitutes, handling issues of prostitution, or in herself acting as a prostitute. Other learned roles might include the "macho“ male, the nyphomaniac, the conservative family man, the priest, and numerous variations. That media portrayals provide images. and often quite distorted ones, which might contribute to learning of accepted behaviors and roles has been proposed by laymen and social scientists alike. Rowan and Mazie, media critics, have noted in reference to the films of the 1930's and l9hO's that "(A) generation of American moviegoers was given the impression that married couples slept only in twin beds, that crime never paid, that angry people rarely said anything harsher that 'darn'" (p. 118). And while critics 15 years ago bemoaned the distorted picture of sex in marriage portrayed on TV by Dick Van Dyke's twin bed arrangement, today they wonder if things have changed a bit too far in the opposite direction: "My lh-year-old daughter reports that television makers 'don't make much of sex,‘ that they treat it as if it were a normal part of life, which indeed it is, my daughter asserts, and wonders why I even question her about it. If she is right, why are some of us so shocked to see what 19 we consider exploitation of sexuality on so many programs?" (Levinsohn, 1977, p. A39). Levinsohn also eloquently expresses a parental concern that is at the heart of the issue of possible social learning of sexuality from the media: I assume that my daughter and all the other kids who make TV such a steady part of their lives will not suffer too greatly from the images of sexuality they now confront on TV. I assume that their other experiences, with their families and friends, will help them grow up to have reasonably satisfying and sexual experiences. But I am not entirely benign about that assumption. 1 cannot help but fear that the time they spend in front of their TV sets is crucially important in their education and that these models they see will have some deleterious effects. I cannot help but fear that my daughter might see her role in relationship to men similar to those she sees on television, that she might wonder whether she should speak up when she is with a man, that she might feel that it is perfectly reasonable to engage in sex for fun without ever wondering about what comes next or how it may affect her. I worry about the young men who expect women to behave like that and share that morality. I worry about a whole generation of kids who may be assuming that what they see on their TV sets is normal behavior. But perhaps I am, after all, an old-fashioned person, not with-it enough to realize that the new morality is actually healthy and moral. Perhaps. (p. hhh) Social scientific researchers have also expressed the idea that certain media portrayals of sex are modeling influences for young people and adults, although these ideas are speculative and not backed up by content-specific research. As early as 1933, Blumer and Hauser argued that movies were providing guidance for people in their sexual behavior. And Bandura and Walters in 1963 pointed out that American children and adolescents were not given the opportunity to observe actual sexual behavior in real life, due to our norms of privacy prohibiting exposure to all but very peripheral forms of sexual activity. Because of this severe scarcity of real-life observational learning opportunities, they argued, the child is forced into dependence on media models for sexual learning 20 (Baran, 1976b, p. A68). This idea need not be limited to youthful observers. The adult American is also customarily precluded from observing the sexual behaviors of others. If, night after night, he is invited into the TV bedrooms of other adults and observes, for example, sexual intercourse between unmarried partners as the norm, he may incorporate that information and later use it in confronting relevant situations. He may show approval when told his sister is living with a man, expect sexual activity to take place between co-workers, or be more likely to be receptive to sexual overtures by other adults to whom he is not married. In fact, as ”functional value" is one of the characteristics of the modeling stimuli Bandura deems as important to social learning, an adult may be more likely to engage in observational learning from sex on TV than would a child. Young geogle's comgrehension g: televised content Carrying this idea a bit further, it is logical from a social learning perspective that effects of exposure to models will not be forthcoming unless some type of comprehension of the behaviors exhibited exists. A child, or even an adult for that matter, will be likely to model the behavior he believes he observes, whether correctly or incorrectly comprehended. The situation becomes more complex when multiple observed behaviors form a is; of actions that are related through motives and consequences. Comprehension of motives and consequences is dependent on comprehension of the individual behaviors observed as well as their interrelationships. 21 Collins (1979) has applied such a perspective to the general area of children's processing of TV narratives. He describes three phases involved in mature comprehension: (1) Selecting essential pieces of information from the presentation, ignoring or paying less attention to extraneous detail, (2) ordering these essential actions according to some scheme, and (3) mgyigg inferences that go beyond what has been explicitly presented in the stimulus (p. 23). Content which goes into the completion of these processes may be exglicit or imglicit (not depicted but implied by relations between explicit actions). A study conducted by Collins, Wellman, Keniston, and Westby and reported by Collins (l979) compares children's comprehension of TV programs which varied in the amount of information shown and in the ordering of individual scenes. Four treatments--simple, complex (both with original ordering), simple-jumbled, and complex-jumbled (both with random ordering of scenes)--resulted in the following: Eighth graders were able to recall more essential details than fifth graders, who were able to recall more essential details than second graders, across all four conditions. Interestingly, the proportion of nonessential or peripheral detail recalled, which was quite high in young children, fell off at the junior-high level, while knowledge of central content continued to improve with age. It may be that older children achieve a greater ability both to know what is important in a plot and to focus on that important information while ignoring nonessential content. Younger children seem to take away with them not only a less complete understanding of the plot, but they also perceive the content somewhat differently due to retention 22 of different cues (p. 28). All children, with the exception of second grade boys, were better able to identify implicit information better when the ordering was 39; jumbled. This points out the importance of ordering of events in the comprehension process for older children, and indicates that some younger children do not make full use of the information conveyed by scene order. Another study by Newcomb and Collins, reported by Collins (1979) tested the belief that when children are familiar with elements (e.g., characters and settings) in a program, they are more able to identify implicit relationships within the plot, due to deeper processing of a set of similar materials to which the children have been exposed. This was found to be true for second graders only, and not for fifth or eighth graders in a test which assigned low and middle SES black and white children to view a TV situation comedy ("sitcom”) featuring either while, middle-class characters or black, working-class characters. The researchers felt the uniformly higher performance of fifth and eighth graders and the lack of SES differences at these age levels might be due to more extensive and varied real-life experiences by these children. Reeves (1979) examined the relevant literature and research on how children perceive and understand TV characters. Studies conducted by Reeves and Greenberg, and Reeves and Lometti, as reported by Reeves (1979) used multidimensional scaling to discover the structure of how children differentiate TV characters. Both studies found four emergent dimensions (i.e., humor, physical strength, physical attractiveness, and activity) and, strikingly, 29 age or sex differences in the structure. There were, however, differences in how the structure was used by males and females: 23 The strength and activity dimensions were good predictors of boys wanting to ”be like" the characters, and the attractiveness dimension was a good predictor for girls. The general finding from these works has been that children evaluate TV characters simply, much more so than they evaluate real-life peers or family members. (Reeves, 1979) While children's learning of consumer information-processing skills has been frequently examined and fully documented (Ward, Wackman, and Wartella, 1977). and children's acquisition of language and other knowledge from interpersonal sources has been an oft-treated subject (Wood, 1976), no application of the ideas described above has been made to the area of sex on TV. Some aspects of such an application are obviously intriguing. The work by Collins indicates that a child will comprehend only} what he perceives. The validity of this premise would limit any effects of sexual content on children to only those actions or statements which the child perceives. If, for example, the child perceives that two TV characters in bed together do nothing more than the kissing shown, he will not comprehend that they are about to make love. Thus, any effects such as perceived social approval would be limited to the child being more likely to think, "It's OK for two adults to kiss each other while they're in bed," rather than being likely to believe, “It's OK for two adults to have intercourse after kissing in bed.“ This possible limiting phenomenon is an argument usually overlooked by TV's social critics, yet a real possibility in the minds of many psychologists. Some believe that children will perceive, process, learn, and usesexual information only insofar as they are ready to do so, based on past sexual experiences. Adults may in fact be the real targets of 24 media sex effects. That observational learning does occur from televised content has been. a major assumption of researchers in the area of TV effects on children (Liebert, Neale, and Davidson, 1973; Comstock, 1980:. Murray, 1980). Studies of observational learning from TV have demonstrated that TV exposure can change behaviors such as a child's willingness to aid others, ability to display self-control, and language learning. Studies of observational learning from film have indicated that observing others can increase learning of unfamiliar behaviors, increase sharing, and decrease fear (Liebert, Neale, and Davidson, 1973, p. 39). The great debate over whether viewing violence on TV leads to aggression in children has pitted social learning theory against the catharsis theory, which suggests that viewing televised violence reduces the likelihood that the viewer will engage in aggressive behavior, due to the viewer vicariously experiencing the violence, identifying with the actor, and thereby discharging his pent up anger, hostility, and frustration. The great body of research which over the past 15 years has probed the issue of TV violence effects generally supports the social learning perspective. There seems to definitely be a relationship between aggressive behavior and viewing of violence, but this relationship is mediated by a very large number of variables, including age, sex, SES, pre-existing aggressive tendencies, self-esteem, frustration, and family structure and communication patterns (Murray, 1980). 25 A second realm of research which has applied social learning theory to possible TV effects is that of sex-role and race-role learning. While the studies in these areas are relatively few in number, they do contribute a fairly unified body of knowledge that indicates children do use TV to find out how they are expected to behave and how others are expected to behave. Low-income groups show the greatest reliance on TV as a socializing influence, perhaps due to fewer or less varied real-life experiences (U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1979). S35 23 IX; Content Analyses Is sexual content present on TV, and if so, what is its frequency and nature? While early systematic analyses- of TV content were mainly concerned with itemizing instances of violence and sex role behaviors, more recent studies have begun to investigate sexual behaviors as quantifiable. No purely “sex on TV" content analyses appeared before 1976. Dominick and Rauch (1972) did, however, find that women in network TV commercials were most often seen in the role of sex object/decoration (322 of females). But this study was, like all its contemporary content analyses dealing with sex, basically a study of 225 Lglgg--how men and women are portrayed. Sex role content analyses and effects studies have been fairly numerous (e.g., Miller and Reeves, 1976; McGhee and Frueh, 1980). But uniformly, they have examined issues such as occupational roles, family roles, home and workplace behaviors, and pro- and anti-social behaviors; the sexual behaviors of the sexes on TV have been until recently ignoqed. 26 In the earliest such effort, Abel and Fontes (1976) analyzed the portrayal of illegal, sexual and violent behaviors in prime time television programming. Four trained coders watched 56 randomly selected half-hours of network content. They found violent behaviors occurring at a rate 1-1/2 times that of sexual or illegal behaviors (in 1976, at any rate). At the time the study was conducted, Family Viewing Time (FVT) was being observed voluntarily by the networks, with supposed "family-oriented“ programs the only content being shown between 7 and 9 p.m. Comparing FVT with the post-PVT time slot, the researchers found significantly fewer illegal and violent behaviors occurring before 9 p.m. than after, but significantly more sexual behaviors occurring before 9 p.m. than after. The conclusions reached included the speculation that FVT concentrated only on violence and therefore only violence was reduced. An alternative explanation could indicate sex substituting for reduced violence. In this study, sexual behaviors included hugging and ‘kissing, as well as such stronger behaviors as extra-marital affairs. A more discriminating content analysis was conducted similarly on programs from the 1975-76 season by Franzblau, Sprafkin, and Rubinstein (1977). Four trained coders viewed videotapes of 61 prime-time programs, recording instances of particular sexual behaviors. The most frequently occurring behaviors were touching--nonaggressive (68.11 instances per hour), touching--aggressive (S.h8 per.hour), kissing (3.7A per hour), and embracing (2.68 per hour). the remaining behaviors (heterosexual intercourse, homosexual behavior, rape, flirting and seductiveness, innuendo (with and without .canned laughter), atypical sex roles, and 27 partner seeking) occurred very infrequently. The researchers found few differences in the content of FVT vs.' post-FVT, but did find some differences by show type. The major conclusion was that physical intimacy occurred in a much less overt manner than might be expected; kissing and touching was the rule, rather than intercourse or rape. According to subsequent research, this situation was not long to remain. Hesslebart (1977) looked closely at several of what she termed ”new adult programs" during 1977: "All That Glitters" (a short-lived Norman Lear sex-role reversal comedy), "Soap,” and "We've Got Each Other" (a short-lived sitcom also with a sex-role reversal theme). While emphasizing the sex roles shown on these series, Hesselbart did look briefly at the sexualities of the characters. First, she concluded that TV is as yet incapable of portraying an androgynous world in which characters combine both desirable male 23g female traits. Second, with regard to specific sexual activities, the researcher found that televised sex is usually implicit and not much fun for the participants, often resulting in guilt or deceit. Sex in these programs was found to frequently be used as a manipulative strategy, often being used by women or "role-reversed" men to gain power. A quantitative analysis of physical contact and sexual behavior during the prime-time l977-78 season was conducted by Silverman, Sprafkin, and Rubinstein (1979). Sixty-four programs were coded for 12 categories of physical contact and sexual behavior and 11 categories of discouraged sexual practices. These categories ranged from nonsexual interpersonal touching (e.g., handshakes) to affection displays (e.g., kissing), from typical sexual behaviors (e.g., heterosexual intercourse) to atypical or 28 deviant sexual behaviors (e.g., transvestism, prostitution). In this analysis, nonsexual touching and aggression occurred much more frequently than any sexual behaviors. While no physical displays of intercourse were evident, some implied intercourse (n-IS) did occur, an increase over the 1975 sample in which no incidents, explicit or implicit, of intercourse occurred. Discouraged sexual practices were extremely infrequent, with transvestism/transsexualism the most frequent of these at .6A per hour, and prostitution (.30 per hour) and homosexuality (.20 per hour) following second and third. These occurrences tended to cluster within a few programs, with 622 containing no discouraged sexual practices at all. In an effort to more precisely define and identify yggggl references to sexual behavior (which were coded as behavior/implied by the content analysis described above), Reeves and Garramone‘ (1979) looked for statements which had a potential to be a reference to intimate sexual behaviors. Intimate sexual behaviors included sexual intercourse, prostitution, homosexuality, and other intimate behaviors aside from kissing and embracing. Two episodes of each of the top-rated 2h prime-time programs were coded off-air. "Euphemisms for sexual behavior'I were quantified, as were demographics for the source of the statement and the context of the statement. 3.7 references per hour, on the average, were found; 6.3 per hour in sitcoms, 2.3 per hour in action/adventure shows, and 1.2 per hour in family drama. Characters making the references were primarily male (62%), young to middle aged (mean-35 years); the behaviors referred to were largely premarital (632) and heterosexual (962). Overall, the study showed a clear increase in the frequency of verbal references to sex over previous studies. 29 Fernandez-Collado, Greenberg, Korzenny and Atkin (1978) conducted a content analysis of 1976-77 prime-time and Saturday morning network TV programming, examining the frequency and nature of both sexual intimacy and drug use, including alcohol consumption. Fifty-eight hours of TV were videotaped and coded, excluding variety show, movies, and public affairs programming. Intimate sexual acts (defined as Reeves and Garramone defined them), implicit and explicit, occurred at an average rate of 1.72 per hour. The sub-categories of sex acts/references and their hourly rates were found to be as follows: Rape/homo- and heterosexual, .09: Homosexual acts, .12: Intercourse/unmarried, .71: Prostitution, .AB: Other intimate sexual behaviors, .22: and Intercourse/married, .10 (p. 33). One unique attribute of this study was that it was followed up by two later replicative analyses: h8.5 hours of programming from the l977-78 season and 56 hours from summer, 1978 were analyzed (Graef, l978). Greenberg, Graef, Fernandez-Collado, Korzenny, and Atkin (1980) reported the results of these three waves of data collection. In this report, the Saturday morning hours were dropped from the analysis, since no 355221 behaviors or references ever occurred in this content. The overall hourly rate of occurrence shoWed a decline over the three seasons, falling from 2.22 in 1976 to 1.35 in 1977 to 1.0A in 1978. It is impossible to discern from this study whether such a decrease over time is an artifact of sampling or a reflection of a true change in content corresponding to the public furor over sex on TV which began to emerge around early 1977. 30 Certain consistencies across the three seasons are particularly noteworthy in light of a possible social learning perspective interpretation of effects. Across the years, intercourse between unmarried partners greatly outnumbered instances of intercourse between married partners, exceeding a h:l ratio for the three seasons pooled. Rape was - uniformly the least frequent behavior coded, and intercourse/unmarried was the most frequent in each of the three years. Thus, the image the heavy TV viewer may derive is that of most sex occurring between unmarried individuals: such behavior may be deemed most appropriate by heavy viewers. The most recent quantitative study of sexual TV content, that of Greenberg, Abelman, and Neuendorf (1981), used the same coding scheme as the two previously described studies to examine three seasons of gggg 92553 content. One modification in the coding scheme was instituted--the addition of the category of "petting." The level of physical explicitness and level of verbal explicitness were further additions to the coding. The sample consisted of 15.5 hours of soaps from 1976 and 21 hours of soaps from 1979 coded from videotapes, and 28.5 hours from 1980 coded off-air. The overall hourly rate did not show a distinct rise or fall over the three seasons (2.00 in 1976. 1.80 in 1979, and 2.28 in 1980). Acts of petting were the predominant activity overall. As in the case of prime-time programming, intercourse/unmarried outnumbered intercourse/married four to one. Regarding physical and verbal explicitness, petting was always physically explicit while there were 31 virtually no physical displays accompanying other acts. In comparing the soap opera analysis to those for prime time, it seems evident that more acts and references were found to occur in soaps, but that these occurrences were more likely to be less intimate (i.e., petting) than those found in the evening. Soaps also seem to virtually exclude such "deviant” behaviors as homosexuality, prostitution, and rape. Effects 91 exposure pg pg; jg_;pp media: Empirical investigations Amazingly, virtually no research effort has been expended on addressing the specific problem of effects of viewing TV sex on cognitions, attitudes, or behaviors of people, young or old. Only three studies relate directly to this issue. Two studies by Baran (l976a and 1976b) looked at TV viewing of sex as related to adolescents' and college students' sexual self-concepts and satisfaction with real-life sexual encounters. In his study of adolescents, Baran (1976a) was concerned with the question of whether portrayals in the media form images and create "great expectations" in the minds of adolescents, resulting in disappointment and dissatisfaction with first coital experiences. Questionnaires were completed by 202 high school students from Cleveland. Significant negative correlations were found between initial coital satisfaction and perceptions of TV characters' sexual prowess (r--.21) and pleasure (r--.3l). However, contrary to the expectations of the researcher, a significant positive relationship ‘was found between initial coital satisfaction and perception of the reality of TV sex (r=.l7)(p.6h). N relationship was found between satisfaction in virginity and perceptions 32 of television portrayals of sex. In his study of college students, Baran (1976b) again investigated whether coital satisfaction was related to media exposure with this older age group. The questionnaire was completed by 207 undergraduate students at Cleveland State University. Similar findings to those of the adolescent study were achieved: A significant negative correlation between perceived sexual prowess of TV characters and initial coital satisfaction was found, as was a nonpredicted significant positive relationship between perceived reality of TV sex portrayals and initial coital satisfaction. Among virgins, dissatisfaction with their virginity was positively related to perceived sexual pleasure of media characters. In summary, Baran's work in this area clearly shows that there are important relationships between sexual satisfaction in real-life and an individual's perceptions of media sex. Combining and re-analyzing the two Baran data sets, Courtright and Baran (1980) conducted a comparison of three sources for what they termed "sexual socialization": Peers, family, and mass media (TV and film). They looked at the relationship of social comparison variables (peer influence), religious and ethnic background (family influence), and evaluations of media sex (media influence) to the young people's dissatisfaction with their own virginity or satisfaction with their own coital experience. Exposure to peer and media sources of sex information served as strong, significant positive predictors of both dependent variables, whereas family influences did not. An interesting additional analysis found that young people who were more sexually active (1) perceived media portrayals of sex to be less realistic. (2) saw the 33 characters as having less pleasure and possessing less sexual prowess, and (3), seemed less concerned about the amount of sex on TV and in movies (p. 112). In general, Baran's work is troubled by poor sampling techniques and also. by a tendency to make grand, sweeping Statements on the basis of singlefitem measures (e.g., "Family influence" was actually a collection of demographics--ethnic background, religious pneference, level of religious activity, and the presence of a parent or parents in the home-~variables which may or may not be indicators of "family influence."). He has uniformly used very specifically worded questions on a low level of measurement (e.g., ”Are you unhappy as-a virgin? YES or N0").' These measures not only limit the scope of the findings, but are also suspect as to their validity due to their oversimplification (e.g., Unhappiness with-virginity is likely to be a complex state, and may be more validly tapped via a number of different items). Thus, Baran's work must not be given too much weight, in light of its apparent shortcomings. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory conducted a pilot study on the influence of TV on adolescent girls' attitudes toward love, sex, and marriage (I! Viewer, 1980). Interviews were completed with teenaged girls who were either pregnant and enrolled in a program for unwed mothers or enrolled in a youth program, never having been pregnant. In comparing the two groups, certain differences were found in their TV viewing habits and attitudes. Pregnant teens reported viewing an average of 20 hours per week while those never pregnant reported watching an average of 13 hours per week. While such a difference is easily attributable to a third factor A such as loneliness, other differences are not so easily 34 explainable. Seventy percent of the pregnant group reported that adult heterosexual relationships shown on TV were similar to real-life relationships, while only 332 of the control group (never pregnant) reported such a belief. Additional analyses indicated that the pregnant teens identified more with romantic TV characters, and that those who reported that their favorite TV character would not use birth control if involved in a premarital sexual relationship were 2.h times as likely to be pregnant (p. 2). Wishnoff (1978) applied social learning theory to a novel aspect of sexual learning: The use of sexual stimuli to reduce sexual anxiety in women. Forty-five highly anxious, virgin college women were selected by pretest and were randomly assigned to three viewing groups: An explicit sex videotape group (this tape, produced by the researcher, included a visual display of intercourse), a nonexplicit sex videotape group (this tape included petting but no nudity nor intercourse), and a control group which saw a "non-sexually oriented videotape." The women who viewed the explicit tape had the lowest sexual anxiety. reported future plans to engage in the greatest variety of sexual behaviors, and experienced a significant decrease in general manifest anxiety (p. A59). It may thus be possible for clinicians to utilize specially-prepared sex tapes in aiding sexually anxious individuals. Development pi 3 study 9: sexual social learning A wide range of sources have been drawn upon to develop this treatment of issues relevant to television's role in the individual's development of sexual knowledge and roles. From a cognitive development 35 standpoint, sexuality develops only as an interface of biology and cognition. ‘Behaviors are not sexual until the individual conceives of them as sexual. Moral development theory would additionally indicate that an individual develops a sexual morality. based on learning of cultural sanctions and internalization of moral sanctions. \Social learning theory as applied to sexual development indicates that an individual may learn sexual behavior observationally. People may also gain from models certain expectations, perceptions, and attitudes. Due to their greater functional relevance, sexual models may have greater potential for impact on adults than on children. Effects on children may be further reduced due to their limited capacity to comprehend televised content. The thesis that observational learning does occur from televised content does seem well supported. Social scientific content analyses show rising frequency of sex on TV between 1975 and 1977, with a slight decline in more recent years. Portrayals of sexual behavior are quite consistent, creating TV stereotypes of sex (e.g., intercourse usually occurs between unmarried partners). Studies of effects of TV sex are few: The main finding in Baran's work in this area is that youths and young adults who perceive TV models as sexually skilled experience disappointment in their own initial coital experiences. Widely varied effects of pornography are indicated, including physical excitation (by both males and females) and aggressive behavior. Much research is needed to address the issue of ”vidsex's” effects on people's knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. The following section gives 36 an overview of how one type of research might be conducted to begin to address these issues. A study is here developed in which these questions of perceptual, attitudinal, and behavioral outcomes of exposure to ordinary televised models behaving sexually are given some initial answers. A study such as that described is valuable and pertinent in a number of respects. In practice, as we already know, sexual content is present on television, at varying levels of verbal and physical explicitness (Greenberg et al., 1980). In both continuing series and movies, the sexual nature of a . growing portion of televised content has raised the ire of conservative and religious citizens' groups (Clarke, 1981). The expanding role of pay TV has greatly increased the availability of more explicit sexual content on the home TV screen. For policy, moral standards of individuals in the judicial branch of government rather than empirical evidence serve as guides to the regulation, or lack thereof, of sexual TV content. The enforced exclusion of certain types and intensities of sexual content is termed censorship by some, protection of the viewership by others. Voluntary moves by networks usually result in physical sexual displays being deleted: verbal references are more likely to be left in. Are these moves relevant to the goals sought, i.e., does reduced explicitness via reduction of the physicality of sexual activity shown result in reduced sexual learning? In the realm of 525131 science, a further test of social learning theory in an area which has received little attention is of value to our understanding of social processes. The great body of research which over the past 15 years has probed the issue of TV violence generally supports a 37 social learning perspective. Does this also apply to televised sexual activity? Given that social learning of sexuality via exposure to televised sexual activity is a worthy but as yet unexplored topic for research, a number of qualifications of the general statement that "social learning will occur" may be attempted. A number of characteristics of the stimulus are pertinent to the maximization of social learning, according to Bandura (1977): Distinctiveness, affective valence, (lack of) complexity, prevalence, and functional value. And, several characteristics of the observer are deemed important: Sensory capacities, arousal level. perceptual set, and past reinforcement (p. 23). Taken together, these aspects regulate the amount and types of observational experiences, and attentional processes determine what is selectively observed and what is extracted from such exposure. The first, and most basic test of sexual social learning from televised content would of course compare exposed subjects with those left unexposed. Beyond this, a wide variety of studies could test the impact of variations in all pertinent variables. This proposed study centers in on one particular feature of the stimulus: Prevalence. As noted above, the explicitness of “vidsex” is found to vary; explicitness may be considered to be one aspect of prevalence when defined as the amount of the attribute (i.e., sex) evident in the stimulus. This test could be conducted through either experimental or survey techniques. Each of these two options possess inherent advantages and disadvantages relevant to the research task: Experiments allow great control via manipulation of the independent variable(s) but are usually 38 low in external validity, while surveys are customarily more externally generalizable and less internally valid. The particular study described here uses as experimental design for several reasons: With as sensitive a subject as that of ”vidsex," it is debatable whether respondents would report accurately on their past exposure to TV sex. It was desirable to be certain that the independent variable was accurately measured/manipulated, and the forced-viewing experiment was chosen. It was also unclear whether respondents would even be able to report accurately on their vidsex exposure. For example, what one person might consider "a lot” of sex could be viewed by others as very "mild." An experimental manipulation of this exposure insures its consistent quantification. In the face of a nearly total lack of prior research on this topic, it was desirable to conduct a truly baseline, step-one type of study which would at the very least examine the impact of a single exposure to vidsex. A true experiment allows one to clearly attribute any significant differences in the dependent variables to that simple manipulation. Concurrently, an experiment allows one to draw conclusions concerning the time-ordering of variables in a way a cross-sectional survey would not. (e.g., Baran's survey findings are as easily 39 explained by sexual dissatisfaction, etc., causing vidsex exposure as vice versa.) These points are not meant to imply that survey information is inappropriate to the research question; both survey and experimental methods should be used in a complementary fashion. This dissertation chose the experimental path due to the baseline nature of the study. In addition to the prevalence of sex in the stimulus, the corresponding arousal lpypl of the observer is also expected to enhance social learning. In the case of vidsex, the arousal could be general or sexual in nature. Social learning theory would be concerned with the content-specific arousal of sexual stimulation only, as a result of exposure to more explicit sexual displays. The idea that general excitation may be related to responses to sexual stimuli indicates possible problems in assessing the above predicted explicitness effect, as highly explicit content might cause high general arousal (Eysenck and Nias, 1979) as well as high sexual stimulation. However, such a competing explanation is not expected to play a part in this proposed study. (A pretest of viewer responses to televised stimuli of varying levels of explicitness found no discernible relationship between general excitement and explicitness, with very slight differences in general excitement across explicitness levels. Thus, the alternative explanation of general excitation may not be tested against the predicted explicitness effect, for this particular operationalization at any rate. Stated more positively, the general excitation explanation is not expected to serve as a competing force with the sexual stimulation explanation in this study.) 4D The affective valence of a stimulus is also .expected to influence social learning. This attribute of the stimulus is not entirely under the control of the researcher; the more a stimulus is greeted with positive affect on the part of the subject, the greater is the expected social learning. Humor may be conceptualized as one element comprising positive affect. As noted in Markiewicz's (l97h) review of research on the effects of humor on persuasion, the evidence is mixed as to whether humor facilitates learning and/or persuasion. An early experiment by Lull (l9h0) indicated no differences in attitude change (persuasion) for humorous and non-humorous public speeches. Kaplan and Pascoe (1977) found no differences in immediate comprehension for humorous and non-humorous college lectures, but did find humor to facilitate retention of material after a 6-week period. They reasoned that humorous examples within a lecture may operate as cues for the student in attempting to recall information. Recently, Bryant, Brown, Silberberg and Elliott (1981) tested the impact of humorous cartoons on information acquisition or motivation, positive effects on appeal, and negative effects on persuasibility (p. A3). Markiewicz reviewed about 30 humor studies conducted before l97h, and concluded that the evidence was inconclusive. Markiewicz did claim, however, that the methodologies employed in these studies were uniformly poor, and that no firm conclusion should be attempted without further, more valid evidence. (If the above-mentioned studies by Kaplan and Pascoe (1977) and Bryant et al. (1981) are an indication of results to be obtained from recent, more valid studies, then there is some preliminary 41 indication that humor increases affect and long-term retention, but not attitude change (persuasion).) A major contribution by Markiewicz is her application of two theoretical approaches to the study of humor. The first, learning theory, views humor as a pleasurable reward, which should facilitate learning and attitude change. The second approach views humor as a distractor (i.e., laughter elicited operates as the actual distractor), and therefore predicts humor as accompanied by less learning and greater attitude change. Obviously, due to the inconclusivity of the findings on humor to date, additional research of this type is needed. The former explanation fits neatly with a social learning approach: Humor as a pleasurable reward implies positive affect and therefore greater social learning. Pertinent to the research described herein, if replications differ substantially as to humorous valence, they may therefore differ in the amount of social learning they may elicit. Not under control in such an experiment are other characteristics of the observer: Sensory capacities, perceptual set, and past reinforcement--those characteristics the subject brings with him/her to the experimental situation. While random assignment to treatment conditions in an experimental design will theoretically result in groups equivalent on these attributes, measurement of key and relevant aspects of these characteristics will ensure a valid test of the effect of overall exposure to and explicitness of sexual media stimuli. In this manner, the contribution of pertinent observer characteristics may be statistically examined and/or controlled for. Regarding a test of vidsex effects, specific applications seem important. Several aspects of the subject's past reinforcement experiences regarding sex might influence his/her 42 sexual attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors in this context, in that modeling influences can affect behaviors which have been previously learned (Bandura, 1971): Prior experience with sex, involvement with members of the opposite sex, and prior exposure to sex in the media. Other aspects of the subject's perceptual pp; regarding sex may also play an important part in determining sexual attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors, in that social learning responses have been shown to be affected by emotional and attitudinal responses to stimuli (Bandura, 1977): Reactions to sex in the media and moral/political liberalism. Social learning in the case of vidsex may be precisely defined as changes in sexual perceptions, expectations, attitudes, and behaviors as a result of exposure to sexual models presented in a non-punitive context, with these changes occurring in the direction expounded upon or displayed by the models. For example, an individual exposed to models engaging in consensual sexual intercourse would exhibit social learning through changes in his perception of who engages in intercourse, where, when, and how often this occurs, through altered expectations of how often and under what circumstances he or others might engage in sex, through increased approval of sexual activities, and through greater desire to engage in sexual intercourse. Of course, some of these changes are going to be elicited more easily than others. Non-behavioral changes are typically more easily affected, in that behavior often requires some initiation to act and is also subject to situational or environmental constraints. Among the non-behavioral changes expected, perceptions and expectations >are likely to be more easily changed than are the more long-range and less concrete attitudes 43 and values. In general, then, it is possible that perceptions and expectations will be more easily changed than attitudes, which will be more easily changed than behaviors. Hypotheses Several hypotheses are forwarded which reflect exploration of vidsex's social learning effects in light of the above discussion: H1: Exposure to televised sex, in comparison to non-exposure, will be related to: a. More positive attitudes toward sexual behaviors; b. The perception that the sexual behaviors of people in real life are more congruent with televised presentations. c. Expectations about one's own sexual behaviors more congruent with the televised content: d. Stronger anticipation of sexual activity for oneself. Hl': These same results will obtain under conditions of controlling for a set of mediating variables (observer characteristics) which themselves are expected to be related to the dependent variables: Past behaviors which would result in reinforcement of sexual attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors: and the observer's perceptual pg; concerning media sex and the social/political environment in which it is presented. H2: Exposure to a greater degree of explicitness of televised sex will be related to: a. More positive attitudes toward sexual behaviors: b. The perception that the sexual behaviors of people in real life are more congruent with televised presentations. c. Expectations about one's own sexual behaviors more congruent with the televised content: d. Stronger anticipation of sexual activity for oneself. H2': These same results will obtain under conditions of controlling for a set of mediating variables (observer characteristics) which themselves are expected to be related to the dependent variables: Past behaviors which would result in reinforcement of sexual attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors: and the observer's perceptual pg; concerning media sex and the social/political environment in which it is presented. 44 Amount 2: pp; _p' _y 239 public reactions 2; indicated jg pgpular literature Any test exploring the effects of "vidsex" on viewers needs to consider the social, legal, and political contexts in which the study is conducted. The following sections look at U.S. society's attitudes toward sex on TV, the research experiences of those examining the impact of more extreme pornographic media content, and the bases for government regulation of sexual content in the media. Given the possibility that TV viewers may be forming perceptions and expectations of their own sexuality based on the images presented to them on the small screen, how much and what type of sexual activity is present and is acceptable, according to the U.S. public? At least in the minds of the public, the incidence of sexual behavior on television has been increasing rapidly in recent years. A recent article in I! Epigg advised parents on the topic of ”Sex on TV: How to Protect Your Child” (1982), calling for more open discussion of sexual content between parent and child (Singer and Singer, 1982). Some critics have hypothesized that sex is replacing violence in TV content, while others treat sex and violence as concurrent and intimately related "problems." As early as 1975, critics examined the amount and type of sex on TV, prompted by the short-lived initiation of a nightly "Family Viewing Time” intended to abolish sex and violence from the airwaves for two hours each evening. Efron (1975a and 1975b) critically examined the sexual content of different types of TV shows, concluding that efforts to censor TV sex were a "pathetic waste of time” in that "puritanism" still ran rampant in televised story lines. For example, in discussing sexual references on 45 game shows, Efron perceptively pointed out that the liberal amount of "sexual wisecracking" going on in these shows might actually be indicative of strong inhibitions against telling what nglly goes on behind closed doors. "All this Winking and Leering and snickering are actually an expression of puritan inhibitions; they do not challenge them" (Efron, 1975a. p. 8). Religious groups and organizations such as the National Council of Churches and the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ have from time to time stepped forward to decry the content of certain types of programming or individual programs. In 1977, the latter institution filed with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) a "Pronouncement on the Use of Gratuitous Violence and the Exploitation of Sex on Television." The United Church of Christ has played an active if unsolicited role in FCC matters for over ten years, and in this pronouncement denounced TV for its "pathological preoccupation" with violence and sex and expressed concern about the possibility that "the daily overexposure to brutal and dehumanizing conduct endangers the moral foundations of everyone," particularly children (Broadcasting, 1977). Also in 1977, 15,000 members of the Southern Baptist Convention signed a resolution which stated, in part, that "(T)elevision dumps into our homes a steady stream of illicit sex, casual violence, alcohol promotion, materialism, vulgarity" (limp, l977a). At this time also, an anti-_ppp effort raged through religious and parent groups. In perhaps the best example of concern-run-rampant, groups across the country fought to have this controversial new situation comedy banned from the airwaves, never having seen 3mg program (Stutzman, 1978).. While much of the furor 46 over this program has died over the several years of its run, the reactionary response of a concerned public (which did result in at least 17 ABC affiliates refusing to carry Sggp; limp, l977a) does attest to the volatile situation regarding sex on TV. The public jg.aware of sexual content on TV and is concerned with its possible effects on old and young alike. More recently, the evangelical preacher Jerry Falwell has led his conservative followers, the "Moral Majority,” in lambasts against all types of sexual information in all media, including a crusade against ”bedroom scenes and vulgar language" on TV (Detroit Eggs 3:533, 1980). Although many people have rebutted that "The Moral Majority is neither" moral nor a majority, the group's stance on TV has been recognized by advertisers as of late. And indeed, Falwell has continually blown his own horn in this area, attempting to gain increased public support through advertisements in I! Qplgp heralding a campaign to "Clean Up America." In a booklet Falwell makes available to those responding to the advertisements (Falwell, 1981), he includes such chapters as "How to Clean Up America by Eliminating Pornography (Steps 1 and 2)," "How to Clean Up America by Cleaning Up Television," and "It's Time To Excise the Pornographic Cancer." In the second chapter, written by Don Wildmon of the National Federation for Decency, the reader is urged to make his/her "voice heard" concerning "offensive" TV content: What can you do when television insults your sense of moral decency.(sic) First, you can speak out. You can resolve not to remain silent and let this medium which has the potential of being the most constructive medium in the history of mankind go to the depths of depravity. Let us suppose that you are watching television and are insulted. First, get a piece of paper and a pencil and make some notes about the program. Note especially which advertisers are making 47 the program possible by placing ads in the program . . . fire off a letter to the Chairman of the Board at each company about what insulted you in their sponsored program . . . Also, you can phone the chairman of the company and tell him personally what your opinion is. In fact, you can do this without it costing you a single penny. Here is how. Simply call the chairman person-to-person (not collect). On a person-to-person call you don't pay a penny unless you get to talk with the chairman personally. Chances are the chairman will not be available to take your call. If not, leave your name and phone number and tell the receptionist that you would like for the chairman to return the call. (p. 23) These histrionics not withstanding, Falwell and company have gained a great deal of publicity in their efforts to mobilize the U.S. populace against sex on TV. And advertisers have taken their threats quite seriously. As of mid-1981, however, 66* of U.S. adults felt that it is not "proper and fitting for Moral Majority evangelical preachers to pressure television networks to take off the air those shows the evangelicals feel are immoral," but 712 did agree that "the TV networks are not interested in morality on shows unless they get high ratings" (Harris, 1981). While Moral Majority members and supporters undoubtably constitute a minority of U.S. adults, their numbers are still impressive--recent estimates range from 4.6 to 67 million (Yankelovich, 1981). And, it must be kept in mind that even if all do not subscribe fully to a view of the world according _ to Falwell, a sexually conservative block definitely seems to exist in the U.S.. For example, a 1977 Time national poll found that 592 of those adults surveyed felt male nudity in movies to be unacceptable for other people and/or themselves. Fifty-four percent saw female nudity in movies as unacceptable (Time, 1977b). 48 Some groups of concerned citizens have attempted to quantify what they consider to be the excessive level of sexual activity on TV. As of 1977, the Southern Baptists' Christian Life Commission had mailed ”Help for Television Viewers" kits to 35,000 pastors and 15,000 lay leaders. The $1.50 kit included a checklist on which viewers could log incidents of violence, profanity and alcohol, and sexual abuse. A more comprehensive attempt by the United Methodist Church, American Lutheran Church, and the Church of the Brethren developed a 16-hour course in "Television Awareness Training." Classes for church and civic groups have used training tapes showing examples of violence, sexuality, and deceptive advertising (limp, l977a). In 1978, the National Parent Teachers Association released the results of its first guide to TV programming. Based on the monitoring of prime time TV by PTA units representing each of the 50 states, the study was conducted by participants who were reported to be a "fair reflection of PTA membership." The PTA's booklet of findings included lO-best and lO-worst program lists, based on findings of violent and sexual content and overall quality. The study also reported that the monitors detected a lessening in the amount of gratuitous violence on TV, but that “sex is not an appropriate or acceptable substitute for violence in series, specials or movie selections during children's viewing hours" (Broadcasting, l978b. P- 51). While these studies were certainly not conducted in a scientific manner, the general contention that violence has declined in frequency and that sex has increased has been admitted by television producers and 49 decision-makers. Pressure from the Surgeon General and the FCC during the early and mid-1970's to reduce violent TV content sent producers scurrying for an alternative eye-catcher. The ratings have to some extent verified that sex on TV is indeed eye-catching, while Frank Price, president of Universal Television, has proposed that "the sexual breakthrough in TV has probably taken us to where the movies were in 1935" (Waters with Kasindorf and Carter, p. 54). Such industry spokesmen hold that the public is accepting of and even encouraging of the present levels of sex on TV, that those voicing objections are a small, extremist minority. Such has mp; been indicated by industry polls. A 1973 nationwide poll by I! Epigg (Hickey, 1973) reported AIS of the sample of 1,021 believing that too much time was devoted to shows dealing with sexual topics, while two-thirds indicated there was too much violence on TV. Older respondents were much more likely to think TV as sexy--58% of those over 60 years of age felt there was too much sex on TV (p. 8). Fifty-one percent of all respondents reported being in favor of a "board to screen shows and keep material of questionable taste off the air" (p. 9)--thus condoning a form of censorship. However, when the respondents were asked, "If you could have your own way, what one or two things would you like most to change about television?” sex came in seventh. The number one wish was to reduce the number of TV commercials. In 1978, Doyle Dane Bernbach released results of a nationwide survey of A00 adults, which found that concern over violence on TV had declined as concern over sex had risen. The study also found that "people worry more about sexual themes that seem to impinge on the welfare of their Ichildren or their concepts of normal family life, and they consider sexual 50 subjects less suitable for treatment. in comedies and dramas than in documentaries, news specials, and cultural programing" (Broadcasting, 1978a, p. 46). Yet while indicating a high level of concern and objection among members of the general public, the survey found little support for censorship. Only 10% felt that the primary responsibility for what is shown on TV should rest with the government; 91% felt that the public should shoulder this responsibility. And only 202 would advocate removing all sex-related programs from TV: 442 would support scheduling of programs at hours when children are not likely to view, and 358 would support having no restrictions and having parents take the responsibility (Broadcasting, l978a). Also in 1978, a survey by Needham, Harper, and Steers was conducted, with 4,000 married men and women as respondents. Seventy-eight percent of the women and 642 of the men agreed that “there is too much sex on prime time TV;" seventy-nine percent of the women and 682 of the men agreed that "TV commercials place too much emphasis on sex” (Johnson and Satow, 1978, p. 24). With regard to preferred programming, an apparently anomalous finding emerged: The respondents hated shows like§gpp, having "too much“ sex, yet the women enjoyed soap operas, which also contain high levels of sex. In subsequent group discussions, it was found that sex is objected to only under certain conditions. Sex is "OK" when it is implicit, handled in a moral context (e.g., the sinners get punished in the end), when the viewer is prepared for it, and when children are unlkely to view, the respondents indicated (Johnson and Satow, 1978). The most recent industry moves dealing with sex on TV have centered on responses by advertisers to pressure by various right-wing groups, who 51 want all sexual content removed from TV (McGrath, 1980). As early as 1975 (Christopher), major advertisers and ad agencies urged restraint on the part of producers in including sexual content in TV programming. A very recent development, however, has been major advertisers' response to New Right complaints about sex and violence on TV. In June of 1981, Procter and Gamble, the nation's largest TV advertiser, was the first to go on record as "listening" to the New Right critics. PEG was referring mainly to the Coalition for Better Television, which unites right wing groups such as the Moral Majority with Rev. Donald Wildmon's National Federation for Decency (which earlier [Waters, 1979] had staged a consumer boycott to protest incidents of incest on TV), formed in February, 1981, and claimed support from 5 million families. Four thousand coalition volunteers each watched 12 to 16 hours of prime time programming during the spring of 1981, recording instances of sex, profanity, and violence. According to Wildmon, the monitors were recruited mainly from church groups and were trained by volunteers who used videotapes to train groups of monitors in practice sessions (Henry, 1981). Though the results of this ”study" are not available, the influence of the Coalition has indeed been felt. As noted above, Procter and Gamble has gone on record as being aware of and interested in what the Coalition has to say. Though he disagreed with Wildmon's methods, P86 Chairman Owen Butler endorsed his general aims: "I think the coalition is expressing some very important and broadly held views about gratuitous sex, violence and profanity. I can assure you that we are listening very carefully to what they say, and I urge you to do the same" (Clarke, 1981, p. 83). 52 The Coalition, meanwhile, has been threatening a consumer boycott of products manufactured by advertisers on shows with high levels of sex, profanity, and/or violence. The advertisers are scared; if the Coalition can, as it claims, mobilize 20 million American consumers for the proposed boycott, the economic impact would indeed be great. At least four companies (Warner-Lambert, SmithKline, Gillette, and Phillips Petroleum) have during 1981 conferred privately with the Coalition, in apparent hopes that they would be deleted from a boycott list should they promise to change the allocation of their advertising dollars(Henry, 1981). While some hold that these efforts by the Coalition are jeopardizing First Amendment rights, others believe that they are an example of democratic free enterprise at work. The eventual outcome of this clash is not fully predictable at the present time. Wildmon's Coalition (which at one time encompassed the Moral Majority membership but does no longer--the Rev. Falwell claims that he and Wildmon are still ”good friends") is at present boycotting RCA products and NBC shows with little apparent result. Falwell refused to join (the boycott, apparently claiming that he is "satisfied that television was already in the process of cleaning up its act." (Birmingham, 1982, p. 3). While the above descriptions detail investigations and reports which are generally non-scientific, certain things do seem quite clear. First, sex has been on the increase on TV as perceived by viewers, advertisers, and the broadcast industry itself. Second, concern has been evidenced by the growing involvement and power of right-wing and religious groups citing, TV sex as excessive. Third, while some groups hold that TV sex is 53 corrupting their youth, the clear operationalization, validation, and quantification of such a claim have not yet occurred. As Waters, with Kasindorf and Carter, note: The complaints may be reminiscent of the public protests against TV violence. but there is a major difference between the two issues. Hardly anyone seemed to be willing to make a case for more video mayhem. And there was sufficient evidence pointing to the damaging effects of televised violence on adolescent psyches to bolster the case for reform. But, at least so far, there is almost no available evidence as to just how much influence vidsex may have on children or, for that matter, on adults. (p. 55) Public reactions pg sex gm TV: Empirical investigations Given that sexual content does exist on TV and that great concern over the proliferation of this content has been evidenced by church and other groups, surprisingly few studies have been done (which empirically examine individuals' perceptions of and reactions to this content. The earlier (circa 1977) studies which do exist do not examine sexual content as their main focus, but rather examine related issues. Fontes, Barwis, and Reagan (1977). in their investigation of audience perceptions of FVT, found that their respondents generally felt violence on TV was worse than sex on TV as of 1976. Among those who responded ”sex is worse,” lower education, having children, and having young children were significant predictors. Herman and Leyens (1977) questioned whether warnings of sex and violence on TV increase the audience. Their investigation in Belgium did show clearcut and significant differences in ratings for movies with no qualifying warning and those with either a violence or sex qualification, with those carrying a qualifier enjoying greater ratings. There was no 54 difference between the ratings for movie 'with violence or sex qualifications. The researchers interpreted the results as being consistent with either a reactance theory (i.e., the idea that the restriction on the availability of something is perceived as a threat to freedom which must be overcome), or commodity theory (i.e., the idea that something scarce or specially designated must be valuable). Similarly, Wurtzel and Surlin (1978) conducted a survey in the U.S. to discover whether TV advisory warnings were noted and used by the public. Only one-fourth of the adult respondents reported using the warnings to alter their own viewing, but over 502 of the respondents with children reported using them to alter their children's viewing. While violence was deemed the type of content most in need of advisory warnings, with 562 of the sample mentioning "explicit or excessive violence," 382 of the sample did indicate concern with the portrayal of sex or nudity, 132 mentioned explicit or aggressive language, and 22 mentioned “mature themes" (p. 27). Concern with violent content was positively related to education. The main finding of the study was a desire by the respondents for more "specific naming of program content" before airing (572), a smaller desire for a “number or letter rating" system (212), and little desire for the current general warning system (l62)(p. 27). Only a few studies have specifically addressed the issue of sex on TV and how people respond to it. Wober (1980), in a study conducted in England, completed six near-yearly surveys between 1973 and 1979. Consistently across the years, when asked what they see or hear on TV that is offensive, the British respondents reported "sex" more frequently than "violence," but less frequently than "bad language." Several other 55 studies have been conducted in the U.S. which examine issues of viewer reactions to, perceived suitability of, and possible enforced changes in sexual content on TV. Sprafkin, Silverman, and Rubinstein (1980) showed 660 adults from 26 different community groups one of 15 randomly selected TV programs from the fall 1977 season. The content of the programs had been objectively analyzed for the presence of physically intimate and sexual content: the subjects were asked to rate the amount of sexual content in the program and evaluate the suitability of that content for adult, teenage and child audiences, and to also estimate how often each of 21 intimate behaviors. was present in the program.’ In addition to this response portion of the study, the respondents also completed an attitude survey on TV sex. A definite majority of the adults thought that the amount of sex on TV is a problem and is potentially harmful for child viewers. In viewing the programs, some people read more sexuality into television presentations than was actually there, especially for intercourse and socially discouraged sexual practices. Suitability ratings were greatest for those programs which had the fewest objectively coded sexual behaviors. General suitability ratings for sexual topics presented on TV in the past showed that most people judged all the listed topics to be suitable for adult viewing but the ratings decreased for teenage and child audiences. Another recent study also attempted to evaluate public attitudes toward sex on TV. A quota sample of 505 from a major metropolitan area completed a self-administered questionnaire. The findings indicated that a large majority of respondents felt that sex in TV programs had increased 56 "in the past year," and that ”the increasing sexual content of TV shows has conditioned us to expect some sex in TV programs.“ While they did mg; agree that "sex has no place in TV programs“ (only 23% agreed), very few people felt that ”the sexual content in TV shows has been helpful in educating people about sex” (23% agreed), or that "watching TV programs with sexual content will help children develop realistic attitudes about sex" (16% agreed) (p. 8). A majority also favored censorship of sexual content, regulation of sexual content, and restriction of sexually explicit content to pay TV situations. In 1981, two U.S. television networks commissioned surveys measuring audience reactions to sex and violence on TV. Conducted by the National Survey Research Group for ABC (1981), a national telephone survey of 1400 adults indicated that 64% felt the primary responsibility for determining what is acceptable TV content should rest with the individual viewer rather than with networks, stations, government, religious organizations or advertisers. Only 6.6% reported belonging to the Moral Majority; the data strongly indicated that a consumer boycott of products advertised on objectionable programs would be unsuccessful--only 1.33 were supportive of a boycott. The NBC survey, conducted by The Roper Organization, Inc. (1981), asked a nationwide telephone sample of 2440 adults about their reactions to sex and violence on 17 specific TV shows. It found little dissatisfaction with the treatment of sex in the programs, less dissatisfaction with violence, and even less support for taking any of the shows off the air (p. 5). Only one show (Dallas) received criticism on grounds of sex/profanity by as many as 102 of the total sample and 252 of 57 religious fundamentalists. And only one show (Dukes of Hazzard) received criticism on the grounds of violence by at least 132 of the total sample and 132 of religious fundamentalists. And, in fact, more religious fundamentalists (162) reported they 11559 the show because of its violence. Imp special case 21 research gm pornography Aside from the several surveys cited earlier (Baran, 1976a and 1976b; Courtright and Baran, 1980: I! Viewer, 1980: Wishnoff, 1978), other research which falls under a rubric of effects of sex in the media deals with what is variously termed "pornography” and "erotica," i.e., media content which is wholly sexual in intent, and visually and/or verbally explicit. A large number of mainly experimental studies have been conducted; only a brief overview of some of this work will be included here, as this research is more concerned with learning of normative sexual behaviors and roles rather than the more extreme effects customarily examined in the pornography research (e.g., physical excitation, verbal and physical aggression against a member of the opposite sex, criminal sexual behavior). A recent and comprehensive explication of the pornography research has been put forth by Eysenck and Nias (1979). They conclude: "That pornography has effects on viewers and readers can no longer be disputed. but these effects can be quite variable. It may produce titillation in some, in others it may elicit feelings of guilt or revulsion, while in yet others it may provoke anti-social sexual behaviour, or help condition them 58 into deviancy. . . There is even evidence that it may lead to aggression and violence. On the other hand, used in conjunction with behaviour therapy, pornographic material may be of help in solving some deep-seated sexual problems" (p. 253). In the late 1960's, early evidence which contributed to this conclusion was brought forth by the President's U.S. Commission on Obscenity and Pornography. The Pornography Commission's findings reported that exposure of adults to explicit sexual materials had little or no effect on sexual activity or attitudes about sex, and that such exposure did not seem to contribute to a decline in moral character nor to an increase in general or sex-related crime. In fact, it was reported that sex offenders were generally underexposed to sexually explicit materials and sexual knowledge during adolescence (Dienstbier, 1977, p. 177). Then-president Richard Nixon and other top government officials were outraged at such counterintuitive (a la 553;; intuitions) findings, condemned the report and did all they could to bury it. They were particularly offended by the report's recommendations to repeal laws prohibiting adult exposure to explicit sexual materials and to increase young people's exposure to sexual information through sex education programs.1 This equation of pornographic sex with "evil," in the same way that violence is considered evil, is a logical error made by researchers as well as bureaucrats and/or administrators. That deviant sexual behavior did not result from exposure to pornography in the same way that aggression seemed to result from exposure to violence was seen by some researchers as counter to a social learning perspective (Berkowitz, 1971). 59 Dienstbier, however, has rightly pointed out that such a critical evaluation ignores such nuances as the following: "Normal" sexual behavior is a more logical outcome of most pornographic content, yet has not customarily been viewed as the crucial dependent variable: an individual's background exposure to violence (e.g., through TV) is far greater than his background exposure to sexually explicit behavior, and in addition, the cultural support for the former is usually much greater: and that there may be basic physiological differences between aggressive and sexual behaviors which social learning theory does not take into account. Nixon and his colleagues apparently also afforded little credence to Berl Kutchinsky, a criminologist in Denmark who was consulted by the Pornography Commission, based on his research on the Danish experience. Denmark, during a period from 1930 to 1969, instituted a series of laws relaxing constraints on pornography, culminating in 1969 with a lifting of all censorship on pornography. Kutchinsky, surveying the occurrence of sex crimes between 1959 and 1970, found that rape remained stable, but exhibitionism fell 66%, indecency 562, sex offenses against children 692, and the number of peeping cases dropped from 99 to five (Psychology Ippgy, 1973). Five years later, Bachy (1976) severly criticized Kutchinsky's methods, and using police statistics conducted an analysis which concluded that the crimes of rape and intercourse with a minor increased in frequency for several years following 1969, then dropped back to their original levels. Complaints against indecent exposure fell off dramatically after 1969, however. It should be noted that when we speak of pornography and erotica (only the former usually being considered illegal), we are referring to a 60 wide variety of print and visual media content. For one, yesterday's "pornography" is often today's socially acceptable fad (e.g., Egympm 31335). Also, within pornography/erotica there exists a range from soft-core romantic tales and pictures (e.g., much of Playboy magazine) to brutally violent “snuff" films in which an actress is reportedly actually killed on film after engaging in sex acts (Detroit £555 3553;, 1975). Smith (1976) did what he claimed no one had had the presence of mind to do previously: He conducted a content analysis of pornography to establish the true nature of its content. "Apparently," Smith notes, "even the serious study of pornography proceeds. . . on the premise that, paraphrasing Supreme Court Associate Justice Potter Stewart, 'we know it when we see it'" (p. 16). Smith limited his examination to "adults only" paperback fiction. Sampling books off store shelves from 1967 to 1974, his findings included a trend over the years toward the inclusion of more material depicting sexual activity per book and a greater variety of books in more outlet stores. A uniformity of characterizations was evident: The typical character in these books was found to be young, single, white, physically attractive, and heterosexual. Male characters were rarely physically described in detail, while females were described ”down to the last dimple" (p. 21), and Smith reported that the theme of machismo dominated the content. While characters were superficially all quite similar, there were real differences among them in terms of such features as presentational contexts, cognitive style, and language style. Smith suggests that there may be differences in the effects of such books because of such attributes rather than the explicit sexual content, a 61 suggestion which is particularly pertinent to a possible social learning application in this area. Pornography and erotica not only very in their content, but also vary in their appeal to males and/or females. Stauffer and Frost (1976) compared males and females in their responses to Playboy and Playgirl respectively. Men and women did not differ substantially in their interest in features in the control magazine, Saturday Evening fipgg, but did differ for their ratings of parallel features in Playboy and Playgirl. Men gave higher interest ratings on sexually-oriented products and cartoons, photo essays and centerfolds. Women reported greater interest in letters to the editor. These differences must be interpreted in light of the fact that all the males had seen Playboy before, while only 522 of the females had read Playgirl. In terms of evaluative responses to erotic behavior, in media and in real life, there is evidence that evaluations of erotica or one's sexual activity are mediated by affective responses. Byrne, Fisher. Lanberth, and Mitchell (1974) found both positive and negative affective responses to erotic slides or verbal passages to be associated with judgments of the stimuli as pornographic for males: for females only negative affective responses were associated with pornographic judgments (p. 111). Hocking, Walker, and Fink (1980) found that subjects rated the morality of a fictitious woman, who had fictitious sexual intercourse with a fictitious man, as lower when they were told that the woman was highly attractive. The interpretation of this by the researchers was that an unattractive female would be perceived as having fewer chances for intercourse, justifying her actions. Tieger (1981) found that a nonattractive rape 62 victim was perceived as being more likely to have provoked her victimization than an attractive victim (p. 155). A large number of studies have looked at physical and aggressive responses to erotica/pornography. Eysenck and Nias report at least eleven studies conducted between 1969 and 1976 which included physical arousal as their main dependent variable, measured by actual physical indicators for males and by self-report for males and females. Both males and females were found in general to be highly and equitably excitable by print and visual erotica. Eysenck and Nias also report on five of a large number of studies which have. examined aggression as an outcome of exposure to erotica, concluding that the results are quite mixed. Some studies found increased aggression and some found reduced aggression (Baron and Bell, 1977; White, 1979: Donnerstein, Donnerstein, and Evans, 1975; Meyer, 1962: Einsiedel, Salomone, and Schneider, 1982). .Libby and Straus (1980) attempted to provide an explanation for the discrepancies by pointing out the subjective meaning assigned to sex acts. Indeed, they found that for men who held the stereotypic view of sex as a "dominant and exploitative act,“ higher levels of sexual activity were associated with aggressive and violent tendencies: for men who held a meaning for sex as a "warm, affectionate act," higher levels of sexual activity were associated with low levels of violence (p. 133). The more recent studies have tended to support the increased-aggression hypothesis (Donnerstein and Barrett, 1978: Donnerstein and Hallam, 1978: Malamuth, 1981: Zillmann and Sapolsky, 1977). Malamuth (1981) found male subjects exposed to a slide-audio show depicting rape to create more violent sex fantasies than those exposed to a mutually-consenting version. Sapolsky and Zillmann (1981) found that 63 regardless of the degree of sexual explicitness of an erotic film shown to subjects, there was no effect upon the hostility of unprovoked males and females. The hostile behavior of provoked males and females was enhanced. however, by strongly arousing but moderately disturbing erotica (p. 319). Malamuth and Check (1981) conducted a field experiment exposing subjects to theatrical films either including or lacking an incident of violence against women with justification and positive consequences. Exposure to the films portraying violent sexuality increased male subjects' acceptance of interpersonal violence against women. For females, there was a nonsignificant trend in the opposite direction (p. 436). Bryant and Zillmann (1981) have shown that longitudinal exposure to standard erotica may result in significantly less aggression after previous exposure to standard erotica, and somewhat less aggression after exposure to sadomasochism and bestiality. As noted in the previous section, definitional problems have been a serious consideration in the area of pornography. This is true in all areas of media sexuality, as displayed in the following discussion of attempts to officially deal with sex in the media. A long history of self-regulation in the motion picture industry has negated the need for government intervention. In 1927, the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MMPPDA) published a list of "don'ts” 'and “be carefuls" for film producers, followed in 1930 by the Production Code. This Code specified "dos" and "don'ts" for all stages of the film production process. It stated in part that "no picture shall be 64 produced which will lower the moral standards of those who see it” and ”the sympathy of the audience shall never be thrown to the side of crime. evil or sin" (Rowan and Mazie, 1981, p. 118). It prohibited words such as "alley cat," ”fanny," and "tart” to be spoken on screen, and forbade the identification of a brothel and jokes about farmers' daughters. But filmmakers began ignoring their own code, and by 1968 the need for a new system was fully recognized. In that year, the Classification and Rating Administration (CARA) was established by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA, successor to MPPDA). A board of seven compose CARA, and those seven view all films released in the U.S., assigning the familiar ratings of G, PG, R, and X. These ratings have been severely criticized as being too general and undiscriminating, unreliably assigned, and as being a form of censorship. Yet the self-regulatory nature of the film industry has been maintained. In the broadcast industries, First Amendment issues are butted against the FCC's power and desire to regulate the use of the airwaves "in the public interest, convenience, and necessity." Enforced by the FCC, Section 1464 of the United States Criminal Code prohibits the broadcast of obscene, indecent, or profane language and allows for fines of "not more than $10,000 or imprisonment not more than two years, or both.” However, self-regulation by broadcasters has generally relegated the FCC's role to regulation through licensing, putting pressure on stations which lean too far in a liberal direction through implicitthreats of lost licenses. The problem, of course, is determining exactly mpg; is obscene, indecent, or profane. As community standards differ substantially from year to year, locale to locale, and even group to group within a single 65 geographic area, the judgment becomes quite tricky. Evaluation by the courts of exactly what constitutes obscenity has been ongoing and in flux since the first U.S. obscenity conviction in 1815 (Schauer, 1976). Although federal statutes declared obscene material illegal, the definitional decision was generally left to local and state officials (the major exception being the U.S. Post Office's authority to prohibit the mailing of obscene publications under the 1876 Comstock Act: Gillmor and Barron, 1974, p. 329), and thus produced widely varying results until the U.S. Supreme Court began trying its hand at defining obscenity. After several false starts, the Supreme Court effectively entered a landmark decision in Roth yy United States in 1957. Samuel Roth was convicted on four counts for violating federal obscenity law.2 He argued that freedom of speech and the press was unconstitutionally restricted. Roth's case was consolidated with that of David Alberts, convicted under California state law of selling obscene material, for presentation to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court ruled that obscenity was not speech at all, so that if material were in fact obscene, the First Amendment was not applicable (Schauer, 1976, p. 35).' Since obscenity was held to be outside the range of First Amendment protection, it was thus judged unnecessary to show harmful effects of obscenity (e.g., by a clear-and-present-danger standard). But it did give added weight to the sticky problem of defining obscenity. The Court attempted a definition: (S)ex and obscenity are not synonymous. Obscene material is material which deals with sex in a manner appealing to prurient interest. The portrayal of sex, e.g., in art, literature and scientific works, is not itself sufficient reason to deny material the constitutional protection of freedom of speech and press (Schauer, 1976, p. 37). 66 The years following this 1957 decision were marked by indecision and divergences in opinion on the part of the Court. In 1973, the Court tried to more decisively outline a test of obscenity in Miller y; California; The majority delineated a three-part test for determining what is obscene: (a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, . . . (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious artistic, political, or scientific value. (Schauer, 1976, p. 48) This test has been variously applied to broadcast content. For example, in the early 1970's a spate of sex-oriented radio talk shows (nicknamed "Topless Radio”) fueled a debate over whether the FCC could and should prohibit airing of content of that type. In 1973, Sonderling Broadcasting Corporation was fined $2,000 for airing obscene programming under Section 1464. As the broadcaster paid the fine without appeal, no court test of the FCC's power to perform such content-directed regulation was conducted (Carlin, 1976: Feldman and Tickton, 1976). A contemporary and future issue is whether narrowcast content (e.g., movie channels on cable TV) does or should fall under FCC jurisdiction and what effect the New Right campaigners may have on our ability to pay for and view X-rated content in our home. So far, cable has escaped the FCC's wrath in this area due to its pay-for-content nature and comparatively wide capacity for providing a variety of content. One ggplg expect differences in the attitudes of the viewership toward sex on commercial, ”free" TV and sex on pay-TV. 67 The definition of what constitutes obscene material is separate from the second issue of whether mass media communicators are responsible for effects of sexually-oriented content they may produce. Is a pornographer to be held liable for a rape which might occur as a result of someone reading his sexually-explicit book? Is a network at fault when a sexual assault depicted on one of its programs is copied by teenagers in real life? In considering this issue, the real stickler is, of course, determining what constitutes decisive evidence that sexual media content is indeed responsible for such results. Is there a cause-effect relationship? As noted in the preceding section, the Commission on Obscentiy and Pornography did not find a clear relationship between pornographic exposure and sex crimes, and recommended complete decontrol for consenting adults. The FCC, in its Report on the Broadcast of Violent, Indecent, and Obscene Material (1975). opted for recommending industry self-regulation rather than "rigid governmental standards" in determining what content might be appropriate for viewing by children. Concluding that in the case of violence, the body of evidence was great enough to conclude that "a steady stream of violence on television may have an adverse effect upon our society-~and particularly on children" (Jones, 1976, p. 189), the FCC recommended several procedures for insuring that broadcasters exhibit a measure of responsibility and good faith when airing potentially "objectionable" material. The Commission endorsed the NAB's proposed amendment to its Television Code which included an expanded Family Viewing period and viewer advisories preceding questionable programming. Most 68 important, however, the FCC made clear its view that the ultimate responsibility did not fall on the broadcaster: "Parents, in our view, have--and should retain--the primary responsibility for their children's well-being" (Jones, 1976, p. 190). The U.S. courts have likewise been loath to place the blame for violent or sexual media effects on the shoulders of broadcasters. The earliest public brouhaha over broadcasting effects, centering on Orson Welles' 1938 War of the Worlds radio drama, led to lawsuits against the CBS radio network for a variety of reported effects, including attempted suicide and property damage. All came to naught, in that the courts had no precedent to go by. That precedent for finding the broadcaster responsible has yet to be set. Recently, several court cases have resulted from apparent "copy-cat" events--crimes and other actions modeled after media content. For example, in a recent case (1981), Disney Productions was found not liable for the actions of a child who copied activities shown on a TV show. Watching the "Mickey Mouse Club" program, ll-year-old Craig Shannon learned that the sound of a tire coming off a car could be simulated by putting a BB inside a balloon and rotating the balloon. In attempting to replicate this feat, Shannon used a piece of lead larger than a BB. The balloon burst, the lead was propelled into Shannon's eye, and he was left partially blind. The Georgia Supreme Court held that although the TV content did invite the child to attempt the act, the televised demonstration did not pose a "clear and present danger of injury" to the child. Although there was in this case no doubt that imitation of media content did occur, the broadcaster was held not liable since it did not 69 anticipate nor intend the harmful consequences. The Court added that it agreed with the lower court judge that the suit was barred by the First Amendment, noting that "(T)o hold otherwise would, as the saying goes, open the. Pandora's box: and it would, in our opinion, have a seriously chilling effect on the flow of protected speech through society's mediums of communication" (mpglg Lg! Reporter, Qipmpy Productions y; Shannon, 1981, p. 1212). A In the only case applying these principles directly to sex-related media effects, the family of a 9-year-old San Francisco girl brought suit against NBC charging that a sexual assault on the girl was inspired by the television broadcast of a film called "Born Innocent." Again, there was no doubt that the crime was a direct result of media exposure-~the minors who bottle-raped the child admitted that they got the idea from watching a scene of a girl being raped with a plunger handle in the ”Born Innocent" film. The California Superior Court of San Francisco however dismissed the case, finding that the film did not incite or produce "imminent lawless action" (mpglg ppm Reporter, ngmi yy Egg, 1976). This decision was reversed by the California Court of Appeals, and the lower court was ordered to empanel a jury and hear the case; the appeals court noted that the lower court had deprived the plaintiff of her right to a trial by jury (559;; ppm Reporter, Olivia N; y; mpg, 1977). NBC appealed this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it refused to stay the order (mpglp Lgm_ Reporter, mpg yy 313ml, 1978). In the final round of this fight, a jury was empaneled but the trial judge dismissed the case on the grounds that the only basis for recovery would be to show that NBC intended for the rape to follow its presentation of the drama. Since the 7O plaintiffs did not make this claim, the case was dismissed, and this was upheld by the California Court of Appeals. U.S. case law, then, implies that intentionality of harmful consequences is necessary to show liability on the part of the broadcaster for media behavioral effects. If future cases follow these precedents. broadcasters have little to fear from those who seek remedies through the U.S. court system; intentionality of this nature is extremely difficult to show. Recapitulation pi hypotheses It was within these social, legal, political, and scientific constraints that this research was conducted. The hypotheses were simple, mainly because they had never before been tested: Young people experimentally exposed to vidsex would change their attitudes, perceptions, expectations, and behaviors to be more in accordance with what they had seen--specifically, that this would hold for both mere exposure and for exposure of greater explicitness, and that controlling for past reinforcement and perceptual set would not substantially reduce this effect. Chapter II METHODS To test these hypotheses, an experiment was conducted at Michigan State University during 1981. Subjects were 234 college students enrolled in an introductory communication course. Each volunteer subject viewed a 10- to IS-minute videotape individually in a viewing room, and after this exposure was asked to fill out a questionnaire intended to measure sexual perceptions, attitudes, and reported behaviors. The videotape stimuli consisted of pay-TV movie content containing either a high level of sexual activity, a low level of sexual activity, or no sexual activity. The initial sections outline the series of stimulus and questionnaire pretests which led to the final data collection. Following sections present the data collection methods and data-reduction techniques used. Experimental design An attempt was made to create stimulus material at three levels of sexual explicitness as will be described below. This manipulation was attempted with edited versions of two different films. One group of subjects was left unexposed. The seven-cell design used for the experiment is shown below: 71 72 MOVIE l MOVIE 2 CONTROL # 47 I 5 0-1 HI (High-sex viewing group) na-u-‘n—nu v-D" LO (Low-sex viewing group) .na... 3: .. aw NO (No-sex viewing arOUP) pm: “on“ F“. ‘- M -'v-. —-v.. .0 [m -u .. .Q... —-..—.~ I CONTROL T] (No viewing) 5 I The development of stimulus material suitable to this design is described in the following sections. EL3£5§£ l; fijyg possible stimuli compared An attempt was made to obtain R-rated movie content containing sexual content of a specific nature. To ensure consistency, films were sought which included heterosexual sexual intercourse between consenting adults, with some visual display of intercourse as well as verbal and contextual references to the act. Over a two-month period during the spring of 1981, three different pay-TV movie channels were monitored in order to locate suitable content. Five likely prospects were identified in this manner and videotaped in their entireties off-cable using a 3/4" reel-to-reel videotape recorder. The films were: American Gigolo, Blume in Love, Delta Fox, IDS 73 Specialist, and §£22£ mpg. From each of these five, a 15-minute segment, a sort of ”mini-movie” with self-contained story line, was edited. Each segment contained an incident of sexual intercourse (including visual, verbal, and contextual material) and surrounding non-sexual story line content. The surrounding story content, critically selected via joint decision of this researcher and four undergraduate research assistants, was edited around the key sexual scene in each case. The intent was to develop a sexual stimulus which was brief enough to allow data collection to run quickly and without fatigue on the part of the subjects, yet complete enough to approximate the actual TV viewing situation. The editing was done onto Beta format (1/2") videocassette. The five segments were then pretested in order to assess their level and comparability on a number of variables: The key variable was perceived explicitness of the sexual content: other variables measured were enjoyment and liking of the segment, perceived reality of the segment, general excitement generated by the segment, sexual stimulation generated by the segment, perceived proportion of the segment devoted to sexual topics, and previous exposure to the film from which the segment was taken. Appendix A displays the short questionnaire used to measure these variables. During the summer of 1981, 21 pretest subjects were shown all five segments in groups ranging in size from two to six individuals. The subjects were college students enrolled in an introductory communication class, voluntarily participating in the pretest study outside of class time, but receiving two hours of extra credit in their class for the participation. The different subject groups viewed the segments in varying orders, and each subject completed one questionnaire after each 74 segment was shown. The mean scores for the five segments on all questionnaire items are shown in Table 1 (as based on O-to-IO scales--see Appendix A for further clarification on how individual items were anchored). Based on the data for perceived sexual explicitness (items 6, 7, and 8) and perceived proportion of sexual content (item 1), American Gigolo and IDS Specialist were chosen as the two stimulus tapes to be further edited and tested.) Table 1 indicates that both were perceived by the subjects as having a fair amount of visual and verbal sexual explicitness, and the two movies matched each other quite closely on the critical items. £Lg£gg£_ili Edited stimuli compared The two videotape stimuli selected were each edited into three different versions, intended to reflect differing levels of sexual explicitness. This operationalization of sexual explicitness was achieved through systematic editing of portions of the videotapes tested in Pretest I, again using 1/2" videocassette (Beta format), such that the following versions were obtained: 1. High explicit sexual content. Embedded within approximately 15 minutes of general story line were several minutes of sexual activity, including contextual, verbal, and physical sexual content. The physical (visual) content displayed sexual intercourse, but not with full visual exposure; it was representative of R-rated sexual content in movies, as typical of *1. *6. *7. *8. 10. ll. 12. 75 Table 1 Mean Scores for Pretest 1: Five Possible Stimuli Compared (n-21) Am. How much of the segment was 6.0 sexual in nature? How much of the segment 1.8 related to automobile driving? How much did you enioy the 6.3 segment? How much did you like the 5.6 characters in the segment? How much did you like the 5.9 plot of the segment? How explicit was the verbal 6.8 sexual content in the segment? How explicit was the visual 7.3 sexual content in the segment? How explicit was the sexual 6.8 content in the segment overall? How much like real life was 5.0 the segment overall? How realistic were the char- 5.1 acters in the segment? How realistic was the sexual 6.2 content in the segment? How realistic was the auto- 6.4 mobile driving in the segment? The 5-7 1.6 4.6 5.0 6.6 6.4 3-3 3.6 4.4 5-9 Blume z..7 3.0 4.3 4.9 4.4 3-5 4.6 4.2 5.8 6.0 5.4 Delta Gigolo Spec. in Love Fox 5.4 1.7 3.9 3.7 2.3 6.7 6.0 3.1. 4.3 5.6 4.9 Stunt Man 3.1. 0.9 5-9 5-5 L..a_ 3.7 4.6 4.7 2.7 1,,3 5.8 2.6 76 Table l, cont'd. Am. The Blume Stunt Gigolo Spec. in Love Fox Man 13. How exciting was the 5.8 3.5 4.4 5.7 segment overall? 14. How exciting was the 2.8 0.9 3.4 1.8 automobile driving in the segment? 15. How sexually stimulating was 6.0 3.9 3.5 4.1 the sexual content in the segment? 16. Have you ever seen the movie 382 02 102 112 from which this segment was taken? (2 YES) * - Critical items NOTE: ”Am. Gigolo" is an abbreviation for "American Gigolo," and "The Spec." is an abbreviation for "The Specialist." 77 films shown on pay-TV or pay-cable TV, rather than including the full genital display of X-rated flicks. 2. Low explicit sexual content. This version was composed of the same general story line material of contextual and verbal sexual content. Basically, it consisted of the “high-sex" version with the physical display of intercourse edited out. It was, generally speaking, typical of R-rated movies edited for prime-time commercial TV, or PG-rated theatrical films. 3. No sexual content. This version contained the same general story line material as did the "high-sex" and "low-sex" versions, but without contextual, verbal, or physical sexual content. It consisted of the ”high-sex" version with all content relating to the specific act of intercourse edited out. The precise content of these stimulus tapes will be explored in subsequent sections of this chapter. Suffice it to say at this point that each of the six tapes represented a coherent video presentation of believable, professional quality--each tape contained a comprehensible story line, and edits were neither distracting nor abrupt. The six videotapes were pretested in order to assess the perceptions of viewers with regard to the tapes' sexual explicitness, thus validating the manipulation. Other (pertinent variables were also measured: the questionnaire used for this pretest consisted of the Pretest I questionnaire, supplemented by items measuring perceived certainty that 78 the videotape couple engaged in sexual intercourse (i.e., viewer interpretation of varying levels of explicitness in terms of behaviors of potential models) and items measuring the perceived humor of the segment overall and of the sexual content in the segment. This latter measurement effort was deemed essential in that while the two movies were matched along sexual explicitness dimensions, they on face value appeared to differ in the amount of amusement they afforded the participants in Pretest I. IDS Specialist seemed to elicit more laughter from the participants than did American Gigolo. Appendix B provides the short questionnaire used in Pretest II. . In the summer of 1981, 71 introductory‘ communication students participated in Pretest 11, each viewing one version of IDS Specialist and one version of American £13912, with random assignment to versions. Viewing was again conducted in small groups of participants. Every subject completed two questionnaires, one after viewing each of the two tapes. Table 2 presents the mean scores for the six tapes on all variables, and indicates which sets of means differed significantly as assessed by F-tests. The crucial variables of perceived sexual explicitness (items 6, 7, and 8), perceived proportion of sexual content (item 1), sexual stimulation (item 15), and certainty that the couple in the segment engaged in sexual intercourse (item 19) were examined for patterns which would validate the manipulation of sexual explicitness in the segments. It was anticipated that the mean scores for the high-sex and low-sex versions would exceed the mean scores for the no-sex versions for all the aforementioned items. It was also anticipated that the mean scores for 79 $1 80\80 R1 801 800 $00 ss01.0 00.0\10.0 0..0 ss0n.0 00.1 00.0 10.. 15..\0.... 00.0 00.1 00.0 00.0 00.0 0..0\mm.n 00.1 a..0 10.0 05.1 01.1 51.0\1..1 11.0 00.0 00.0 00.5 10.1 00.1\00.1 00.1 00.0 «0.1 .5.0 00.1 mm.0\00.0 00.0 .0.1 00.1 50.1 10.0 51.0\0N.0 00.0 55.0 00.1 00.1 .900.0 05.1\00.0 00.0 9901.0 00.0 05.0 5.00.0 00.1\5u.0 00.5 .90..0 10.0 «0.5 50.0 15.1\0N.0 01.1 5.00.0 01.0 01.0 00.1 00.N\00.0 0..0 00.1 .N.0 10.1 00.1 00.0\N0.1 01.1 00.0 5..0 00.0 01.1 00.0\00.1 01.1 m..0 00.0 .5.0 00.. 00.p\00.. 10.0 «1.0 «1.0 00.0 {050.1 500.0\00.0 05.0 com..1 00.0 50.0 I~1Nu0% ~.N\NNNGM Ann-cu ~0Nucv ~1Nncv ~.NICM xom-oz x00-304 xooica.z X09102 xounzoa xmnicu.I um..a.UOQm 0:5 0.00.0 cm0.cme< 00000500 ..3E.um 00«.0m Amw> flu 5c0xnu 003 «£05000 0.5. £0.23 20c. 0.>oe use coon c0>0 30> 0>nz «acmeuon on. c. acoucou .e3xmu on. no: mmflMMdmfiflwm Nddmmmmm 5.006000 0:. c. ac.>.c0 0..0050«30 one no: umflwflmmm 5..nc0>0 «cocoon as. no: amdMflmmm «acmeaon 0:. c. ac.>.c0 0..00&0u3n on. no) mflMMHdmmu «acoeuuo on. c. «coucou .n3xon on“ an: mflMMddmmu eucoeuon on. c. acouuecoco 0:» ago: 0.ua..eoc 5..aco>0 «00:00» on. no: a... .00; 0x.. £035 5..eco>0 «cocoon on. c. «caucou .a3xmn on. no: ..0..0x0 5ucoeoou on. c. «caucoo .o3x0n .m3m.> 0:. an: u.0..0x0 «acoeuon on. c. «coacoo .e3xom .nnc0> on. no: u.0..0x0 5.:05000 02a 00 ~0.m 0:. 0x.. 30> 0.0 £035 «newsman 0:. c. ncouoecozu 05a Ox.. 30> 0.0 £035 5.006000 05. xoqco 30> 0.0 $036 5mm.>.c0 0..0080.3m 0. 00.0.0; «£05000 02¢ 00 £035 50c3uec c. .m3xom on: .005000 on. .0 :03! u.— «mmuOLQ c0. mocoom com: a 0.005 301 301 30: 30: 30: so: 301 30: 30: 30: 30: 30: 30: 30: 30: .0. .m. i .1. .0. .N. ... .0. .0 .. ¥ 80 .co.nc0> xmnizo. 0:000» 00u.00-0c 0:. >0 00:.muno nmcoun 0a mcoeoc can.» on. Loewe c0053: 0:. "co.nc0> x0m-30. .mc.. 02. >0 00c.euoo come on. pacemocooc can.m 0c. ceases c0053: 0:. -ss. ..co.«n.3o.eo n.c. c. 00m: ago: p.00 xom-30. .0 .00 0:0000 on. .wm..u.uomm 055 can. .Amo.v00 amuoE.un0 «cocouu.0 >.~cno...cm.n c. 00..3m0c E... n.c. no nco.mco> macaw och - as .meo.. .eo.«.eo - . ..ov.v .w.o\ov.o no.» ..mm.v v0.0 .o.o «omtzoocouc. .osxon c. oooeoco «£06000 0:. 0. 0.0300 0:. «an. 30> 0cm c.0vc00 30: .m. ..so.v oo.v\uo.v vu.o co.“ vo.n mo.« «season» on. c. «caucoo .eaxou on. no: mmmumamm 3o: .o. so.v no.v\sn.v op.m em.“ mu.n mo.n e._uto>o «cases» at. no: mmmumamm so: .5. ~kuc0 ..«\uu.c. ~ma.cm .mu.cu men-c. ..«.c« xomloz X00130; xonicu.z xowuoz xmuiaoa xomicu.z .mr.m.oomw 0:» 0.00.0 cmo.coe< .Usucoo .N 0.005 81 the high-sex versions would be greater than those for the low-sex versions on all items except that measuring perceived ygmpgl sexual explicitness. Since the high-sex and low-sex versions did not differ in their verbal sexual content, a difference along that dimension was not expected. In addition, differences across the three versions for each film were not anticipated for the other items on the questionnaire, in that it was hoped that the amount of sexual explicitness contained in a particular version would be unrelated to the subjects' enjoyment and liking of the segment, the perceived reality of the segment, the general excitement generated by the segment, and the perceived humor of the segment. For American gigplp, the data did conform to these expected patterns, with one minor exception: The low-sex version scored slightly higher than the high-sex version on item 19, measuring certainty that the couple in the segment engaged in sexual intercourse. Both means were very high--8.9l and 9.04 on a O-to-IO scale--pointing toward the possibility that the verbal sexual content common to these two versions implied a near-certainty that this act did take place. An inspection of the content of the American 919219 stimulus tapes does lend face validity to such a possibility--before the act of intercourse occurs, in both the high-sex and the low-sex versions, the female lead character tells the male lead that she wonders "what it would be like to fuck you." This does leave little doubt as to their intentions. The data for IE2 Specialist proved to be less satisfactory in meeting the desired parameters. The low-sex version was perceived to be more verbally explicit, somewhat less visually explicit, and only slightly less explicit overall than the high-sex version. It was decided that an 82 attempt at re-editing and testing might result in high-sex and low-sex versions which would be better differentiated. This attempt was made by deleting one brief shot from the tape of a close-up of the female lead character posing topless for a portrait. Twenty-one undergraduate subjects were each shown this new low-sex version of [mg Specialism (and also to one of the three versions of American Glgplg, for the sake of procedural consistency) and asked to complete the Pretest II questionnaire. The exclusion of this visual content did result in substantially lower visual explicitness and overall explicitness scores. In Table 2, a mean score on each variable for the first Specialist low-sex version appears on the left of the slash, and the mean score for the second, re-edited version appears on the right.' As indicated previously, the greatest difference between American 919212 and IRS Specialist along variables possibly pertinent to a social learning hypothesis was anticipated to be a difference in perceived humor, and this prediction was upheld in the data. The humor of the segments in general and, unexpectedly, the sexual content of the segments were both judged to be substantially greater for ID; Specialis . Strangely, the high-sex version of this film scored highest on both humor items.3 In order to test any impact these differences have on social learning, it was decided to include items measuring perceived humor on the final study questionnaire. IDS final stimulus tapes Thus, in substituting the revised low-sex Specialist version, the six stimulus tapes were finalized. The videotape editing was of professional 83 quality, exhibiting single-frame precision (i.e., no "blips” or "rolls" were evident in the finished tapes). Timings of the final videotapes indicated that the length of the Specialist versions varied by 14.92, and those of the American Gigolo by 25.03. Table 3 presents the lengths in minutes of the six stimulus tapes. Table 3 Lengths of Stimulus Tapes (in Minutes) American Gigolo The Specialist High-sex 14:35 High-sex 13:20 Low-sex 13:30 ‘ Low-sex 11:55 No-sex 12:25 No-sex 10:00 The story line of each of the edited films revolved around the meeting of a man and woman, their conversations as they got to know one another, their participation in consensual sexual intercourse (in the high-sex and low-sex versions), and subsequent events occurring to these characters, unrelated to the sex act. Appendix C presents transcripts of the two high-sex segments in their entireties, indicating key visual activity as well as all verbal content. On the transcripts are notations indicating the portions which were edited out in the creation of the low-sex and no-sex versions. Questionnaire development 84 As indicated in Chapter 1, the impact of viewing these manipulated segments on an individual's sexual perceptions, expectations, attitudes, and future behavior will be explored. Thus, measures of these constructs needed to be devised. A post-test only design was decided upon so as to avoid possible threats to internal validity such as sensitization; if random assignment of subjects to cells (conditions) is achieved, no experimental pre-test is necessary (Campbell and Stanley, 1968). A self-administered questionnaire data collection was planned, due to the sensitive and personal nature of the questions asked. In preparation for the. final questionnaire, a 'third pretest was conducted, providing preliminary assessments of possible sexual perceptual, attitudinal and behavioral items. The measurement of sexual attitudes was particularly problematic, in that no previous studies have been identified which assess the validity of any_ sexual attitude scale. Thus, the main purpose of Pretest III was to select questionnaire items which would tap certain dimensions of sexual attitudes. First, 28 items were generated which were intended to measure positive and negative affect toward a variety of sexual behaviors, of varying levels of sexual liberalism. The adapted Likert-type items included such diverse statements as ”I approve of necking and petting on the first date," ”I could not have respect for a person who had homosexual experiences," and IIPornography should be strictly regulated." Also included were a number of items intended to measure sex-role attitudes (e.g., "Men should be concerned with their careers rather than the duties of child rearing and house tending.”) in order to discover whether these 85 commonly measured attitudes are closely related to ppmpgl attitudes. Also, 16 similar items intended to measure sexual values were also generated. Using an adapted semantic differential format (an ll-point scale where 0 represents NEVER RIGHT and 10 represents ALWAYS RIGHT), these items asked whether the respondent thought certain things were "right or not”: e.g., "To read 'dirty' magazines,” "To go to X-rated movies," or VTo engage in oral sex." The ll-point scale format used for many of the dependent and mediating variable measures was selected because it allows considerable freedom of response for the respondent (i.e., moreso than a 5-point or 7-point format) while at the same time possessing properties which make it analogous to percentages, and therefore easy to conceptualize and use (i.e., 10 represents ALL of a property, 0 represents NONE of it, and 5 represents about HALF of it). Items were also developed to measure a respondent's proclivity for perceiving stimuli as sexual-~a sort of index of "dirty-mindedness." It was felt that those individuals who more readily perceive stimuli as sexual in nature might be more affected by exposure to the stimuli in this experiment. Although random assignment to conditions should assure equivalent distribution of such individuals across conditions, it might be desirable to quantify the contribution of such ”dirty-mindedness“ to any cognitive, affective, or behavioral sexual effects of the media. Thus, an attempt was made to develop questionnaire items which might measure this potential active mediating variable. In an effort to enhance the external validity of this "dirty-mindedness'I measure, actual quotes of televised sexual references were collected (Comm. 399 Students, 1980). Nineteen items were created which asked whether the quotes did indeed "refer to 86 sexual intercourse." The items asked the respondent to answer according to an ll-point scale where O meant "DEFINITELY NO" and 10 meant ”DEFINITELY YES." These quotes included within their number statements ranging in their explicitness, from "He picked me up and carried me over to the bed and made love to me," to "Here's to afternoon delights." Also needed were items measuring specific sexual perceptions. Ten items were generated which asked the respondent to "assume that a man and a woman have engaged in sexual intercourse" and to judge such specific probabilities as the following: "How likely is it that they are married to one another?" "How likely is it that the act was initiated by the woman?" and "How likely is it that one or both of the partners were married to someone else?" (providing a scale where 0-DEFINITELY NO and 10-DEFINITELY YES). These specific perceptual items were intended to match the content of the stimulus tapes--for example, in both stimulus tapes, the lovers were mp; married to one another, and it was therefore anticipated under the hypotheses forwarded that a respondent viewing such content would garner an enhanced real-life perception that lovers may be unmarried. The hypotheses also indicated effects on anticipated future sexual behavior. Items intended to measure this, as well as items asking about past sexual behavior and exposure to sex in the media (to serve as possible mediators and also to describe the sample's sexual orientations), were developed. The main items measuring intended future sexual behavior asked. specifically 'about sexual intercourse (again, matching the content of the stimulus tapes)--"How likely are you to engage in sexual intercourse during the next week?" and "How eager are you to engage in 87 sexual intercourse during the next week?" Items measuring past behavior included questions dealing with X-rated and R-rated movie viewing, reading of sexually-oriented magazines and books, and frequency of engaging in heterosexual and homosexual intercourse in the past month. All of the abovementioned items sets were included in the Pretest III questionnaire in order to test their feasibility for use in the final study questionnaire. Additionally, demographic variables which were needed to describe the sample (and which might serve valuable as possible mediators) were measured: Age, gender, ethnic affiliation, marital status, present living arrangement, romantic involvement, class standing, sexual preference (heterosexual, bisexual, or homosexual), family income, occupation(s) of those supporting the respondent, hometown, religious preference, religiosity, perceived identification with or membership in the Moral Majority, and political conservatism. Appendix 0 presents the Pretest III questionnaire. The Pretest III questionnaire was completed by 27 undergraduate communication students during the summer of 1981. A number of decisions were made on the basis on the results of this data collection. First the sex attitude items and sex value items were subjected to factor analysis in order to determine which sets of items combined to measure general sexual constructs. From the seven factors which emerged from this analysis, three were of conceptual interest here: A factor representing general sexual liberalism (highly-loading items included agreement that it is ”right" to “read 'dirty' magazines," "use contraceptives," and ”go to a prostitute."), a factor representing (sexual permissiveness of a more extreme nature (highly-loading items included agreement that "There. are 88 times when sex between two people of the same sex can be as good as sex between people of the opposite sex," agreement that it is ”right". to "experiment with various positions for sex," "masturbate," and "engage in 21:55; ppgplp (highly-loading items included agreement with the ideas that "If there wasn't so much sex on TV, today's youth wouldn't be so sexually promiscuous," and "If children are exposed to sexual themes in the media that are new to them, they are likely to learn something positive.”) The Pretest III questionnaire included in Appendix 0 includes notation which indicates which items loaded highly on these three factors. An "SL" next to an items indicates that it loaded highly on the sexual liberalism factor, an "SP" indicates that it loaded highly on the sexual permissiveness factor, and an "SM“ indicates a high loading on the sex-and-media factor. A designation of "(neg.)" indicates that the item loaded strongly but negatively on the factor. The second analysis available from this pretest examined the results of the items measuring perceived sexual meaning of 19 different quotes taken from televised content. The mean scores for each of these 19 quotes are in Appendix D. as are the standard deviations. It was desired to establish a range of quotes for the final study questionnaire, including some 'quotes which gained overwhelming agreement that they indeed referred to sexual intercourse, some quotes which gained general agreement that they did mg; refer to sex, and quotes at every point in between. It may be seen from the means displayed in Appendix D that the items did provide a wide range to choose from. 89 The third purpose of Pretest III was to test whether repondents would respond to certain behavioral and demographic questions of a personal nature. Only two items did not receive 100% reponse. The first asked, "What do you consider to be your main sexual preference?" Eleven percent of the respondents refused to answer this question, and the remaining 89% responded uniformly that they considered. themselves to be "heterosexual"--no one reported that they considered themselves to be either "bisexual" or "homosexual." The second item which received some non-response was that asking "What is the approximate yearly income of your family?" Again, 112 refused to respond. Surprisingly, all respondents did deign to answer such questions as "Have you ever engaged in (heterosexual) sexual intercourse?" (52* yes), "Have you ever had a homosexual experience?" (19% yes), and "How eager are you to engage in sexual intercourse during the next week?" Overall, Pretest III indicated that college-age respondents were willing and able to answer most sexually-oriented questions posed to them. Using the results of this pretest, a complete final study questionnaire was drafted. Each of four undergraduate research assistants worked independently on clarifying and improving the questionnaire items--persona1 interviews were conducted to test the clarity of the items. This in-depth testing resulted in a questionnaire which was comprehensive and comprehensible. The final study guestionnaire 90 On the basis of the Pretest III results and the guidance obtained through intensive critiquing of the questionnaire items, the posttest-only questionnaire was finalized. The following subsections detail the variables measured by the questionnaire and pinpoint their location in the final questionnaire, which is in Appendix E. 1. Screening Question . An effort was made to show subjects a videotape stimulus obtained from a movie which they had never seen before. The first page of the questionnaire consisted of a list of 13 films, and asked the respondents to indicate which ones they had seen, "either in part or totally," and either “on TV or at a theatre." Included within the list were the films from which the stimulus tapes were derived: IDS Specialist and American gigplg. This page was administered to the subjects separately from the rest of the questionnaire, and comprised the only questions asked of the respondents before exposure to the stimulus tapes. Exactly how this information was utilized shall be dealt with in subsequent sections of this chapter. Manipulation £53553. In order to validate the manipulation of the stimulus tapes, questions asking the respondents about the segment they viewed were included in the questionnaire. The Pretest II questionnaire was basically included in its entirety. Again, these items asked how much of the segment was perceived by the respondent as sexual, how explicit the verbal, visual, and 3. 91 overall sexual content were perceived by the respondent, how sexually stimulating the sexual content and the segment in general were, how certain the respondent was that the couple in the segment engaged in sexual intercourse, and how humorous the sexual content and the segment in general were perceived. In addition, a number of "foil" items--items intended to diversify the topics asked about and take the edge off the many sexually-oriented questions-~were included. For example, in addition to being asked "How much of the segment was pgyppl in nature?" the respondents were also asked, "How much of the segment was about the drinking 2: alcohol?" The intent behind and the nature of these foils will be further discussed in point #6 of this itemization. Dependent Variables. Each of the main study dependent variables were measured with a number of items intended to form an index. Spmpgl attitudes were measured by 24 adapted Likert-type items, utilizing an 11-point scale where -5 indicated "STRONGLY DISAGREE” and 5 indicated "STRONGLY AGREE." These 24 were interspersed with 15 foil items dealing with attitudes toward alcohol and drugs, and 5 political liberalism items. As indicated previously, these 24 items were developed through pretesting of a large pool of possible items. These attitudinal items are listed in Table 4. Specific sexual perceptions were measured by the 12 items shown in Table 4. As described previously, these items were intended to measure very specific 92 Table 4 Items Measuring Dependent and Mediating Variables Dependent Variables SEXUAL ATTITUDES: All items used an ll-point response scale where -5-STRONGLY DISAGREE and 5-STRONGLY AGREE. 1. IO. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. "It is wrong to have sex with someone who is married to someone else." ”If children watch sexual themes on TV that are new to them, they are more likely to experiment with sex-related behaviors." "I approve of necking and petting on the first date." "I could not have respect for a person who has had a homosexual experience." "It is desirable to engage in some sort of sexual activity every day.” "It is wrong to go to X-rated movies." "Sex should take place only in the dark." "If children watch sexual themes on TV that are new to them, they are likely to learn something positive." "I approve of sexual intercourse if the couple is in love but not married." "It is OK to masturbate.” "Pornography should be strictly regulated by the government.” "I disapprove of premarital sex even if the couple is to be married." ”It is wrong to read sexually-oriented magazines.” “It is OK for a woman to make the first move toward having sex." "If there wasn't so much sex on TV, young people wouldn't be so sexually promiscuous." I'It is wrong for a man to fondle a woman's breasts." "Sex between two people of the same sex can be as satisfying as 93 Table 4, cont'd. sex between people of the opposite sex.” 18. "I approve of sexual intercourse on casual dates." 19. "It is OK to go to a prostitute.” 20. "It is wrong to have sex with someone who is seriously involved with someone else." 21. "If children watch sexual themes on TV that are new to them, they are more likely to tolerate certain sex behaviors in others.” 22. "It is OK to experiment with various positions for sex." 23. "The government should not legislate what is permissible sexual activity between consenting adults." 24. "It is wrong to engage in oral sex." SEXUAL PERCEPTIONS: Except where noted, all items used an ll-point response scale where 0-DEFINITELY N0 and 10-DEFINITELY YES. The items were preceded by the following: ”For the following questions, imagine that a man and a woman have just had sexual intercourse." A.G. The S. 1. How old do you imagine the woman to be? YRS. (COMPARED WITH ESTIMATE or FEMALE CHARACTER'S AGE) 2. How old do you imagine the man to be? YRS. (COMPARED WITH ESTIMATE or MALE CHARACTER'S AGE) 3. Are the two people married to one another? - - 4. Did the act take place in the woman's home? - - 5. Did the act take place in the man's home? + + 6. Was the act initiated by the woman? + + 7. Was one of the partners a prostitute? + 8. Were the two partners on their first date? + + 9. Were one or both of the partners married to someone + else? 10. Were one or both of the partners seriously involved + with someone else? 11. Had one or both of them been drinking alcohol? + + Table 4, cont'd. 94 12. Did the act take place in the dark? SEXUAL EXPECTATIONS FOR SELF: All items used an ll-point response scale where O'DEFINITELY N0 and lo-DEFINITELY YES. The items were preceded by the statement: "For the following questions, imagine that ypp are going to How likely are have sexual intercourse with someone of the opposite sex. the following things?" 10. 11. Will the act Will the act home? Is the other Will the act. Will the act Is the other or female)? take place in your home? take place in the other person's person married to someone else? be initiated by you? be initiated by the other person? person a prostitute (male Are you on your first date with this person? Are you marr Is the other ied to the other person? person seriously involved with someone else? Will you have been drinking alcohol? Will the act ANTICIPATED FUTURE items are included below. I. 2. PREVIOUS SEXUAL BEHAVIORS: Response categories are provided for How likely next week? How eager ar week? (ll-point scale, 0-NOT AT ALL, take place in the dark? A.G. + (M) H“ +0") + (M) The S. + (M) +(F) +(F) + (M) SEXUAL BEHAVIORS: The response scales for these two are you to engage in sexual intercourse during the (ll-point scale, 0-DEFINITELY NO. IOIDEFINITELY YES) e you to engage in sexual intercourse during the next Mediating Variables sets of items measuring past sexual behaviors. 10-VERY EAGER) the two 95 Table 4, cont'd. 1. Have you ever engaged in (heterosexual) sexual intercourse? (YES or NO) IF YES: How many times have you had sexual intercourse in the past month? ( TIMES) 2. Have you ever had a homosexual experience? (YES or NO) IF YES: How many times have you engaged in homosexual sexual activity in the past month? ( TIMES) PAST SEX MEDIA EXPOSURE: Response categories are provided. 1. How many X-rated movies have you seen in the last year? ( X-RATED MOVIES) 2. How many R-rated movies have you seen in the last year? ( R-RATED MOVIES) 3. How many issues of sexually-oriented magazines (such as Playboy, Playgirl, and Penthouse) have you read in the last year? ( - ISSUES) 4. How many sexually-oriented books have you read during the last year? ( BOOKS) MEDIA "DIRTY-MINDEDNESS": The first five quotes listed were judged via pretest to be "mild" quotes, i.e., inexplicit as to their sexual nature, while the second five quotes listed were judged to be more explicit. All used an 11-point response scale where OIDEFINITELY NO and 10-DEFINITELY YES. The items were preceded by the statements: "Listed below are some quotes which may or may not refer to an act of sexual intercourse. Please indicate whether you feel‘ each quote does indeed refer to sexual "intercourse." The means and standard deviations given are those obtained for the items as originally tested in Pretest III. 1. "It would be the easiest thing in the world to have a relationship with you." (mean-4.1, sd-2.3) 2. "We talked some business and then went to bed.” (mean-6.2, sd-3.1) 3. "I don't think anything could be more beautiful than last night.” (mean-6.6, sd-3.0) 4. ”Here's to afternoon delights." (mean-6.6, sd-2.7) 5. '"I hope last night was as heavy for you as it was for me." (mean-6.6, sd=2.8) 6. "We can sit in the back seat and 'get down.'" (mean-7.0, sd-2.8) 7. "Bob slept with Shari." (mean-8.3, sd-1.8) Table 4, 8. 9. lo. 96 cont'd. "If you're trying to tell me that Pat slept around, I agree with you." (mean-8.8, sd-l.7) "I'm just not sure I want to exchange my best friend for my best lover." (mean-7.6, sd-2.4) "You're the most beautiful girl I've been to bed with in a long time.” (mean-9.2, sd-O.9) POLITICAL AND MORAL LIBERALISM: All items used an 11-point response scale where -5-STRONGLY DISAGREE and 5-STRONGLY AGREE. 5. "Capital punishment should never be used.” "It is important for each of us to spread the word of God.” "Welfare payments to the poor should be eliminated." "Abortion should remain legal." "The U.S. should increase‘its military spending." INVOLVEMENT: Response categories are provided. I. What is your current marital status? (SINGLE, NEVER MARRIED: MARRIED: SEPARATED/DIVORCED; WIDOWED) IF SINGLE: Do you have a close, romantic relationship with a member of the opposite sex? (NO, NOT AT THIS TIME: YES, AND WE DO NOT LIVE TOGETHER: YES. AND WE DO LIVE TOGETHER) 97 perceptions regarding sexual intercourse in real life, and were reflective of the filmed sexual activity the respondents had just been exposed to. The index to be formed from these items would consist of a sum of all .items worded consistently with the videotape content (e.g., "Was the act initiated by the woman?"--in both tapes it was), and a subtraction of all items reverse-worded with regard to the videotape content (e.g., "Did the act take place in the dark?"--in neither tape was this true). It should be remembered that these items asked the respondent to ”imagine that a man and a woman have just had sexual intercourse,” rather than to respond concerning the videotape just seen. Thus, any extrapolation by the respondent from the videotape to real life would hopefully be tapped. Similar items measuring specific personal ppyppl expectations were also included in the questionnaire, as shown in Table 4. Like the sexual perception items, these corresponded closely to the content viewed. Asked to imagine that "ygp are going to have sexual intercourse with someone of the opposite sex," the respondent was requested to gauge how likely certain things might be: e.g., "Will you have been drinking alcohol?" "Will the act take place in the dark?” and "Are you married to the other person?" The index to be formed from these items would be constructed in the same manner as the sexual perception index. Finally, anticipated figmppg gpypgl behaviors were measured by two single items, shown in Table 4. These items asked, "How likely are you to engage in sexual intercourse during the next week?" 4. 98 and "How eager are you to engage in sexual intercourse during the next week?" again using an ll-point response format. Mediating Variables. Measures of past experiences of a sexual nature (i.e., past reinforcement) were made to serve as mediating variables. The respondents' previous sexual behaviors were asked in two items as shown in Table 4; past heterosexual and homosexual sexual experience was reported by each respondent. Virginity/non-virginity was measured for both, as was frequency of intercourse in the past month (this time interval was chosen to provide responses which might have substantial range and variance, yet would be tapping recent, recallable events). Past experience with sex im the media was measured by four items as shown in Table 4. The respondents' exposure to X-rated and R-rated movies, as well as exposure to sexually-oriented magazines and books, were asked. And, items asking the subjects' marital status and romantic attachments were included. These measures of involvement with the opposite sex are shown in Table 4. Also, as explained in the above section on Pretest 111, it was expected that social learning effects might be mediated by the respondents' perceptual set, including the extent to which the individual respondent does perceive media stimuli in general to be sexual. Thus, a measure of this mpgjp "dirty-mindedness" was included. Ten quotes from TV (all are displayed in Table 4) attempted to measure this construct. (NOTE: The 525259 page 3 included in Appendix E was used for those subjects who saw pp 99 stimulus tape. Those in this control group were of course not asked about the segment they "just saw," and so were not given pages 1 and 2 of the questionnaire.) On the basis of Pretest 111 results, the quotes were split into two groups--one set of five "mild," or inexplicit, quotes, and one set of five more sexually _ explicit references. General political and moral liberalism attitude items were also included. These five items are also listed in Table 4. Basic demographic information was requested of each subject. Age, gender, racial/ethnic background, living arrangements, class standing, sexual preference, family income, occupations of those supporting the respondent, Moral Majority affiliation, religious preference, and frequency of attendance at religious services were asked of each respondent. As indicated throughout this section, a large number of £211 ‘Lppmg were included in order to lead the subjects to conclude that the questionnaire was broad-based and intended to measure more than just sexual attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors. Thus, it was hoped that sensitization due to the instrument might be reduced. The subjects would indeed be aware that they were being asked many sexual questions, but inasmuch as many items inquired about drug and alcohol use and about automobile driving, it was hoped that they would conclude that the study might be about "adult topics" in general. (The data collection did uphold 100 this anticipation--many subjects inquired upon leaving the research situation as to exactly mpg; we had been interested in finding out.) The selection of drug and alcohol consumption was not arbitrary--in both videotaped segments, some alcohol consumption was clearly shown, and in one movie (American gigplp) cocaine use was briefly shown. The foils used included: (1) eleven R- and PG-rated films listed on the screening page, (2) items asking about the perceived composition of the segment viewed by the subjects, (3) items asking about attitudes toward drugs, alcohol, and driving, (4) items asking about the subjects real-life perceptions of alcohol and drug use. (5) quotes. which "may or may not refer to drinking of alcoholic beverages," and (6) six behavioral items asking about the subject's alcohol and drug use. IDS sample Subjects for this experiment were 234 introductory communication students at Michigan State University. Participation in the study was voluntary, and the students did receive one hour of extra credit. These students represented a variety of academic majors. Communication majors constituted 292 of the sample, and other College of Communication Arts and Sciences students 112 of the sample. Agriculture majors comprised 172 of the sample, while 92 were students of business, 72 were students in the social sciences, 62 were education majors, and 62 were engineering and science students. Eleven percent of the sample reported being ”no 101 preference” or undesignated students, and 32 had other assorted majors. A majority (56*) of the sample consisted of freshman students. Sophomores composed 152 of the sample, juniors 193, and seniors 93. These figures did not differ substantially across the four treatment groups (high-sex viewing, low-sex viewing, no-sex viewing, and control). The average age of the respondents was 19.2 years. The average family income was reported to be $44,775 per year. These figures were also consistent across the treatments. Forty-one percent of the sample was male (The breakdown for the four sex treatment groups was as follows: High-sex, 453: low-sex, 452: no-sex, 332: control, 423: these differences were not found to be significant.). Eight percent of the respondents indicated a black racial/ethnic identity, 12 endorsed a Native American identity, 22 an Hispanic identity, 02 an Oriental identity, 90* a white identity, and 2% some other racial/ethnic identity. (NOTE: Endorsement of these identities was not a mutually exclusive process: respondents were asked to check "all that apply.") These racial/ethnic breakdowns did not differ across the four treatment groups. Only 22 of the sample was presently married. Five percent reported to be living with one or more people of the opposite sex. Fifty-five percent of the single respondents had a "close, romantic relationship with a member of the opposite sex." This did vary across the four treatment groups (high-sex, 48%; low-sex, 582: no-sex, 482: control, 752), although nonsignificantly (chi-square-10.78, p-.10).h Twenty-four percent of the respondents considered themselves to be members of the Moral Majority. This percentage was quite uniform across 102 treatment groups. The single most prominent religion represented in the sample was Catholicism--37X of the respondents. The vast majority of the sample indicated their main sexual preference to be heterosexual (982). A scant 22 said they were bisexual, and pg respondents reported to be mainly homosexual. Fifty-five percent of the respondents reported to have a "close, romantic relationship with a member of the opposite sex." They viewed an average of .84 X-rated movies during the last year (range from 0 to 10), and an average of 9.1 R-rated movies (range from 0 to 68). The average number of sexually-oriented magazines read in the last year was .4.4 per respondent, while the average number of sexually-oriented books read in the last year was 1.7. Forty-two percent reported they were virgins when it came to heterosexual intercourse, and 94* indicated they had no homosexual sexual experience. The non-virgins reported to have engaged in heterosexual sexual intercourse an average of 5.7 times in the last month. Those with homosexual experience reported to have engaged in homosexual sexual activity an average of only .1 times in the last month. 22;; collection procedures In October and November of 1981, introductory communication students at Michigan State University were solicited to participate in this experiment. In this solicitation the students were told nothing of the nature of the study except that it dealt with television, and were asked to sign up for specific appointment times. Over a two-week period, 247 students agreed to participate and did meet their appointment times. In accordance with Department of Communication policy, each participant was 103 asked to sign a research consent form which released the Department of liability and informed the participant that since his/her participation was entirely voluntary, he/she was free to refrain from engaging in any portion of the study. No student exercised this option. Each participant did receive extra credit in his/her communication course for participating in the study, and also completed an extra credit form for that purpose. In order to achieve random assignment of subjects to the seven cells in the design, a table of random numbers was used to devise a schedule of assignments to groups. Thus, as each subject arrived for his/her appointment, the schedule was checked and the subject was assigned to the next open slot, determining the subject's identification number and treatment condition. One major deviation from a pure random assignment procedure occurred: Subjects were not assigned tooa group in which they would view a segment from a film they had viewed before. This screening was achieved via the cover page of the questionnaire, which asked the respondents to check all films (in a list of 13) which they had seen in part or totally. (Given to each respondent as a single page when he/she first arrived at the research station, it was later stapled to the respondent's questionnaire.) If a subject reported to have seen American gagglp (pp subjects reported to have seen IDS Specialist), he/she was not assigned to one of the three American £13912 treatment cells: in the schedule, the next available non-American gigglg designation was assigned. A sample page from this random assignment schedule is included in Appendix F. A staff of four undergraduate research assistants in addition to this Ph.D. candidate comprised the research team for the data collection. 104 These research assistants were actually involved in all stages of pretesting and preparation for the final data collection, and provided invaluable aid at every step. For the final data collection, two research stations on the second floor of the Communication Arts Building were staffed: One researcher manned the viewing room where participants arrived, filled out the screening page, were assigned an ID and treatment, and viewed the videotape segment: a second researcher staffed a large research room where participants subsequently completed the post-test questionnaire.5 Appendix G contains photographs of the viewing room. The set-up for the viewing room was maintained a constant throughout the two-week data collection period. Appendix H contains a diagram of furniture and equipment in the room: A small couch, a bookcase, and of course a television set and videotape machine on a stand. The television was a 17" diagonal color set, and the videotape machine a Betamax 11 machine. The distance between and relative positioning of the couch and TV stand were carefully controlled, and the volume of the TV was marked and remained constant. The lighting in the room also remained constant. The protocol followed by the researchers was also standardized. A subject arriving for his/her appointment would be greeted outside the viewing room and be asked by the researcher to have a seat at one of several desks, and to fill out the screening page (see page El, Appendix E) indicating previous exposure to a short list of films. Returning the completed sheet, the subject would be asked to be seated again and wait, and the researcher would at this point check the random assignment schedule, assigning the subject an ID number and treatment or control condition. If the subject happened to be assigned to the control group 105 which saw no videotape segment, he/she would be instructed to proceed to the second research room, a short distance down a hallway from the viewing room. All other subjects awaited their turn in the viewing room. Upon being ushered into the viewing room by the researcher, a subject was asked to sit on the couch while the researcher readied the assigned videotape. The subject was given a sheet of paper to read, upon which was printed, ”In a moment, you will be asked to view a TV segment approximately 15 minutes long. This segment was edited from a movie which was originally rated 'R' because of its violent, sexual, or adult-oriented material. Please remember that your participation in this study is entirely voluntary." When the appropriate videotape was cued to its start point, the researcher would take the printed sheet from the subject and begin the videotape, asking the subject to come out of the viewing room when the tape was over. The researcher exited the room as the tape began. When the subject reappeared from the room, he/she was given his/her screening sheet and asked to proceed to the second research room. There, a second researcher greeted the subject and gave him/her a copy of the questionnaire and a pencil, and asked him/her to be seated at one of several small desks in the room in order to complete the questionnaire. Silence was maintained in the room by the researcher. The researcher indicated to each subject that while the questionnaire asked for certain personal information, the subject should remember that names would not be known. The subjects were asked to please answer as many questions as they possibly could. An effort was made to deal with all contingencies in a consistent manner. For example, in anticipation of questions by subjects as to the 106 interpretation of several of the less commonly used terms in the questionnaire, a list of approved definitions was created to be used by the researchers if asked for clarification. Appendix I includes the protocol specifications as used in training the researchers, a list of detailed "things to know and remember" for the researchers, and the abovementioned definitions list. This last reference material was rarely used in actual practice, with one notable exception -- a significant number' of subjects asked the researcher the meaning of the word "innuendo"...and the approved definition (”something that is implied or hinted at") was used. When the subject had finished the questionnaire, he/she was thanked and informed that the particulars of the study would be revealed as soon as the data collection was complete. It was thus hoped that even if some subjects were able to discern the intent and focus of the research, word would not be widely spread that researchers in the Department of Communication were showing sexy movies for extra creditl Once the data collection was completed, a debriefing handout was distributed to the subjects' classes. Appendix J displays this debriefing handout, which explained the design of the study and gave the author's name and phone number for their use should they desire more information. Handling pi completed guestionnaires Once the data collection was completed, the questionnaires were screened and decisions were made as to the eligibility of certain cases in the data set. One subject was excluded because she had been interrupted in the viewing room by a wandering foreign student in search of 107 ”Communication Research." He had seen the "research in progress" sign on the viewing room door, and demanded of the subject that he wanted to "do research." The unfortunate subject believed this interruption to be part of the research manipulation. Another subject was excluded from the data set because he was unable to complete the questionnaire due to a lack of time. A number of older students did participate in the study, but all those 30 years of age or older were excluded from the data set. Due to these deletions, the number of completed questionnaires was reduced from 247 to 234. The data were "punched" onto a permanent computer file. ipppy construction Using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences: Nie, et al., 1975), data reduction was undertaken by creating indices for each set of items intended to measure the mediating and dependent variables. Except where otherwise noted, factor analyses with iteration using orthogonal (or "varimax") rotation were used to create indices. The actual index construction consisted of summing standardized items which had been weighted by factor score coefficients obtained from the factor analyses. Each item set will be examined separately below. Dependent variables 1. Sexual attitudes were measured by 24 Likert-type items. Submitted to factor analysis, seven factors emerged. Using visual inspection and a scree test, the analysis was conducted a 108 second time with a 3-factor solution. The factor score coefficients for these three factors are shown below. The numeric designations on the variable names refer to the item numbers (found in Table 4). FACTOR l FACTOR 2 FACTOR 3 ATTI .01150 -.05498 .00116 ATT2 .06214 -.07643 .03607 ATT3 .0358] .22480 .14570 ATT4 .03903 .11772 .40122 ATTS .07482 .07858 .08334 ATT6 .01869 -.09617 .06133 ATT7 -.09038 .01736 .04053 ATT8 .02674 .03926 -.01940 ATT9 .12706 .12525 .06198 ,ATTIO .06552 -.05072 -.17631 ATTll .02731 -.09895 .08084 ATT12 -.07815 -.06298 -.02686 ATT13 -.06009 -.10977 .03651 ATT14 .06704 -.01752 -.07l72 ATT15 .01892 -.07702 .06874 ATTl6 -.23110 .02398 -.16701 ATT17 -.09145 .01933 -.25633 ATT18 -.07l31 .28221 .04150 ATT19 -.06677 .12545 -.09062 ATTZO .07001 -.15614 .01231 ATTZI .03915 -.05396 -.00249 ATT22 .37999 -.18539 -.04217 ATT23 -.00783 .01858 -.04858 ATT24 -.20144 .10618 .00930 Factor 1 was interpreted to be a factor representing general ppm attitudes (Dependent Variable 1, or DVl): high loading items were "It is wrong for a man to fondle a woman's breasts” (ATT16, negative loading), ''It is OK to experiment with various positions for sex" (ATT22, positive loading), and “It is wrong to engage in oral sex" (ATT24, negative loading). These items seem to tap attitudes toward sexual activities in general, rather than any moral issues concerning sex. Factor 2 seemed to represent pppppi sex attitudes (DV2): high loading items included "I approve of 109 necking and petting on the first date" (ATT3, positive loading) and "I approve of sexual intercourse on casual dates" (ATT18, positive loading). These items seem to tap the issue of mppp sexual intercourse is acceptable. And Factor 3 clearly represented anti-gay ppm attitudes (0V3); high loading items were "I could not have respect for a person who has had a homosexual experience“ (ATT4, positive loading) and "Sex between two people of the same sex can be as satisfying as sex between people of the opposite sex" (ATT17, negative loading). In applying the hypotheses to these specific indices, it is evident that one would expect higher scores on DVl (general sex attitudes) and DV2 (casual sex attitudes) for those exposed to televised sex and those exposed to more explicit portrayals of that sex. The proper application to 0V3 (anti-gay sex attitudes) is not so readily apparent, however: anti-gay sex attitudes may be viewed as more unfavorable toward sex in general, 0R they may be seen as measuring pro-heterosexual tendencies. Given that in this experiment the stimulus material clearly showed ppiy heterosexual activity, the second explanation will be used: We would expect the subjects who have seen the heterosexual display of intercourse to be more favorably disposed toward that particular brand of sex, and not toward homosexual activity. In fact, they should be less favorably disposed toward homosexual activity after being exposed to the heterosexual display. Sex perceptions were measured by 12 items. An index was 110 constructed using these items for each movie separately, in that the content of the two movies did differ slightly. Table 4 indicates which items were used for each index. For the American Gigolo, responses to the following 6 items were summed: "Did the act take place in the man's home?" "Was the act initiated by the woman?" "Was one of the partners a prostitute?" "Were the two partners on their first date?" "Were one or both of the partners married to someone else?" and "Had one or both of them been drinking alcohol?" The items were all positive additions to the index in that they corresponded to details that were included in the American Qigpip (although the items themselves asked about real-life sex perceptions, not about the movie content). Five ‘ other items were subtracted from this American gigpip, sex perception index, in that they were reflective of details which did ppi correspond to the American Qigpip content: "Are the two people married to one another?" "Did the act take place in the woman's home?" ”Did the act take place in the dark?" and measures of discrepant estimates of partners' ages ("How old do you imagine the woman to be?" and "How old do you imagine the man to be?”) as compared with their estimates of the stimulus tape characters' ages ("flpg pip would you say the main female character in the segment was?” and "Hp! pip would you say the main male character in the segment was?"). (For the female and male estimates separately, the absolute value of the difference between the real-life age estimate and the movie age estimate was calculated, standardized, and then subtracted from the perception 111 index.) All items in this American Gigolo sex perception index were standardized before computation, and two version were created: One with the age estimates included (DV4A) and one with the age estimates excluded (DV5A). This was done in order to allow for comparisons between the control group who saw no televised segment and the viewing groups. Since the control group did not see a segment, those subjects were not asked for their estimates of characters' ages. The index was created through simple addition/subtraction, i.e., factor score coefficients were not utilized, in that the items were chosen on a conceptual basis and were seen as holding equal importance in determining the perception index. For IDS Specialis , the following 5 items were summed: "Did the act take place in the man's home?” "Was the act initiated by the woman?" “Were the two partners on their first date?" "Were one or both of the partners seriously involved with someone else?" and "Had one or both of them been drinking alcohol?" The following 5 items were subtracted from the index: "Are the two people married to one another?" "Did the act take place in the woman's home?" "Did the act take place in the dark?" (for DV4B) and also (for DVSB) the two age-discrepancy items. Again, a simple sum of standardized items was used. From these, two overall sex perception indexes were created: DV4 (including ages) and 0V5 (excluding ages). For American Qigpip, DV4 assumed the value of DV4A, and for imp Specialis , DV4 assumed the value of DV4B. For American Gigolo, DV5 assumed the value of DV5A, for IDS 112 Specialist, 0V5 assumed the value of DVSB, and for the control group, 0V5 assumed a value which was the average of DV5A and DV5B. The hypotheses as applied to the perceptions indices DV4 and DV5 would predict a greater value on each of these for those exposed to televised sex and those exposed to more explicit levels of sexual activity. An identical procedure was employed to create an index of personal sexual expectations ipp self. The 11 items were selectively combined to form separate indexes for the American Qigpip and Imp Specialis , as indicated in Table 4. The following 6 items were standardized and summed for the American gigpip expectation index: EITHER "Will the act take place in your home?" (used for male subjects)6 OR ”Will the act take place in the other person's home?" (used for female subjects), "Is the other person married to someone else?", EITHER "Will the act be initiated by you?" (used for female subjects) OR “Will the act be initiated by the other person?" (used for male subjects), "Is the other person a prostitute (male or female)?" "Are you on your first date with this person?" and "Will you have been drinking alcohol?" Two items were subtracted from this American Gigolo expectation index: "Are you married to the other person?" and "Will the act take place in the dark?” A simple summation-subtraction of the standardized forms of these items constituted DV6A. The following 5 items were standardized and summed for the Ipp Specialist expectation index: EITHER ”Will the 113 act take place in your home?” (used for male subjects) OR "Will the act take place in the other person's home?" (used for female subjects), EITHER "Will the act be initiated by you?" (used for female subjects) OR “Will the act be initiated by the other person?" (used for male subjects), "Are you on your first date with this person?", "Is the other person seriously involved with someone else?”, and "Will you have been drinking alcohol?" Two items were subtracted from imp Specialist expectation index: "Are you married to the other person?" and "Will the act take place in the dark?" Again, a simple summation-subtraction operation of the standardized items was used to create DV6B. For those subjects exposed to American gigpip, the overall expectation index (DV6) assumed the value of DV6A, for those exposed to Imp Specialist, DV6 assumed the value of DV6B. and for the control group, DV6 assumed an averaged value of DV6A and DV6B. Again, the hypotheses would predict a greater value of DV6 for those exposed to sex on TV, and for those exposed to content of greater explicitness. 4. Anticipated future sex behaviors were measured via two individual items, shown in Table 4. No index construction was undertaken for these items. Perceived likelihood was designated ”DV7" and eagerness, "0V8." Mediating variables 114 Previous ppm mppip exposure was measured by four items as shown in Table 4. A single-factor factor analysis solution was obtained for these four items, the standardized items were weighted by factor score coefficients and summed to create an index of previous sex media exposure (MVI). Displayed below are the factor score coefficients used. The numeric designations of the variable names refer to the item numbers as shown in Table 4. FACTOR l BEHIA .24052 BEHIB .14070 BEHZA .62888 BEHZB .01303 Previous ppm behaviors were tapped via four individual items, as shown in Table 4. No index construction was undertaken for these items. The two heterosexual intercourse items were chosen as mediating variables (MV2 and MV3): The infrequent affirmative responses achieved for the homosexual items eliminated them from further consideration as mediators. Political ppp mpppi liberalism items were submitted to a factor analysis routine, resulting in two factors. The factor score coefficients for these are shown below; again, the numbers on the variable names refer to item numbers in Table 4. FACTOR 1 FACTOR 2 L181 .09343 -.30118 L182 .46215 -.03498 L183 .01495 .40276 L184 -.43281 -.06785 L185 .05105 .25785 115 Factor I seemed to represent a mpipi conservatism dimension; high loading items were "It is important for each of us to spread the word of God" (L182, a positive loading) and "Abortion should remain legal“ (L184, a negative loading). Factor 2 seemed to reflect a political conservatism dimension: high loading items were "Capital punishment should never be used" (LIBl, a negative loading), "Welfare payments to the poor should be eliminated" (LIB3, a positive loading), and "The U.S. should increase its military spending" (LIBS, a positive loading). Using standardized items weighted by the above factor score coefficients, two summative indexes were created. The Factor 1 index was in preliminary analyses found to be significantly related to the explicitness manipulation and to many of the dependent variables: the Factor 2 index was found to be unrelated to the manipulation and to most of the dependent variables.. The former, therefore, was chosen as a mediating variable (MV4) and included in subsequent analyses. By and large, the demographic ~measures were for descriptive purposes, rather than to serve as mediators. The major exception to this was the variable of whether or not the subject was seriously involved with someone of the opposite sex, either through marriage, living together, or just maintaining a "close, romantic relationship." A variable was thus created where 1 represented involvement of some sort and 0 indicated no involvement with a member of the opposite sex. It was felt that 116 this variable might be closely related to some of the dependent variables, and preliminary analyses did find it to be significantly correlated with most of the dependent variables. On this basis, it was included in subsequent analyses as a mediator (MV5). The mppip ”dirty-mindednessN items were submitted to correlational analysis, and it was found that the first five quote (the “mild" quotes) were highly intercorrelated, but not highly correlated with the second five (more "explicit" quotes). The second group of quotes were highly intercorrelated, with the exception of the fourth item, "I'm just not sure I want to exchange my best friend for my best lover." (This may be due to the negative wording of this particular item--all others were worded in a positive manner.) On the basis of these patterns, two single-factor factor analyses were conducted: One for the first five quotes, and another for the four correlated quotes from the second group. Thus, two indexes were created from these items, using standardized items weighted by factor score coefficients. Preliminary analyses found both indexes to be uniformly uncorrelated with the dependent variables, and the "explicit quotes" index was also unrelated to the experimental manipulation. The "mild quotes" index was, however, significantly related to the manipulation, as tested via analysis of variance. This index was included in a set of analyses testing the hypotheses, [but failed to provide a significant 117 contribution to any of the analyses of covariance. Thus, it was dropped from the analyses, and MVl (previous sex media exposure) was substituted in its place as a mediator. The final indexes The index construction thus resulted in the creation of eight dependent variables and five mediators. Table 5 contains all means and standard deviations for these variables/indexes. and also shows correlation matrixes for the dependent variables and for the mediating variables. mazes. There were a total 234 subjects from which usable data were collected. The cell sizes for the four treatment conditions (collapsing across the two films) were as follows: “Highesex" viewing group, 67; "low-sex“ viewing group, 67; "no-sex" viewing group, 67: control group (non-viewing), 33. DVl: DV2: DV3: DV4: DVS: DV6: DV7: DV8: MVl: MV2: MV3: MV4: MV5: 118 Table 5 Descriptive Statistics for Dependent and Mediating Indexes General sex attitudes Casual sex attitudes Anti-gay sex attitudes Perceptions of sexual inter- course (including ages)--as shown In the stimulus tapes Perceptions of sexual inter- course (excluding ages)--as shown in the stimulus tapes Expectations for self re sexual intercourse--as shown in the stimulus tapes Perceived likelihood of engaging in sexual intercourse Eagerness for engaging in sexual intercourse Previous sex media exposure Past experience with sexual intercourse (l-YES, 0-NO) Frequency of sexual inter- course in past month Moral conservatism Involvement with member of opposite sex _E_ 209 209 209 191 23:. 233 233 233 220 233 232 223 228 Mean -.0000 “.0000 .0000 .0000 -.0822 T-0775 3.6052 4.9528 -.0000 .5751 3-4353 .0000 .5482 Stan. Dev. .8808 .9005 .8454 3.8827 3.6894 3.4518 3.9171 3.7026 .8074 .4954 7.0622 .7809 .4988 Table 5, cont'd. DV2 0V3 DV4 0V5 DV6 DV7 0V8 MV2 MV3 MV4 MV5 MVI r-.20 p-.002 r-.12 P'-037 r--.O9 p-.O98 r-.14 p-.023 119 Intercorrelations among Dependent Variables DV2 0V3 r--.l7 p-.012 r--.12 p-.O38 r--.14 p-.026 r--.17 p-.OO6 r--.17 p-.OO7 DV4 0V5 r-.41 p-.001 r-.32 p-.OOl r-.29 p-.001 DV6 DV7 r-.3l ----- p-.001 r-.44 r-.73 p-.001 p-.001 Intercorrelations among Mediating Variables MVZ MV3 MV4 r--.29 r--.l7 ----- p-.OOl r-.39 p-.005 r-.38 r--.14 p-.001 p-.001 p-.020 Chapter III RESULTS To test the four hypotheses as applied to cognitive, affective, and behavioral effects, analyses of variance and covariance were conducted on the data. The following sections outline the logic and procedures involved in the hypothesis testing, as well as the results of this testing for each dependent variable. Unhypothesized findings will be presented in Chapter IV. Analysis procedures Before hypothesis testing was attempted, results for the two films were compared to assess whether the two films differed substantially, or whether they might be considered replications of the same experiment. Table 6 presents the findings, made via two-way analysis of variance. As may be seen under the "Main Effect 11" heading in the table, the two films did not differ substantially on any of the dependent variables. No treatment/film interaction emerged as significant, as shown under the ”Interaction" heading. It was concluded that the films were replications of one another, and the testing of the hypotheses was done after collapsing across the two films. Four sets of analyses were conducted to test the hypotheses. First, each dependent variable was subjected to a one-way analysis of variance, comparing the ”high-sex" viewing group and the control group who saw no 120 121 Table 6 Two-way Analyses of Variance (Dependent Variables by Treatment by Film) Main Main Dependent Effect 1: Effect 11: Inter- Variable Treatment Film action DVl: General sex attitudes F-.87 F-.Ol F-.79 p-.42 p-.94 p-.46 DV2: Casual sex attitudes F-.3l F-.O4 F-l.81 p-.74 p-.84 p-.l7 DV3: Anti-gay sex attitudes F-1.65 F-.O6 F-.ll p-.20 p-.81 p-.89 DV4: Perceptions of sexual F-1.68 F-.O3 F-.93 intercourse (including p-.l9 p-.87 p-.40 ages)--as shown in the stimulus tapes 0V5: Perceptions of sexual F-3.00 F-.03 F-.76 intercourse (excluding p-.05 p-.85 p-.47 ages)--as shown in the stimulus tapes DV6: Expectations for self F-2.22 F-.42 F-1.01 re sexual intercourse-- p-.11 p-.52 p-.37 as shown in the stimulus tapes DV7: Perceived likelihood F-1.10 F-.12 F-.25 of engaging in sexual p-.34 p-.74 p-.78 intercourse DV8: Eagerness for engaging F-l.22 F-.80 F-1.57 in sexual intercourse p-.37 p-.21 p-.3O 122 videotape.’ This comparison tested Hypothesis 1. Second, each dependent variable was subjected to a one-way analysis of covariance, comparing these same two groups but controlling for five mediating variables: Previous sex media exposure, past sexual intercourse experience, frequency of recent sexual intercourse experience, moral conservatism, and involvement with someone of the opposite sex. The following possible mediators were found to be unrelated to the manipulations in a systematic fashion, and were therefore excluded from the analyses: Both indices of "dirty-mindedness," past homosexual sexual experience, and the index of political conservatism. 1'. Third, each dependent variable underwent a one-way analysis of variance comparison of the three viewing groups -- the "high-sex" group, the "low-sex" group, and the "no-sex" group--testing Hypothesis 2. Fourth, an analysis of covariance was conducted on each dependent variable, making the same 3-by-l comparison but controlling for the five mediating variables. This tested Hypothesis 2'. Tables 7 through 14 present the results of all four analyses for each dependent variable individually. In every instance, a high score on the dependent variable indicates a greater amount of that variable, as hypothesized for the more explicitly exposed group(s). For all dependent measures, a larger mean for the exposed group (HI > CON) or the group(s) exposed to more explicit sex (HI > L0 > MO) indicates support for the hypothesis. Results for hypothesis testing: Affective outcomes Table 7 displays the group means and covariate analyses for the first 123 Table 7 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DVl: General Sex Attitudes _ippp Means -.11* F-1.58*L-.11**] H1 -.15** p-.21 H1; .00** F-. .85* .15 F-.73** = .10 ip CON .05 p-.40 LOI -.05 I g a F-.l9** g-.05 1 P'o33 N0L -.10 Covariates Covariates F _p_ beta F _p_ beta MVl .01 .91 .02 MVl .85 .36 .07 MV2 4.47 .04 .55 MV2 8.45 .00 .44 MV3 .37 .55 .01 MV3 .49 .49 .01 MV4 6.19 .02 -.35 MV4 14.29 .00 -.34 MV5 .74 .39 -.21 MV5 2.37 .13 .23 TEV 3.21 .008 TEV 7.71 .001 R2-. .05* ' R2-. .05* R - .22** R -,26** *-Analysis of variance **-Analysis of covariance ng HI: "High-sex“ viewing group L0: "Low-sex” viewing group NO: ”No-sex" viewing group CON: Control group (no viewing) MVl: Mediating variable #1: Previous sex media exposure MV2: Mediating variable #2: Past experience with sexual intercourse (YES-l, N0-0) MV3: Mediating variable #3: Frequency of sexual intercourse in past month 124 Table 7, cont'd. MV4: Mediating variable #4: Moral conservatism MV5: Mediating variable #5: Involvement with member of opposite sex TEV: Total explained variance (covariates + main effect) NOTE: H1 and HI' predict differences in means of H1 > CON for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. H2 and H2' predict differences in means of H1 > L0 > NO for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. The grand mean for all subjects on DVl is .00. 125 dependent variable, that of general sex attitudes (DVI). The top left portion of the table shows the means for the high-sex (HI) and the control (CON) groups, first for the straight comparison (HI mean--.ll, CON mean-.15, F-l.58, p-.21) and secondly showing the adjusted means for the analysis of covariance controlling for five mediating variables (HI mean--.15, CON mean-.05, F-.73, p-.40). H1 and HI' predicted a higher mean (more positive general sex attitudes) for the high-sex viewing group in both cases, and it did not occur. Beneath this, the significance tests for the covariates are shown, as are the test for total explained variance (TEV, including the combined impact of the covariates and the main effect (HI vs. CON)) and the percent of variance explained for both the straight comparison (R2-.02) and the analysis of covariance (R2-.22). Viewing of televised explicit sexual material did not significantly contribute to more positive general sex attitudes. ' In fact, the nonsignificant difference which does emerge is that of the control group having mppp positive general sex attitudes than the high-sex viewing group. Two mediating variables contribute significantly to an analysis of covariance which is significant overall (F-3.21, p-.OO8, R2-.22): MV2, past experience with sexual intercourse (F-4.47, p-.O4), which is a positive predictor of positive general sex attitudes (beta-.55). and MV4, moral conservatism (F-6.19, p-.02), which is a negative predictor (beta--.35). The top right portion of Table 7 displays the means for the various viewing groups (HI, L0, and NO), again both for the straight analysis of variance comparison (HI mean--.ll, L0 mean-.10, NO mean--.05, F-.85, p-.43) and the analysis of covariance comparison controlling for the five mediating variables (HI mean-.00, L0 mean--.05, NO mean--.IO, F-.l9, 126 p-.83). H2 and H2' predicted an ordering of means such that HI > L0 > NO for both analyses. Both comparisons indicate that explicitness of the televised sexual content shown does ppi influence general sex attitudes significantly, although the adjusted means for the covariance analysis do show a trend congruent with the hypothesis. The significant predictors of these attitudes are once again shown to be past experience with sexual intercourse (MV2, a positive predictor) and moral conservatism (MV4, a negative predictor). Including these variables in the analysis increases the variance explained from 12 to 262, with a significant level of total explained variance achieved (F-7.71, p-.OOl). Overall, then, Table 7 indicates a lack of support for the hypotheses as applied to general sex attitudes. Neither the exposure per se nor the explicitness of the stimulus seem to make a difference in these attitudes. What pppp make a difference is past experience with sexual intercourse and level of moral conservatism. In Table 8 these same analyses are applied to casual sex attitudes (DV2). The results show that the experimental manipulations--both the simple viewing of sexual content and the viewing of various explicitness levels--do not significantly influence casual sex attitudes. The covariance analyses both result in significant (p-.001) overall explained variances. For the high-sex vs. control comparison, 39% of the variance in the dependent variable is explained, mainly due to significant contributions by previous sex media exposure (MVI: F-5.12, p-.03, beta-.26) and moral conservatism (MV4: F-18.83, p<.01, beta--.43). For the high-sex vs. low-sex vs. no-sex viewing comparison, 42% of the variance in the dependent variable is explained by the covariance 127 Table 8 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV2: Casual Sex Attitudes Group Means -.08* F-.28* -.08* HI -.l4** p-.60 H1 .01** F-.39* p-.68 .03 .07 CONI -.14 I F-.OO** L0 -.02 p-.99 F-.22** I‘.Ol p'.81 N01 -.07 ‘ Covariates Covariates F _p_ beta F _p_ beta MVl 5.12 .03 .26 MVl 45.76 .00 .44 MV2 1.63 .21 .24 MV2 13.65 .00 .46 MV3 1.90 .17 .20 MV3 4.46 .04 .02 MV4 18.83 .00 -.43 MV4 10.17 .00 -.24 MV5 1.88 .17 -.24 MV5 3.73 .06 -.24 TEV 7.33 .001 TEV 15.81 .001 R2-.Og* R2-.O * R ..39** R -.h2** *-Analysis of variance **-Analysis of covariance NOTE: H1 and HI' predict differences in means of H1 > CON for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. H2 and H2' predict differences in means of H1 > L0 > N0 for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. The grand mean for all subjects on DV2 is .00. 128 analysis; significant contributors are previous sex media exposure (MVl: F-45.76, p<.01, beta-.44), past experience with sexual intercourse (MV2: F-l3.65, p<.01, beta-.46), frequency of sexual intercourse in the past month (MV3: F-4.46, p-.O4, beta-.02), and moral conservatism (MV4: F-10.17, p<.01, beta--.24). As in the case of general sex attitudes, casual sex attitudes are not influenced significantly by the treatments. The adjusted means for the 3-group comparison do show a pattern as predicted, but the differences among means are small. Past exposure to sexual media content and moral liberalism do seem to significantly enhance casual sex attitudes. Thus, there is a lack of support for all hypotheses as applied to casual sex attitudes (DV2). The third attitudinal index, measuring anti-gay sex attitudes (0V3), was also subjected to these analyses. The results are shown in Table 9. The high-sex viewing vs. no viewing comparison indicates a significant difference between the means for the two groups in the predicted direction (HI > CON), both in a simple analysis of variance comparison (F-6.81, p-.Ol) and after controlling for the mediating variables (F-4.33, p-.O4). Two mediating variables contribute significantly to the increase in percent variance explained from 72 to 242: Previous sex media exposure (F-5.04, p-.O3, beta--.34) and moral conservatism (F-4.03, p-.05, beta-.26). The 3-group viewing comparison indicates no significant contribution of the explicitness manipulation and a solitary individual contribution in the covariance analysis by moral conservatism (MV4: F-9.71, p<.01, beta-.27). The total explained variance for both the 2-group and the 3-group analyses of covariance are significant. There is' support for Hypotheses 1 and 1' regarding anti-gay sex attitudes, but a 129 Table 9 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV3: Anti-gay Sex Attitudes Group Means .20t F-6.81* . .20: ’ H1 .21** p-.01 H1 .15** F81.68* 4% P-.19 -.30 I -.05 CON -.24 I F-4.33** L0 .02 a 1 p-.04 F-.56** J-.01 3 p-.57 NO -.01 i Covariates Covariates F _p_ beta F _p_ beta MVl 5.04 .03 -. 4 MVI .81 .37 -.O7 MV2 .99 .33 -.24 MV2 .05 .82 -.O3 MV3 .03 .86 .00 MV3 2.45 .12 -.02 MV4 4.03 .05 .26 MV4 9.71 .00 .27 MV5 .56 .46 -.17 MV5 .09 .77 -.04 TEV 3.58 .004 TEV 3.16 .004 R2-.0 * R2-.o§* R -.24** R -,]3** *-Analysis of variance **-Analysis of covariance NOTE: H1 and H1' predict differences in means of MI > CON for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. H2 and H2' predict differences in means of Hi > L0 > NO for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. The grand mean for all subjects on 0V3 is .00. 130 lack of support for Hypotheses 2 and 2'. Results for hypothesis testing: Cognitive outcomes As explained in Chapter II, two indices were created to measure perceptions of sexual intercourse in an effort to see if these perceptions correspond to what the subjects are exposed to in the stimulus tapes: One index included items measuring the congruity of perceived ages of real-life sexual partners and perceived ages of the sexual partners in the stimulus tape viewed (0V4) while the other index excluded these age-congruity variables (0V5). Inasmuch as the former required responses to the stimulus material, the control group could not yield values for this index. For this reason. both indices were analyzed; it should~ be kept in mind that the two perception indices are pp; independent measures (their correlation is .91). Tables 10 and 11 contain the presentation of the results for the perception indexes. Table 10 show the 3-group comparison for the perception index including ages. The differences found are significant for the simple analysis of variance comparison (F-3.53, p-.03). The pattern which emerges is not as hypothesized (HI > L0 > NO): The low-sex group perceives real-life sex to be most similar (mean-.96) to what they have seen in the videotape stimulus, followed by the high-sex group (mean--.21), and then the no-sex group (mean--.80). Although no individual mediating variable emerges as a significant contributor in the covariance analysis, the addition of the influence of these five variables reduces the influence of the manipulation to a nonsignificant level (F-2.00, p-.14), and the total explained variance is nonsignificant (F-l.42, p-.201). There is partial or mixed support for Hypothesis 2 in 131 Table 10 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for 0V4: Perceptions of Sexual Intercourse (including ages)-- As Shown in the Stimulus Tapes Group Means -.21* ; HI -.2h**§ F-3.53* j p-.03 .96 l L0 .94 i r ’ F-2.00** i-.80 p-.14 N0; -.44 Covariates F _p_ beta HVl 2.91 .09 .62 MV2 1.50 .22 .87 MV3 .26 .61 -.03 MV4 .02 .89 -.O6 MV5 .06 .81 .17 TEV 1.42 .20l R -.O * R -.06** *-Ana1ysis of variance **-Analysis of covariance NOTE: H1 and H1' predict differences in means of H1 > CON for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. H2 and H2' predict differences in means of H1 > L0 > NO for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. The grand mean for all subjects on 0V4 is .00. 0V5: 132 Table 11 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for Perceptions of Sexual Intercourse (excluding ages)-- As Shown in the Stimulus Tapes Group Means -.62* F-2.56* -.62* HI -.77** p-.11 HI -.57** F-3.02* P'-05 .58 .73 CON .45 F-1.9l** L0 .62 p-.l7 F-1.66** -.69 p-.19 NO -.47 Covariates Covariates F _p_ beta F _p_ beta MVl 1.49 .23 .76 MVl 3.54 .06 .66 MV2 1.75 .19 1.30 MV2 3.04 .08 1.17 MV3 .10 .75 .02 MV3 .00 .98 -.00 MV4 2.50 .12 -.84 MV4 .00 .99 -.00 MV5 1.89 .17 -1.28 MV5 .02 .89 .09 TEV 1.80 .110 . TEV 1.85 .081 R2.,02* R2-.o§* R -.13** R -.07** *-Analysis of variance **-Analysis of covariance NOTE: H1 and H1' predict differences in means of HI > CON for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. H2 and H2' predict differences in means of HI > L0 > NO for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. The grand mean for all subjects on 0V5 is .00. 133 this case, but no support for Hypothesis 2'. Table 11 displays the different means for the perception index excluding ages (0V5). Results very similar to those shown in Table 10 are obtained for the 3-group comparison: The unadjusted simple means differ significantly (F-3.02, p-.05) but in a manner somewhat different than that hypothesized. Again, the inclusion of the mediating variables results in adjusted means which show a reduced. contribution by the manipulation (F-1.66, p-.19), although all mediators are individually nonsignificant contributors and the total explained variance is nonsignificant (F-1.85, p-.081). The left side of Table 11 shows the only comparison possible for perceptions of the high-sex group and the control group. ‘The unadjusted and adjusted means do not differ significantly for the two groups, no mediators emerge as significant, and the total explained variance for the analysis of covariance is nonsignificant (F-1.80, p-.110). Although nonsignificant, the pattern shown by this 2-group comparison is quite surprising: The control group reports perceptions of real-life sex that are mppp similar to the stimulus content (which they did pp; see) than those perceptions reported by the high-sex viewing group. Overall, Table 11 shows a lack of support for Hypotheses l, 1', and 2', and partial or mixed support for Hypothesis 2. The sixth dependent variable measured the subjects' self expectations regarding sexual intercourse in the future to see whether these expectations correspond to what the subjects have been exposed to in the stimulus tapes (0V6). For example, both stimulus tapes showed sexual intercourse betweeen unmarried partners, and the subjects were correspondingly asked how likely they themselves would be to have 134 unmarried intercourse. Table 12 presents the findings for this variable. The 2-group comparisons testing the mere exposure hypotheses (l and 1') again show a counter-supportive but nonsignificant pattern: For both the unadjusted and the adjusted means the control group holds expectations more similar to the stimulus content than those held by the high-sex viewing group, although this trend is not significant in either case. One covariate makes a significant contribution to the analysis of covariance: Previous sex media exposure (F-7.80, p-.01, beta-1.37). The analysis of covariance yields an overall significant total explained variance (R2-.20, F-3.18, p-.OO8). The 3-group comparisons testing the explicitness hypotheses (2 and 2') show the same pattern as the results for the perception indices: The highest mean score for expectations is obtained by the low-sex viewing group, followed by the mean for the high-sex viewing group and finally the no-sex viewing group. Neither of these patterns, however, are statistically significant. The analysis of covariance for the 3-group comparison results in a significant amount of total explained variance (R2-.25, F-7.92, p-.001), a result of strong individual contributions by_ the individual's previous sex media exposure (F-l8.33, p<.01, beta-1.22), past experience with sexual intercourse (F-18.76, p<.01, beta-2.37), and involvement with a member of the opposite sex (F-11.74, p<.01, beta--1.82--i.e., lack of rinvolvement predicts expectations congruent with the stimulus portrayals). In total, no support is obtained for the hypotheses as applied to DV6. Results for hypothesis testing: Behavioral outcomes Table 13 displays the group means and analyses for the individual's 135 Table 12 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV6: Expectations for Self re Sexual Intercourse-- As Shown in the Stimulus Tapes Group Means -.45* F-2.24* -.45* HI -.51** p-.14 H1 -.14** F-1.66* P--19 -55 -45 CON .29 F-1.32** L0 .32 p-.26 F-l.02** -.54 p-.36 N0 -.50 Covariates Covariates F _p_ beta F _p_ beta MV1 7.80 .01 1.37 MV1 18.33 .00 1.22 MV2 3.56 .06 1.47 MV2 18.76 .00 2.37 MV3 .01 .91 .01 MV3 .01 .92 .00 MV4 1.30 .26 -.48 MV4 1.75 .19 -.42 MV5 3.04 .09 -1.29 MV5 11.74 .00 -1.82 TEV 3.18 .008 TEV 7.92 .001 R2-.03* R2-.03* R -.20** R -.25** *-Ana1ysis of variance **-Ana1ysis of covariance NOTE: H1 and H1' predict differences in means of H1 > CON for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. H2 and H2' predict differences in means of H1 > L0 > NO for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. The grand mean for all subjects on 0V6 is .00. 136 Table 13 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for DV7: Perceived Likelihood of Engaging in Sexual Intercourse Group Means 3.06* F-2.06* 3.06* HI 2.96**_ p-.16 HI 3.39** F-1.16* p-.32 4.22 “.07 CON 3.13 F-.10** LO 3.07 p-.76 5.,55** 3-39 P'-58 No 3.56 Covariates Covariates F _p_ beta F _p_ beta MV1 .19 .66 .16 MV1 9.20 .00 .71 MV2 26.33 .00 3.02 MV2 31.33 .00 2.52 MV3 30.38 .00 .25 MV3 46.83 .00 .22 MV4 1.86 .18 -.44 MV4 3.30 .07 -.48 MV5 2.13 .15 .82 MV5 7.75 .01 1.21 TEV 29.62 .001 TEV 34.37 .001 R2-.03* R2-.Oi* R -.71** R .,59** *-Ana1ysis of variance **-Ana1ysis of covariance ‘NOTE: H1 and H1' predict differences in means of H1 > CON for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. H2 and H2' predict differences in means of H1 > L0 > NO for both the analysis of variance and the analysis of covariance. The grand mean for all subjects on 0V7 is 3.61. 137 perceived likelihood of engaging in sexual intercourse in the near future (DV7). The 2-group comparisons at the left show unadjusted means which once again differ in a manner counter to Hypothesis 1 but do not constitute a significant difference (F-2.06, p-.l6). The analysis of covariance shows the control group to be more likely to engage in sex than the high-sex viewing group, but the adjusting of the means has reduced the magnitude of the difference. Two mediating variables strongly contribute to an overall significant analysis of covariance (R2-.71, F-29.62, p-.001): Past experience with sexual intercourse (F-26.33, p<.01, beta-3.02) and frequency of sexual intercourse in the past month (F-30.38, p<.01, (beta-.25). When the three viewing groups are compared as to their perceived likelihood of engaging in sexual intercourse in the near future, no significant differences are found. For the unadjusted analysis of variance, the three viewing groups rank order as follows: The low-sex group is most likely, followed by the no-sex group, and lastly by the high-sex group (F-1.16, p-.32). The adjusted means in the analysis of covariance show a different, but similarly nonsignificant pattern: The no-sex group is the most likely, followed by the high-sex group, and then the low-sex group (F-.55, p-.58). Four of five mediating variables play an important role in significantly predicting the dependent variable in the analysis of covariance (R2-.59, F-34.37, p-.001). Those which are significant individual contributors are previous sex media exposure (F-9.20, p<.01, beta-.71), past experience with sexual intercourse (F-31.33, p<.01, beta-2.52), frequency of sexual intercourse in the past month (F-46.83, p<.01, beta-.22), and involvement with a member of the opposite sex (F-7.75, p-.01, beta-1.21). No support is obtained for the 138 hypotheses as applied to OV7. Table 14 shows the results of the analyses as applied to eagerness for engaging in sexual intercourse (0V8). The Z-group differences are small and nonsignificant. Three mediators are important, significant predictors of eagerness in this analysis: Previous sex media exposure (F-3.97, p-.05, beta-.98), past experience with sexual intercourse (F-4.10, p-.05, beta-1.60), and frequency of sexual intercourse in the past month (F-8.55, p-.Ol, beta-.18). The total variance explained is significant (R2-.44, F-9.61, p-.001). Likewise, the 3-group differences are nonsignificant: the direction of the adjusted means do show a high-sex viewing group more eager than either the low-sex or no-sex viewing groups. This pattern is near-significant when controlling for the mediating variables (F-2.59, p-.08). Again, the analysis of covariance results in a significant level of total explained variance (R2-.42, F-l7.35, p-.001), with three mediators contributing strongly: Previous sex media exposure (F-13.47, p<.01, beta-.95), past experience with sexual intercourse (F-16.61, p<.01, beta-2.04), and frequency of sexual intercourse in the past month (F-l9.26, p<.01, beta-.15). No support is obtained for the hypotheses as applied to DV8. Summary 2: hypothesis testing Table 15 provides a summary regarding the patterns (supportive of the hypothesis, counter-supportive, or mixed) and levels of significance (significant at p<.05, or nonsignificant) for each hypothesis as applied to a given dependent variable. Further discussion of these findings will occur in Chapter IV. HI CON NOTE: H1 and H1' predict differences in means of H1 > CON for 139 Table 14 Analyses of Variance and Covariance for OV8: Eagerness for Engaging in Sexual Intercourse Group Means 5.21* F-.28* 5.21* 5.08** p-.60 HI 5.46** F-1.25* p'-29 5.63 5.06 4.79 F-.17** LO 4.38 p-.68 F-2.59** 4.27 p-.08 NO 4.41 Covariates Covariates F _p_ beta F _p_ beta MV1 3.97 .05 .98 MV1 13.47 .00 .95 MV2 4.10 .05 1.60 MV2 16.61 .00 2.04 MV3 8.55 .01 .18 MV3 19.26 .00 .15 MV4 1.05 .31 -.44 MV4 .91 .34 -.28 MV5 1.55 .22 .94 MV5 1.69 .20 .63 TEV 9.61 .001 TEV 17.35 .001 R2-.O * R2-.0 * R -.44** R -.42** *-Ana1ysis of variance **-Ana1ysis of covariance both the analysis of variance and the analysis covariance. H2 and H2' predict differences in means of H1 > L0 > NO for both the analysis of variance and analysis of covariance. The grand mean for subjects on OV8 is 4.95. 140 Table 15 Summary of Patterns and Significance Testing in the Tests of Hypotheses H1 H1' H2 H2' DVl: General sex counter- counter- mixed/ supp./ 3 attitudes supp./ns supp./ns ns ns 'C 3 0V2: Casual sex counter- no diff./ mixed/ supp./ E atti tudes supp./ns ns ns ns (U . OV3: Anti-gay sex supp./ supp./ mixed/ supp./ ” attitudes sig sig ns ns I 0V4: Perceptions of NOT NOT mixed/ mixed/ 21 sexual inter- TESTABLE TESTABLE sig ns -9 course (inc. Ea ages) 8 E 0V5: Perceptions of counter- counter- mixed/ mixed/ DI sexual inter- supp./ns supp./ns sig ns _5 course (exc. _ ages) n my 8 S 0V6: Expectations counter- counter- mixed/ mixed/ EfiS for self re supp./ns supp./ns ns ns “.3 sexual ‘ U intercourse V 0V7: Perceived counter- counter- mixed/ mixed/ likelihood of supp./ns supp./ns ns ns engaging in m sexual 3 intercourse > _S OV8: Eagerness counter- supp./ supp./ mixed/ .8 for engaging supp./ns ns ns ns , in sexual '0 intercourse H1: Comparison of "high-sex" viewing group and control group: analysis of variance, unadjusted means. Comparison of "high-sex" viewing group and control group: analysis of covariance, adjusted means. Hl': 141 Table 15, cont'd. H2: Comparison of "high-sex," "low-sex,“ and "no-sex" viewing groups: analysis of variance, unadjusted means. H2': Comparison of "high-sex," "low-sex," and "no-sex" viewing groups: analysis of covariance, adjusted means. Supp.: Supportive of the hypothesis Counter-supp.: Counter-supportive of the hypothesis Sig: Significant (p‘.05) NS: Nonsignificant (p>.05) Chapter IV CONCLUSION Discussion pi hypotheses tested: Summary ppp conclusions Little support was gained for the formal hypotheses tested in this research. Interesting patterns of counter-support and mixed support are evident in Table 10, however. Each of these patterns shall be discussed in turn: 1. For hypotheses H1 and H1', a pattern of counter-support is evident. Although tests for individual dependent variables are uniformly nonsignificant, the consistencies across the dependent variables are striking. H1 and H1' predicted more positive sex attitudes, sex perceptions and expectations more congruent with stimulus content, and increased sexual behavior for the high-sex viewing group when compared to the non-viewing control group. In ten of the fourteen individual hypothesis tests of H1 and H1'. counter-support was evident: the control group showed apps of the dependent variables than did the high-sex viewing group. The main exception to this trend was the test of the hypotheses for OV3--anti-gay sex attitudes. The high-sex viewing group had stronger anti-gay sentiments than the control group. This difference was significant for both the straight analysis of variance comparison (H1) and for the adjusted analysis of 142 143 covariance comparison (Hl'). This particular finding constituted the pply significant support for hypotheses H1 and H1'. In the face of such a strong pattern of counter-support, I must re-examine the logic of hypotheses H1 and H1' as applied to 0V3. It was hypothesized (and found) that the high-sex viewing group would have stronger anti-gay attitudes than the control group, due to the former's exposure to a display of heterosexual intercourse presented in a positive manner. In being exposed to that specific type of sexual activity, it was argued, the high-sex viewing group would obtain more positive attitudes toward that activity. The inference that was made was that an increased positive attitude toward heterosexual sex would correspondingly indicate an increased negative attitude toward homosexual sex. This logic is appropriate if these two types of attitudes are viewed as polar opposites. If, however, there is a generalizing influence among sex attitudes, such that an increase in positive affect toward one sex behavior (e.g., heterosexual intercourse) will carry over to an increase in positive affect toward other sex behaviors (e.g., homosexual activities), then this logic does not hold. Thus, the finding that for 0V3, H1 and H1' are supported, while for all other dependent variables there is counter-support, may be an artifact of a misconceptualization of anti-gay sex attitudes. If this is the case, there is an even stronger pattern of counter-support for H1 and H1'. While too much should not be made of a trend of non-significant 144 findings, given that a pattern of counter-support is evident, what could account for this unexpected outcome? How could the control group have perceptions and expectations of sex more similar to stimulus material they didn't even see than the group which saw the material? One possible explanation involves a version of the famous (or infamous) "catharsis hypothesis," which has in the past been theoretically applied to the case of aggression reduction through media exposure. Generally, it implies that the performance of an aggressive act decreases the strength of any remaining instigation to act aggressively (Berkowitz, 1962, p. 226)--the individual is emotionally purged (as in the ancient, cathartic Greek tragedies). An extension of this idea to vicarious involvement with media content would predict that having seen, for example, a barroom brawl on TV, a viewer would be less likely to feel the need to fight when visiting his/her favorite watering hole later that evening. Such vicarious catharsis was in fact a key element in the original Greek plays. But evidence of cathartic media effects in modern times has not been forthcoming in the vast amount of research on media violence effects: the body of evidence supports an aggression-enhancing social learning perspective. Could it be that in the realm of 555931 effects, a catharsis explanation might be more appropriate? Perhaps, but this process is difficult to imagine as applied to cognitive effects. It is easy to see how a desire to act sexually might be cathartically reduced, but less easy to conceptualize) how perceptions and 145 expectations might be made less congruent with stimulus- content by exposure. Something more than a simple catharsis explanation seems to be at work. He could call it a boomerang corrolary to social learning theory--an individual sees sexual content which is more extreme than he/she is normally exposed to, and the content is rejected out of hand as unrealistic and/or unacceptable. Perceptions, expectation, attitudes, and reported futUre behaviors all move away from what has been seen. Yet another possible explanation is that of an experimental demand characteristic, in which those exposed to the high-sex versions became sensitized to the topic material (i.e., second-guessed the researcher) due to the obviousness of the ,sexual content. The low-sex version might be discrete enough so that the subjects exposed to it were not quite sure what the test was all about, while the high-sex group was certain of the researcher's intent, and rebelled against it. This possibility would, of course, shed doubt upon the validity of this research. The boomerang explanation would also fit the second main pattern discernible in Table 10: A pattern of curvilinear (H1 < LO > NO) effects in the test of H2 and H2'. In Table 10, the occurrence of such a curvilinear finding is noted as "mixed support" and is generally nonsignificant, although it is significant for the tests of H2 as applied to perceptions (DV4 and 0V5). It is 146 designated "mixed” support since LO > NO is as hypothesized, while the portion HI < L0 is not as hypothesized. It seems that when there is a shift toward more positive sex attitudes, more congruent sex perceptions and expectations, or increased reported future sex behaviors as hypothesized, it is for the low-sex viewing group only. You will recall that the high-sex viewing group saw visually and verbally explicit sexual material (of an R-rated nature) while the low-sex viewing group saw the same verbal and contextual material, with the visually explicit material edited out. The "boomerang" effect might be the explanation: Individuals are exposed to sexual content which is typical of what they are normally exposed to (i.e., low-sex and no-sex viewing groups, who saw typical PG- and G-rated content), and social learning occurs for these individuals (i.e., LO > NO). As noted in point 1, however, those exposed to explicit sex content (i.e., high-sex viewing group, who saw typical R-rated content) may reject the content, and social learning does not occur or may even occur in the opposite direction. The question becomes, then, is R-rated sexual content a relatively unfamiliar type of televised content for the population under examination? The mean number of R-rated movies seen in the past year for the sample was 9.1. This seems large, but we do not know how many of these were rated R for sexual as opposed to violent content. And if an individual watches only one network TV movie (which will definitely not contain R-rated 147 sexual content) per week on the average, we may see that exposure to "PG”-type sexual content is likely to far exceed R-rated exposure. Also, other TV content such as prime-time dramas and soap operas do contain sexual content of a "PG" nature. Also to be considered is the average age of the respondents (19.2 years). Chances of their being exposed to many R-rated films in their total lifetime are slim. Set against a backdrop of many years of TV viewing and the corresponding exposure to "PG sex," it is likely that this content (lowésex) seems much more familiar than "R sex" to most respondents. Sixty percent of the sample reported pp exposure to X-rated films in the past year (mean exposure . .84 films/year), so exposure to models exhibiting overt and explicit sexual behaviors seems small. Also to be considered are the patterns of support by mediating variables, as shown in Tables 2 through 9 in Chapter 111. Previous sex media exposure played a significant part in predicting casual sex attitudes, sex expectations for self, eagerness for engaging in sex, and, partially, in predicting pro-gay sex attitudes, and likelihood of engaging in sex. It is apparent that while a single, controlled exposure to vidsex did not make a substantial impact on the respondents, there exists a relationship between voluntary exposure to media sex over time and certain sexual attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors. Now, it is not known, nor easily testable, whether these attitudes, cognitions, and ‘ behaviors preceded or followed media sex 148 exposure. Now that evidence of a relationship exists, future survey research ought examine this possibility. Past experience with sexual intercourse significantly contributed to positive general sex attitudes, sex expectations for self, likelihood of engaging in sex, eagerness for engaging in sex, and partially, casual sex attitudes. Frequency of engaging in sexual intercourse in the past month significantly predicted likelihood of engaging in sex, eagerness for engaging in sex, and, partially, casual sex attitudes. Cognitive and affective outcomes seem to be more dependent upon the simple fact that someone has had sexual intercourse than its recent frequency of occurrence. However, ppgp aspects contribute strongly to reported future behaviors, and they do correlate .37. Apparently, minimal real-life sexual experience has an effect on sexual cognitions and attitudes which additional real-life experience does not enhance. It seems logical that this pattern of effect or "threshold" might also operate for vidsex exposure (i.e., a little exposure is as good as a lot): however, the evidence of this study does not support that view. The minimal, baseline exposure given in the experiment did not make a substantial impact on cognitions and attitudes, while longitudinal exposure (self-reported) did contribute significantly. Moral conservatism predicted conservative sex attitudes of all types: More negative general sex attitudes, more negative casual 149 sex attitudes, and stronger anti-gay attitudes. It made no contribution to cognitive or behavioral dependent variables. While giving us strong predictive power for sex attitudes, moral conservatism as a construct does not tell us what the mechanisms or processes are by which sex attitudes are formulated. Involvement with a member of the opposite sex only partially predicted sex expectations for self and likelihood of engaging in sex. One's past experience with sexual intercourse is a much more important predictor of these outcomes. It seems that for this population, romantic involvement is not nearly as important in determining future sex expectations and behaviors as is actual past sex activity. 4. Finally, the most striking pattern is one of glaring non-support for a straightforward social learning from vidsex hypothesis. We cannot, however, "prove the null hypothesis," i.e., we cannot conclude that there is pp effect. The following sections will explore the implications of this lack of support for methodology, policy, production, and theory. A caution against “making too much" of the patterns itemized above must be made. Non-significance of findings was the most prevalent pattern of all. It should be kept in mind that since many of the dependent variables are intercorrelated (see Table 5), a pattern of repetitive findings across dependent variables could be simply an artificial enhancement of some spurious relationships. 150 Unhypothesigpg findings In general, the experimental manipulations did not strongly predict sexual outcomes. What, then, gppg predict sexual attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors? As outlined in the preceding section, certain mediators did contribute significantly. To find out if other unhypothesized predictors might also be found, multiple regression analyses were conducted predicting each dependent variable from a wide variety of available demographic, attitudinal and behavioral variables. The following list itemizes all predictor variables included in the analyses: 1. Experimental exposure to high-sex stimulus (dummy coded) 2. Experimental exposure to low-sex stimulus (dummy coded) 3. Experimental exposure to no-sex stimulus (dummy coded) 4. Previous sex media exposure (MV1) 5. Past experience with sexual intercourse (MV2) 6. Frequency of sexual intercourse in past month (MV3) 7. Moral conservatism (MV4) 8. Involvement with member of opposite sex (MV5) 9. Media "dirty-mindedness" for mild quotes 10. Media ”dirty-mindedness" for explicit quotes 11. Past experience with homosexual sexual activity 12. Political conservatism 13. Age 14. Gender (maleness) 15. Black racial/ethnic identity 16. White racial/ethnic identity 151 17. College class level 18. Income 19. Moral Majority affiliation 20. Frequency of church attendance Table 16 shows the results of the eight step-wise regressions. Only significant predictors (p<.05) were included in the final solution: they are listed in Table 16. The results show that while all dependent variables were significantly predicted by the 20 variables, the amount of variance explained (R2) was quantitatively substantial in only three cases: For casual sex attitudes (R2 - .43), likelihood of engaging in sex (R2 - .63), and eagerness for engaging in sex (R.2 - .51). Positive casual sex attitudes were predicted by previous sex media exposure, moral liberalism, maleness, past experience with sexual intercourse, and a black ethnic identity. Perceived likelihood of engaging in sex was predicted by frequency of sexual intercourse in the past month, past experience with sexual intercourse, involvement with a member of the opposite sex, infrequency of church attendance, maleness, and low income. Eagerness for engaging in sexual intercourse was predicted by frequency of sexual intercourse in the past month, maleness, past experience with sexual intercourse, and moral liberalism. Several things may be concluded from these analyses. First, we see that it is possible to predict sexual attitudes, perceptions, expectations, and behaviors through a combination of media, demographic, attitudinal, and behavioral variables. Second, we see reinforcement of 152 Table 16 Results of Multiple Regressions 0V1: General sex attitudes a F _p__ R2 -.21 F-20.45 p-.000 *Past experience with sexual intercourse .30 15.94 .000 *Moral conservatism -.26 11.99 .001 0V2: Casual sex attitudes R2 - .43 F-22.63 p-.ooo *Previous sex media exposure .27 16.28 .000 *Moral conservatism -.38 30.76 .000 Gender (maleness) .28 15.76 .000 *Past experience with sexual intercourse .17 6.91 .009 Black identity .14 4.93 .028 DV3: Anti-gay sex attitudes R2 - .24 F-11.55 p-.ooo *Moral conservatism .27 14.29 .000 Past experience with homosexual sexual activity -.26 13.16 .000 Political conservatism .22 9.47 .002 Moral Majority affiliation .20 7.80 .006 0V4: Perceptions of sexual intercourse (including ages)-- as shown in the stimulus tapes R2 - .09 F-6.35 p-.ooz *Experimental exposure to low-sex stimulus .21 6.10 .015 **Past experience with sexual intercourse .17 4.11 .045 153 Table 16, cont'd. 0V5: Perceptions of sexual intercourse (excluding ages)--as shown in the stimulus tapes 2 R - .13 F-8.03 p-.000 **Past experience with sexual intercourse .23 9.67 .002 *Experimental exposure to high-sex stimulus -.18 5.57 .019 Gender (maleness) .17 5.22 .024 0V6: Expectations for self re sexual intercourse--as shown in the stimulus tapes R2 - .29 F-ll.68 p-.OOO *Past experience with sexual intercourse .35 21.30 .000 **Political conservatism -.29 14.68 .000 *Previous sex media exposure .25 12.73 .000 College class level .17 5.56 .020 Income .16 5.44 .021 0V7: Perceived likelihood of engaging in sexual intercourse 2 R - .63 F-44.39 p-.000 *Frequency of sexual intercourse in past month .45 63.29 .000 *Past experience with sexual intercourse .29 26.80 .000 *Involvement with member of opposite sex .17 9.27 .003 Frequency of church attendance -.16 10.35 .002 Gender (maleness) .15 9.54 .002 Income -.10 4.44 .037 OV8: Eagerness for engaging in sexual intercourse R2 - .51 F-41.32 p-.ooo *Frequency of sexual intercourse in past month .35 32.69 .000 Gender (maleness) .38 45.01 .000 *Past experience with sexual intercourse .26 17.55 .000 **Moral conservatism -.16 7.29 .008 * - Appeared as a significant mediator in the analyses of covariance. ** - Was included as a mediator, but was not a significant predictor in the analyses of covariance. 154 the finding that the experimental media exposure predicts sex perceptions: Experimental exposure to the low-sex stimulus contributes positively, while experimental exposure to the high-sex stimulus contributes negatively. Third, we see reinforcement of the finding that previous sex media exposure predicts casual sex attitudes and sex expectations for self (but pp; for eagerness), even in the presence of strong demographic influences. In assessing these findings, we must also analyze the circumstances under which the findings were achieved. A methodological clarification The following discussion of this dissertation's methods is offered, not so much as an itemization of flaws and errors, or a decrying of "It would have been a good study if only . . ."--but a clarification of how this study fits among other research efforts and exactly how generalizable the findings might be. First, the sample merits discussion. While not a random sample of young adults, the sample was a large and broad-based pool of college students. The group seems representative of middle- and upper-middle-class young people. The generalizability of this study is thus limited to that population. It is likewise limited to individuals of this age group (mean age I 19.2) and level of sexual experience (583 have had heterosexual intercourse, 62 have had homosexual sexual experience). As past experience with heterosexual intercourse played a significant role in predicting some sex attitudes, sex expectations for self. and perceived likelihood and eagerness for engaging in sex, it is expected that the 155 outcomes seen in this study might not hold for less (or more) experienced populations. The particular nature of the research design of this study also needs explication. As with most true experiments, this study involved administration of the manipulation at only one point in time. Would the subjects have reacted the same way if they had been exposed to numerous videotapes over a period of weeks? Quite probably not. Longitudinal exposure might result in greater and more consistent cognitive, affective, and behavioral effects as hypothesized. The same might be true of multiple exposures over a short period of time (although the external validity of this design would be low). On the other hand, these might result in even stronger differences for the counter-supportive findings. While most experiments on erotica have found a single exposure to result in increased aggression, Bryant and Zillmann (1981) found that longitudinal exposure resulted in significantly lppp aggression. Perhaps there is a satiation pattern of effects for sexual stimuli. In this case, a one-shot study would be more likely to show a change than would a longitudinal study. On the other hand, the evidence from this study that past sex media exposure is related to some sex attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors would lead one to believe that longitudinal exposure might indeed show stronger effects. In any case, this research may be seen as a valid test of short-term outcomes stemming from a single controlled exposure to "vidsex,” and its generalizability is to that situation rather than to a long-term viewing situation or to multiple exposures. Correspondingly, the single exposure to vidsex which did occur in the study was administered in a controlled, laboratory setting, not in the 156 "home" environment (the quotation marks allude to the consideration that college students do not usually watch TV in a conventional house, but rather in dorm rooms, dorm TV rooms, or student apartments). The subjects were also exposed individually, to avoid the intrusion of situational variables (e.g., group size, group gender composition) into the experiment. In keeping the viewing situation under strict control, the generalizability has been limited to solitary viewing situations in a non-"home" setting. The operationalizations of the independent and dependent variables merit consideration. First, the dependent measures were sexual in nature, and may have stimulated a sexually-oriented response in and of themselves. However, to the extent that this phenomenon might have occurred, it should have been randomly distributed across treatment groups. Also, the inclusion of many non-sexual ”foil” items should have softened the blow somewhat. Second. the dependent variables are obviously self-report in nature. Are self-report measures really able to tap internal states such as perceptions, expectations, and attitudes? They are our best bet, inasmuch as one may not observe these qualities directly. But this reliance upon the objectivity, the self-realization, and the honesty of the subject always invites criticism of the internal validity of these measures. In the case of behavioral outcomes, however, one mpy directly observe--in principle at any rate. Bandura (1977) and many others have used direct observation of aggression in testing the aggressive social learning hypothesis. Two questions arise when considering the application of direct observation to a test of sexual social learning: 157 May a method be devised which would validly tap natural behavioral sexual outcomes? Short of a Big Brother approach to the invasion of privacy, I think it is unlikely. Herein stands a major difference between violence and sex as behavioral outcomes of TV viewing. In our society, aggression is allowed and sometimes encouraged in a wide variety of situations. A "strong man" is admired, children are taught by parents to "stick up for themselves" and “fight their own battles," protesters freely throw rocks at police, those same police tell a battered wife they can't get involved in "family matters," and the Moral Majority admires the Dukes of Hazzard for their violent displays. More than this, the open discussion of violence is socially acceptable: while all aggressive behaviors are not commended, they are at least all open for discussion--in the home, on the street, in .the newspaper, on TV. Sex, on the other hand, is still a sensitive topic. Sexual activity is regarded by most as an activity to be done and to be talked about in private only. Thus, we may put children in.a room to see if they will. punch a Bobo doll, and few parents will object. But could we put those same children, in the name of science, mind you, into that same room with a. sexually equipped blow-up doll to see if they will engage in sexual play? I think not! The point of this is not so much to note the obvious problems in getting permission to do such a study, as to question the validity of even wanting to do such a thing. Youngsters find hitting a doll a normal thing to do in a relatively public setting. Sexual play in public is not 158 something most would willingly do. The same holds true for adults: We can have adults administer shocks to others as a measure of their aggressiveness: would having them sexually service others in a research situation have similar validity? The above discussion applies particularly to behavioral outcomes. Perceptual and affective outcomes could be tapped by other than self-report means. Oirect response questionning through personal interview posttest and unobtrusive measures of post-viewing verbal interactions with a confederate are possibilities for future research. 2. Tied to the above discussion is a second question: Is the fact that this study failed to use behavioral outcome measures the only reason for its lack of congruence with the violence studies' findings? In other words, does social learning theory apply equally well to one-shot experiments on sex and violence, with differences in the operationalization of the dependent variables the only reason for the divergence of findings? We will probably never know for certain, but it is doubtful, in light of the above discussion concerning our society's sanctions against sex and in favor of violence under certain conditions. The items and scales used in the posttest questionnaire had been extensively pretested, hopefully minimizing ambiguity. The ll-point response scheme used for many items provided room for the respondent to 159 discriminate in his/her choices. However, the response scheme was bounded at both ends, while measuring theoretically unbounded concepts. Responses using this scheme have been analyzed as interval/ratio level data, although there is no assurance that respondents treated the scheme in that way. Finally, the operationalization of the independent variable needs discussion. An effort was made to use program content which would be typical of sex as shown on pay-TV and might also be shown on network TV with some sex edited out. However, as with any TV stimulus, the content was of a specific type: 1. The stimulus tapes were relatively short (10 to 15 minutes), and therefore did not include the entire story line. 2. Not only were the stimulus tapes brief, but they also were not representative of the broader movie content: the stimulus tapes each consisted of an edited, self-contained story line, which is not the same as a 15-minute excerpt extracted from the movie. Viewing of the ”mini-movie" may not be considered the same as viewing the whole movie pp; viewing a randomly selected lS-minute portion of that movie. 3. The tapes- were shown without commercial breaks, thus approximating a pay-TV situation rather than one of network TV viewing. 160 Since the stimulus content was taken from recent films, this approximated a pay-TV or network pilot viewing situation--the subjects were not acquainted with the characters or general plot characteristics as they might be if the content were taken from popular TV series. The actual sexual content, while differing significantly in explicitness among the different treatment groups as shown by the manipulation checks, was of a specific type. It was straightforward both visually and verbally, as opposed to much of network TV's "teasing" sex content. As Roberts (1980) points out, "Just as it is difficult to separate sexuality from the rest of our lives, it is difficult to isolate television's sexual content from the rest of programming." (p. 17) Perhaps this study's operationalization was a bit atypical of vidsex in this regard. The sexual activity shown was not entirely what one might term “normal. normative sexual behavior." The sex act shown occurred between people who had just met, and an unconfirmed hint of prostitution was also present. The sexual activity shown was portrayed in a non-punitive way, with both partners being consenting adults. As Gagnon (1964) notes, this type of portrayal is acceptable to most adults: a portrayal of rape, homosexual sex, or some other less common sex 161 act might result in different outcomes due to the novel stimulus content 0 One of the two films used, Ipp Specialist, elicited a fair amount of humor from the subjects. No significant differences were found between the two films on the dependent variables, however, so in this case the humor did not seem to make a major difference. A final concern refers back to the discussion of moral development in Chapter I. There, it was noted that people go through successive degrees of internalization of socially-based moral sanctions, from avoidance of sexually-related speech and behavior due to fear of punishment (Stage 1) to conformity with social standards of appropriate behavior out of regard for others and one‘s own integrity (Stage 6). The characters shown in the videotape stimuli behaved sexually at a Stage 2 level ("naive egoistic orientation”). If a subject is a Stage 1 individual sexually, he/she might reject the models as "morally immature" or perhaps “morally corrupt.” No attempts to develop measures of one‘s ppgppl moral stage have been made to date: with the development of such a measurement technique, future research could assess the validity of this possibility. 162 All these considerations cf the stimuli impinge upon the generalizability of the study, and should be kept in mind when interpreting the findings for future applications. Again, these points are not apologies-~this research was carefully conducted and, I believe, a valid test of the hypotheses. But, as the above points make clear, it is only one possible test of the hypotheses. Comparison with past research Quite simply, this study found no basis for stating that a single exposure to vidsex results in cognitive, attitudinal, or behavioral changes of the kind predicted. Although not directly comparable, this is congruent with the findings of the Pornography Commission, which found only slight impacts of pornography (i.e., increased marital communication about sex, increased masturbatory and coital behavior of a very short-lived nature, and no experimental impact on sexual attitudes), and no survey evidence for adverse behavioral changes (i.e., no impact on the occurrence of sex crimes). However, this is dissimilar to the findings of most of the research on televised violence, as well as the findings of the recent pornography-and-violence studies. These latter research efforts have supported a social learning perspective, showing more aggressiveness on the part of the subjects after viewing standard aggression or erotic aggression. Why do the findings of this study, and the findings of the Pornography Commission, generally go against a social learning explanation? It is, I feel, for the reason explicated above: Sex is not the same as violence, and is not treated equivalently to violence in our 163 society. Special (considerations must be made for researching such a unique topic. In this study, past exposure to sexual content in the media was a significant mediator for the prediction of several dependent variables: Casual sex attitudes, sex expectations for self, eagerness for engaging in sex, pro-gay sex attitudes, and likelihood of engaging in sex. However, inasmuch as these relationships are of a cross-sectional, self-report nature, we do not know if the exposure preceded or followed the occurrence of the dependent variables. Indeed, in the multiple regressions displayed in Table 16, more variables were included as predictors and as a result previous sex media exposure remained significant only for casual sex attituces and sex expectations for self. The Pornography Commission's findings parallel this: Correlational studies found a relationship between experience with erotic material and general attitudes toward sex, while experiments, again, found no effect of erotica on attitudes (U.S. Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, 1970a, p. 26). Given this body of evidence, it seems likely that attitudes determine sex media exposure. rather than vice versa, or that certain sex-related attitudes determine initial sex media exposure, which then enhances these attitudes, resulting in a reciprocal cause-effect relationship between sex attitudes and sex media exposure. Future research If you were to ask me, "What areas should future research emphasize?" I would have to answer that "We can't do the research we'd really like to do!" Sex is indeed a very sensitive area, and it is for this reason that 164 we can't get at the subjects we'd like, can't make the measurements we'd like, and even produce the experimental stimuli we'd like. I would like to see research done on younger age groups, as well as adults. I would hypothesize that adolescents would be the prime targets of vidsex effects, in light of what we know about sexual learning in childhood. Adults would learn less from vidsex, due to their opportunity for real-life experience and their already-formed beliefs hand attitudes. Young children (ten years and younger) would customarily be affected very little, due to their inability to comprehend the sexual nature of acts. I would like to gather true behavioral measures for the dependent variables, as well as cognitive, affective, and self-report behavioral measures. While very difficult to do, this would allow direct comparison with typical violence applications of social learning theory. If conducted in an unobtrusive manner, this type of study should show any effects more clearly than self-report paper-and-pencil tests. However, as noted earlier, social sanctions against sexual behavior by the young might render such measures invalid. I would like to see longitudinal studies, as well as cross-sectional surveys and experiments, conducted. Unfortunately, these do not seem feasible in the foreseeable future. Parents are very unwilling to allow children to see even the most inocuous vidsex material in an experimental situation. In 1981, for example, researchers at Michigan State University (Greenberg, Perry, and Covert, 1982) attempted an experiment in which they were to show adolescents either a "Facts for Boys" or a "Facts for Girls” videotape. These stimuli were educational(informational programs which had been already aired on CBS, as part of the "Body Human" series. The 165 test was whether significant learning of sexual information took place via viewing these programs. The upheaval which occurred in the sampled community when they heard about the upcoming study to be conducted in their schools was incredible--a pirated copy of the study questionnaire was passed out to citizens shopping at a grocery store in an attempt to shock the citizenry. And many of them were shocked-- the study took place, but the participation by the students was not good. Kilmann, Wanlass, Sabalis. and Sullivan (1981) also note the controversy which has surrounded most sex education studies conducted to date. The citizenry is simply not ready for sex ed., let alone American Gigolo, to be shown to their children. Nor would attempting to conduct longitudinal studies and studies with true behavioral measures be necessarily valid at this point in time. We might be able to do them, but the self-selecting sample which would result would limit the generalizability of such studies to the extreme. Then what can the serious vidsex researcher do to pursue valid and valuable avenues of research? First, he/she can exhaust all existing possiblities before giving upl That alone could take a person many years to do. We have available to us college-aged young people,and adults, with whom we can conduct many experiments and surveys, tapping the various aspects of vidsex and its possible effects. We can compare different age groups and groups of varying sexual experience. We can operationalize vidsex with an infinite number of stimulus tapes, comparing funny with serious, familiar with novel, full-length with edited, etc. And second, he/she can wait. Our society has changed dramatically in the past 15 years-~who knows what it will be like, culturally and behaviorally, in 5 166 or 10 years? ipplications for policy What implications exist for U.S. sex-in-the-media policy and for U.S. producers of TV content as a result of this study? For policy, this study gives no support for changing current laws, statutes, FCC guidelines, or NAB standards in a more restrictive direction. Sex on TV does not seem to be corrupting our post-adolescents, from the evidence (or lack thereof) shown here. If anything, there is marginal evidence that . more explicit sex on TV may result in more conservative attitudes and behaviors, which may be exactly the desired outcome of many policymakers. FOOTNOTES FOOTNOTES The Pornography Commission's findings have been scathingly criticized by feminists in a nonscientific light (Lederer, 1982) for its many value judgments made in determining what is ”harmful" or "bad." That argument aside, the Pornography Commission's collection of studies did include some with serious sampling and measurement problems. 18 U.S.C. § 1461. Research aides have speculated that the high level of humor reported for Ipp Specialist may be partially derived from the group viewing situation of the pretest. Less formal in style than American Gigolo, Ipp Specialist received a fair amount of tittering from the subject groups. As this variable operated as a mediator, the impact of these differences was assessed by analysis of covariance. If a subject was assigned to the control group which saw‘ no segment, he/she proceeded directly to the research room to fill out the questionnaire. Inasmuch as ’the stimulus content showed sexual intercourse in a gender-specific light (e.g., clearly taking place in the male's home rather than the female's), extrapolation to one's own life was measured differently for males (e.g., “Will the act take place in your home?") and females (e.g., "Will the act take place in the other person's home?"). To avoid administrative difficulties, all respondents were asked all questions: the items were selectively utilized in constructing indices. 167 BIBLIOGRAPHY 10. I]. 12. 13. BIBLIOGRAPHY Abel, J.D., and Fontes, B.F. The Portrayal of Illegal, Sexual, and Violent Behaviors in Prime Time Television Programming. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Telecommunication, Michigan State University, November, 1976. American Broadcasting Corporation. Programming and the Viewer: The Right to Choose. ABC, 1981. Angelino, H., and Mech, E.V. Some "First" Sources of Sex Information as Reported by Sixty-seven College Women. Journal p1 Psychology, 1955, 12, 321-324. Bachy, V. Danish "Permissiveness" Revisited. Journal p: Communication, Winter 1976, 40-43. Bandura, A. Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1977. Bandura, A. Vicarious and Self-Reinforcement Processes. In R. Glaser (Ed.) The Nature p1 Reinforcement. New York: Academic Press, 1971. Baran, S.J. How TV and Film Portrayals Affect Sexual Satisfaction in College Students. Journalism Quarterly, 1976a, 468-473. Baran, S.J. Sex on TV and Adolescent Sexual Self-Image. Journal p1 Broadcasting, Winter, 1976b, 29, 1, 61-68. Baron, R.S., Baron, P.H., and Miller, N. The Relation between Distraction and Persuasion. Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 89, 4, 310-323. Baron, R.A., and Bell, P.A. Sexual Arousal and Aggression by Males: Effects of Type of Erotic Stimuli and Prior Provocation. Journal p1 Personality ppp Social Psychology, 1977, 35, 2, 79-87. Berkowitz, L. Aggression: A Social Psychological Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1962. Berkowitz, L. Sex and Violence: We Can't Have It Both Ways. Psychology Today, December 1971, l4/18-23. Birmingham, S. Hotter or Cooler? The Sex Watch...l982. 1! Guide, May 22-28, 1982, 2-6. 168 14. 15. l6. l7. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 169 Broadcasting. 008 study finds public wants reins on television sex, but shies from total censorship, federal controls. January 23, 1978a, 46. Broadcasting. PTA announces results of its watch on the TV networks. February 20, l978b. 50-52. Broadcasting. United Church Takes on Mission Against Sex and Violence on TV. April 11, 1977, 49. Bryant, J., and Zillmann, D. The Effects on Aggression of Viewing Sadomasochism and Bestiality After Longitudinal Exposure to Standard Erotica. ' Paper presented at a Mass Communication Division Session at the 31st Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota, ‘May 21-25, 1981. Byrne, D., and Byrne, L.A. Exploring Human Sexuality. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1977. Byrne, D., Fisher, J.D., Lamberth, J., and Mitchell, H.E. Evaluations of Erotica: Facts or Feelings? Journal of Personality ppp Social Psychology, 1974, 39, 1, 111-116. [_— Campbell, D.T., and Stanley, J.C. Experimental Quasi-Experimental Designs fipp Research. Chicago: Rand McNa College Publishing Company, 1963. and 11y Carlin, J.C. The Rise and Fall of Topless Radio. Journal p: Communication, Winter 1976, 31-37. Christopher, M. Execs from GE and 08M urge moves against TV sex/violence. Advertising App, November 24, 1975, l and 59. Clarke, G.‘ Sanitizing the Small Screen. Time, June 29, 1981, 83. Collins, W.A. Children's Comprehension of Television Content. In E. Wartella (Ed.), Children Communicating: Media and Development p: Thought, SpeechI Understanding. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1979. Communication 399 Students. Speaking about Sex in Prime Time: The Language of Sexual Intimacy. Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University, 1980. Communication 399 Students. Speaking about Sex in Soaps: The Language of Sexual Intimacy. Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University, 1980. Comstock, G. Television ip America. Beverly Hills: Sage 28. 29. ' 3o. 31. 32. 34. 35- 36. 37- 38. 39- 40. 170 Publications, 1980. Conn, J.H. Factors Influencing Development of Sexual Attitudes and Sexual Awareness in Children. American Journal p: Diseases p: Children, Oct. 1939, 8, 4, 738-745. Conn, J.H. Sexual Curiosity of Children. American Journal 'pfi Diseases p: Children, Nov. 1940, pp, 5, 1110-1119. Courtright, J.A. and Baran, S.J. The Acquisition of Sexual Information by Young People. Journalism Quarterly, 1980, 51, 57-114. Detroit Free Press. Latin Sex Film Ends with Actual Killing. October 3, 1975. 6-0. Detroit Free Press. Moral Majority sets sights on TV. November 14, 1980, 6-C. . Dickinson, G.E. Adolescent Sex Information Sources: 1964-1974. Adolescence, Winter 1978, 13, 52, 653-658. Dienstbier, R.A. Sex and Violence: Can Research Have It Both Ways? Journal p1 Communication, Summer 1977, 176-188. Dominick, J.R. and Rauch, G.E. The Image of Women in Network TV Commercials. Journal p: Broadcasting, Summer 1972, 1p, 3, 259-265. Donnerstein, E., and Barrett, G. Effects of Erotic Stimuli on Male Aggression Toward Females. Journal pi Personality ppp Social Psychology, 1978, 3p, 2, 180-188. Donnerstein, E., Donnerstein, M., and Evans, R. Erotic Stimuli and Aggression: Facilitation or Inhibition. Journal p: Personality ppp Social Psychology, 1975, 3;, 2, 237-244. Donnerstein, E., and Hallam, J. Facilitating Effects of Erotica on Aggression Against Women. Journal p1 Personality ppp Social Psychology, 1978, 3p, 11, 1270-1277. Einsiedel, E.F.. Salomone, K., and Schneider, F. A Field Experiment on Immediate and Delayed Effects of Aggressive-Erotic, Mild- and Hard-Core Erotic Films on Attitudes toward Sexual Violence. Paper presented at the 32nd Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, Boston, Massachusetts, May, 1982. ' Efron, E. Television After Dark. 1! Guide, October 25, 1975b, 26-32. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. SO. 51. 52. 53- 54. 171 Efron, E. TV's Sex Crisis. 1! Guide, October 18, 1975a, 4-8. Elias, J., and Gebhard, P. Sexuality and Sexual Learning in Childhood. [pi Delta Kappan, March 1969, 401-405. Ellis, H. Psychology p1 Sex, Second Edition. New York: Harvest/HBJ, 1966. Eysenck, H.J., and Nias, D.K.B. Sex, Violence ppp _pp Media. New York: Harper Colophon Books, 1979. Falwell, J., (Ed.) Hp! [pp gpp Help Clean pp America. Washington, D.C.: Moral Majority, Inc., 1981. Farrell, W.C. Jr., and Others. Sexual Attitudes and Knowledge Among Black Inner-City Elementary School Students in Philadelphia: A Pilot Study. Paper presented at the National Sex Institute of the American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors, and Therapists, Washington, O.C., April 1978. Federal Communications Commission. Report on the Broadcast of Violent, Indecent and Obscene Material. February 19, 1975. Feldman, C., and Tickton, S. Obscene/Indecent Programming: Regulation of Ambiguity. Journal p1 Broadcasting, Spring 1976, 29, 2, 273-282. Fernandez-Collado, C., Greenberg, B.S., with Korzenny, F., and Atkin, C.K. Sexual Intimacy and Drug Use in TV Series. Journal pf Communication, Summer 1978, 28, 3, 30-37. Fontes, B.F., Barwis, G.L., and Reagan, J. Audience Perceptions of Family Viewing Time. Central States Speech Journal, Fall 1977. 2Q. 283-289. Franzblau, S., Sprafkin, J.N., and Rubinstein, E.A. Sex on TV: A Content Analysis. Journal p: Communication, Spring 1977, 164-170. Gagnon, J.H. Sexuality and Sexual Learning in the Child. Bloomington, IN: Institute for Sex Research, Inc., Indiana University, 1964. Gillmor, D.M., and Barron, J.A. Mass Communication Law: Cases and Comment, Second Edition. St. Paul, Minn.: West Publishing Co., 1974. Graef, D. Sexual Intimacy on Prime-time Television During the Summer 1978. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Communication, Michigan State University, 1978. 55- 56. 57. ' 58. 59- 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 172 Greenberg, B.S., Abelman, R., and Neuendorf, K. Sex on the Soap Operas: Afternoon Delight. Journal p: Communication, Summer 1981, in press. Greenberg, B.S., and Gantz, W. Public Television and Taboo Topics: The Impact of "V0 Blues." Public Telecommunications Review, January/February 1976, 5, 1, 56-59. Greenberg, B.S., Graef, D., Fernandez-Collado, C., Korzenny, F., and Atkin, C.K. Sexual Intimacy on Commercial TV During Prime Time. Journalism Quarterly, Summer 1980, 51, 2, 211-215. Greenberg, B.S., Perry, K.L., and Covert, A.M. 15p Body Human: Sex Education, Politics and Television. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Michigan Speech Association, Kalamazoo College, Kalamazoo, Michigan, April 3, 1982. Gruner, C.R. The Effect of Humor in Dull and Interesting Informative Speeches. Central States Speech Journal, 1970, 31, 160-166. Gruner, C.R. An Experimental Study of Satire as Persuasion. Speech Monographs, 1965, 3;, 149-153. 0 Harris, L. Majority oppose Moral Majority. Lansing State Journal, July 10, 1981. Henry, W.A. III. Another Kind of Ratings War. Time, July 6, 1981, 17-20. Herman, G., and Leyens, J.P. Rating Films on TV. Journal ‘p: Communication, Autumn 1977, 48-53. Hesselbart, S. Men and Women on the Tube: Sex and Sex-Stereotypes on Television. Paper presented at the Association for Consumer Research, Chicago, Illinois, October 1977- Hickey, N. Does TV Go Too Far: Results of a Nationwide Poll on the Medium's Morality. I! Guide, October 13, 1973, 7-9. Hocking, J.E. Walker, B.A., and Fink, E.L. The Effects of Physical Attractiveness on Judgments of Morality Following an "Immoral" Act. Unpublished manuscript, University of Georgia, July 1980. Hoffman, M.L. Development of Moral Thought, Feeling, and Behavior. American Psychologis , October 1979, 55, 10, 958-966. Hoffman, M.L. Moral Development in Adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook p: Adolescent Psychology. New York: John Wiley 5 69. 70. 71. 72. 73- 71.. 75- 76. 77- 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 173 Sons, 1980. Hoffman, M.L. Sex Differences in Moral Internalization and Values. Journal pi Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 31, 4, 720-729. Johnson, D.K., and Satow, K. Getting down to specifics about sex on television. Broadcasting, May 22, 1978, 24. Jones, W.K. Cases and Materials on Electronic Mass Media. New York: The Foundation Press, 1976. Kahn, 5.5., with Davis, J. he Kahn Report pp Sexual Preferences. New York: Avon Books, 1981. Kaplan, R.M., and Pascoe, G.C. Humorous Lectures and Humorous Examples: Some Effects upon Comprehension and Retention. Journal pi Educational Psychology, 1977, 59, 1, 61-65. Kilmann, P.R., Wanlass, R.L., Sabalis. R.F., and Sullivan, 8. Sex Education: A Review of Its Effects. Archives pi Sexual Behavior, 1981, 19, 2, 177-205. Kohlberg, L. Stage and Sequence: The Cognitive-Developmental Approach to Socialization. In D.A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook pi Socialization Theory ppp Research. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1969. Lederer, L. (Ed.). Take Back ipp Night: Women pp Pornography. Toronto: Bantam Books, 1980. Levinsohn, F.H. Television's New Sex Education. School Review, May 1977. 439-444. Libby, R.W., and Straus, M.A. Make Love Not War? Sex, Sexual Meanings, and Violence in a Sample of University Students. Archives pi Sexual Behavior, 1980, 9, 2, 133-147. Liebert, R.M., Neale, J.M., and Davidson, E.S. Ipp Early Window: Effects pi Television pp Children ppp Youth. New York: Pergamon Press, Inc., 1973. Lull, P.E. The Effectiveness of Humor in Persuasive Speech. Speech Monographs, 1940, 1, 26-40. Malamuth, N.M. Rape Fantasies as a Function of Exposure to Violent Sexual Stimuli. Archives pi Sexual Behavior, 1981, 19, 19 33-117 0 Malamuth, N.M., and Check, J.V.P. The Effects of Mass Media Exposure on Acceptance of Violence against Women: A Field 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95- 96. 97. 98. 174 Experiment. Journal pi Research 1p Personality, '1981, 1 , 436-446. " "— Markiewicz, 0. Effects of Humor on Persuasion. Sociometry, 1974. 11. 3. 407-422. McCandless, B.R., and Evans, E.D. Children ppp Youth: Psychosocial Development. Hinsdale, Illinois: The Dryden Press, 1973- McGhee, P.E., and Frueh, T. Television viewing and the learning of sex-role stereotypes. 5pm Roles, 1980, p, 179-188. McGrath, E. Striving to Shake Up Jell-O. Time, December 15, 1980, 23-24. Media ppm Reporte . Niemi v. NBC. 1976, 1, 1830-1831. Media ppm Reporter. Olivia N. v. NBC. 1977, 3, 1454-1456. Media ppm Reporte . NBC v. Niemi. 1978, 3, 1785-1786. Media ppm Reporter. Disney Productions v. Shannon. 1981, 1, 1209-1212. Media ppm Reporte . Olivia N. v. NBC. 1981, 1, 2359-2363. Meyer, T.P. The Effects of Sexually Arousing and Violent Films on Aggressive Behavior. The Journal of Sex Research, November 1962. g, 4, 324-331. "" _' -" Miller, M.M., and Reeves, 8. Dramatic TV content and children's sex-role stereotypes. Journal pi Broadcasting, 1976, 1Q, 35-50. Monge, R.H., Dusek, J.D., and Lawless, J. An Evaluation of the Acquisition of Sexual Information through a Sex Education Class. The Journal pi 5pm Research, August 1977, 13, 3, 170-184. Murray, J.P. Television and Youth: 15 Years pi Research and Controversy. Boys Town: The Boys Town Center for the Study of Youth Development, 1980. Psychology Today. Pornography and Sex Crimes: The Danish Experience. November 1973. 13. . Reeves, B. Children's Understanding of Television People. In E. Wartella (Ed.), Children Communicating: Media ppp Development pi Thought, Speech, Understanding. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1979. Reeves, B., and Garramone, G. Sex on Television: Euphemisms for 175 Intimate Sexual Behavior. Paper presented to the Status of Women Research Session, Association for Education in Journalism, Houston, Texas, 1979. 99. Resnik, H.S. Putting VD on Public TV. Saturday Review, October 14. 1972. 33-33- ‘ 100.Roberts, E.J. (Ed.) Childhood Sexual Learning: The Unwritten Curriculum. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Ballinger Publishing Company, 1980a. 101.Roberts, E.J. Television Influences on Sexual Behavior and Expectations. Paper submitted to the National Institute of Mental Health, Department of Health, Education and Welfare for the update of the 1971 Surgeon General's Report on Television-and Social Behavior, April, 1980b. 102.Romer, N., and Cherry, 0. Ethnic and Social Class Differences in Children's Sex-Role Concepts. 5pm Roles, April 1980, p, 2, 245-264. ' 103.Roper Organization Inc., The. Sex, Profanity and Violence: An Opinion Survey about Seventeen Television Programs. Report prepared for National Broadcasting Company, June 1981. 104.Rowan, C.T., and Mazie, D.M. Do Movie Ratings Work? Readers Digest, July 1981, 117-120. I ,105.Rubinstein, J.S., Watson, F.G., Drolette, M.E., and Rubinstein, H.S. Young Adolescents' Sexual Interests. Adolescence, Winter 1976, 1_1_, 44, 487-496. 106.Ryan, K. Television as a Moral Educator. In R. Adler and D. Cater (Eds.), Television pp p Cultural Force. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1976. 107.Sapolsky, B.S., and Zillmann, D. The Effect of Soft-Core and Hard-Core Erotica on Provoked and Unprovoked Hostile Behavior. 108.Schauer, F.F. Ipp pp! pi Obscenity. Washington, D.C.: The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., 1976. 109.Shear, M. Free Meat Talks Back. Journal pi Communication, Winter 1976, 38-39. 110.Silverman, L.T., Sprafkin, J.N., and Rubinstein, E.A. Physical Contact and Sexual Behavior on Prime-Time TV. Journal pi Communication, Winter 1979, 33-43. lll.Simon, W., and Gagnon, J.H. On Psychosexual Development. In 176 D.A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook pi Socialization Theory ppp Research. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1969. 112.Singer, D., and Singer, J. Sex on TV: How to Protect Your Child. 1! Guide, August 7, 1982, 33-34. 113.Smith, 0.0. The Social Content of Pornography. Journal pi Communication, Winter 1976, 16-24. . 114.Spanier, G.B. Sex Education and Premarital Sexual Behavior among American College Students. Adolescence, Winter 1978, i3, 52, -659-674. 115.Spanier, G.B. Sources of Sex Information and Premarital Sexual Behavior. Ipp Journal pi 5pm Research, 1977, 13, 73-88. 116.Sprafkin, J.N., Silverman, L.T., and Rubinstein, E.A. Reactions to Sex on Television: An Exploratory Study. Public Opinion Quarterly, Fall 1980, 55, 3, 303-315. 117.Stauffer, J., and Frost, R. Male and Female Interest in Sexually-Oriented Magazines. Journal pi Communication, Winter 1976. 25-30- 118.Strommen, E.A., McKinney, J.P., and Fitzgerald, H.E. Developmental Psychology: Imp School-Aged Child. Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press, 1977. 119.Stutzman, B. Television's ”Soap“ Controversy. Freedom of Information Center Report No. 387, School of Journalism, University of Missouriat Columbia, March 1978. 120.Thornburg, H.D. A Comparative Study of Sex Information Sources. The Journal of School Health. February 1972, 5;, 2, 88-91. 121.Tieger, T. Self-Rated Likelihood of Raping and the Social Perception of Rape. Journal pi Research ip Personality, 1981, 15, 147-158. 122.Time. If the Eye Offend Thee. .September 26, 1977a. 53. 123.Time The New Morality: An exclusive poll on what Americans really think about sex. November 21, 1977b, 111-117. 124.1! Viewer. Impact of TV on Adolescent Girls' Sexual Attitudes and Behavior. No. 13, February 14, 1980, 1-2. 125.U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Window Dressing pp ipp Set: pp Update. Washington, O.C., 1979. 126.U.S. Commission on Obscenity and Pornography. Ipp Re ort pi ipp 177 Commission pp Obscenity ppp Pornography. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. 127.U.S. Commission on Obscenity and Pornography. Technical Report pi ipp' Commission pp Obscenity and Pornography, Vols. I-IX. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. 128.U.S. Congress. Sex and Violence on TV. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Communications of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, 1977. 129.Wagner, H. Sexual Behavior of Adolescents. Education, 99, 1, 44-47. 130.Ward, S., Wackman, 0.8., and Wartella, E. ppm Children Learn ip 5_y. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1977. 131.Waters, H.F. Does Incest Belong on TV? Newsweek, October 8, 1979. 101-102. 132.Waters, H.F., with Kasindorf, M., and Carter, 8. Sex and TV. Newsweek, February 20, 1978, 54-61. 133.White, L.A. Erotica and Aggression: The Influence of Sexual Arousal, Positive Affect, and Negative Affect on Aggressive Behavior. Journal pi Personality and social Psychology, 1979, 31, ‘1’ 591-601 0 134.Wishnoff, R. Modeling Effects of Explicit and Nonexplicit Sexual Stimuli on the Sexual Anxiety and Behavior of Women. Archives pi Sexual Behavior, 1978, 1, 5, 455-461. 135.Wober, J.M. Offence and Defence in the Home. Independent Broadcasting Authority Special Report, London, February, 1980. 136.Wood, B.S. Children ppp Communication: Verbal ppp Nonverbal Language Developmen . Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976. 137.Wolfenstein, M. Children's Humor: A Psychological Analysis. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978. 138.Wurtzel, A., and Surlin, S. Viewer Attitudes Toward Television Advisory Warnings. Journal pi Broadcasting, Winter 1978. 1;, 1, 19-31. 139.Yankelovich, D. The Public Mind/Stepchildren of the Moral Majority. Psychology Today, November 1981, 15, 11, 5-10. 140.Zillmann, D., and Sapolsky, 8.5. What Mediates the Effect of Mlld Erotica on Annoyance and Hostile Behavior in Males? Journal APPENDIX A PRETEST I QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX A PRETEST I QUESTIONNAIRE ID SEGMENT__ He'd like you to answer some questions about the movie segment you just saw. For each question, please circle ppp_numbep_between O and 10 which represents the way you feel about the segment. 1. How much of the segment was sexual in nature? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 none ’ all of it . of it 2; How much of the segment related to automobile driving? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 none all of it of it 3. How much did you enjoy the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not very at all much 4. How much did you like the characters in the segment? 0 l 2 3 4 S _ 6 7 8 9 10 not A very at all much 5. How much did you like the plot of the segment? 0. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not very at all much 6. How explicit was the verbal sexual content in the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 not at extremely all explicit explicit 7. How explicit was the visual sexual content in the segment? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not at extremely all ' explicit explicit ‘ 8. How explicit was the sexual content in the segment overall? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not at extremely all explicit explicit 9. How much like real life was the segment overall? 0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 not at exactly all like like real life _ . real life A1 10. 11. 12. I 13. 14. 15. 16. A2 10 SEGMENT____ How realistic were the characters in the segment? 0 1 2 3. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not at exactly all like like real life real life How realistic was the sexual content In the segment? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not at exactly all like . like real life real life How realistic was the automobile driving in the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not at exactly all like ' like real life real life How exciting was the segment overall? 0 1 2 3 4 5 - 6 7 8 9 10 not ‘ extremely at all exciting How exciting was the automobile driving in the segment? 0‘ 1 ‘2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not extremely at all exciting How sexually stimulating was the sexual content in the segment? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not I extremely at all sexually stimulating Have you ever seen the movie from which this segment was taken (CIRCLE ONE)? YES NO NOT SURE APPENDIX B PRETEST II QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX B PRETEST II QUESTIONNAIRE < ID SEGMENT Ne' d like you to answer some questions about the movie segment you just saw. For each question, please circle one number between 0 and 10 which represents the way you feel about the segment. , 1. How much of the segment was sexual in nature? 0 l ' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 none all of it of it 2; How much of the segment related to automobile driving? 0 y l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 none all of it . of it 3. How much did you enjoy the segment? 0 1 2. 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 not very ‘at all much 4. How much did you like the characters in the segment? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not very 'at all * - ~ much 5. How much did you like the plot of the segment? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not - very at all much 6. How explicit was the verbal sexual content in the segment? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not at - extremely all ' explicit explicit 7. How explicit was the visual sexual content in the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not at - extremely all ' , explicit explicit ' 8. How explicit was the sexual content in the segment overall? 0 ‘1-‘._2 3 4 5 6 7' a 9 10 not at '= ; extremely all [A H. explicit explicit 9. Hal’much like real life was the segment overall? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not at exactly all like , like real life ‘ . - real life 81 10. 11. 12. ‘13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 32 ID SEGMENT— How realistic were the characters in the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not at exactly all like like real life real life How realistic was the sexual content in the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 not at . exactly all like like real life real life How realistic was the automobile driving in the segment? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not at exaCtly all like ' like real life real life How exciting was the segment overall? 0 1 2 3 4 s -6 7 a 9 10 "0t . ‘ extremely at all exciting How exciting was the automobile driving in the segment? 0' 1 '2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not extremely at all exciting How sexually stimulating was the sexual content in the segment? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not extremely at all sexually stimulating Have you ever seen the movie from which this segment was taken (CIRCLE ONE)? YES NO NOT SURE How'humorousiwas the segment overall? 0 l 2 3' 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not extremely at all lumprous Hothumoro s was the sexual content in the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 “0t extremely at all humorous Haw certain are you that the couple in the segment engaged in.sexual intercourse? O l _ 2 3 4 S I 6 7 8 9 10 they - they definitely . . definitely 4.14 net ' - 11.4 APPENDIX C TRANSCRIPTS OF STIMULUS TAPES APPENDIX C TRANSCRIPTS OF STIMULUS TAPES The Specialist Characters in order of appearance: CHARACTER NAME ABBREVIATION Pike Smith (PS) Alex Sharky (AS) Hardin ' (H) Landa Wyeth (LW) Judge (J) Bailiff ' (8) Jerry Bounds (JB) American Gigolo Characters in order of appearance: .CHARACTER NAME ABBREVIATION Julian Kaye (JK) Lady .(L) Waiter (”1 Michelle Straton (MS) Charles Straton (CS) Hrs. Laudner (Ms. L.) T I 1 - Indicates material excluded from the low-sex version. I .L - Indicates material excluded from the no-sex version. C1 Car drives up to wharf and parks. PS gets out and walks up to AS. Boats in background. AS sits on boat. C2 The Specialist (MUSIC UP AND UNDER) PIKE SMITH: ALEX SHARKEY:- PS: AS: PS: AS: PS: AS: PS: AS: PS: AS: PS: AS: PS: AS: PS: AS: PS: AS: PS: AS: PS: . AS: Alex Sharkey? Yeah, that's me. You, uh, you Pike Smith? (NODS) My car's this way. No, no, we'll talk hereo-not that I think there's any bugging going on or anything. Business must be good. Yeah, I do okay for a lawyer without a practise. 0h, then you were a lawyer before you became a private investigator. Yeah, til I got careless doing something the bar association considered unethical. There's nothing tougher than a group of lawyers sitting in judgement on another lawyer. Well, I'm glad to be out of it. What's on your mind, Mr. Smith? I want you to watch the opposing attorney in a case I've got coming up in two weeks. Which case is that? Fighting to have the city condemned and take over the water company. It's a private interest now. Well, isn't that a regular court case? Yes, but I don't trust the opposing attorney. What do you want me to do? ‘ Just watch everything he does. 'Watch everything who does? Jerry Bounds. (LAUGHING) Jerry Bounds?! Oh, you've heard of him? Yeah. Who hasn't? He's been making quite a reputation for himself. The way I hear it he's the hottest article around here-- very ambitious, very snrewd-- ‘ Very aggressive. Well, I think you're going to have to let me do a little bit more than just watch him if you want to trip him up somewhere. Scene changes. Van drives up to curb and honks horn. H walks up to LW who is wearing a large hat. C3 PS: AS: PS: AS: PS: 'AS: Like what? Test him. 1 How? I got a friend in San Francisco. She's a knockout, someone I trust. Now say she arrives in town in a day or two, and say her name just happens to get drawn for jury duty. How can that happen? Oh, come on, Pike. You don't have to play games, you run the county. (LAUGHS) You set up the machinery. H picks up suitcase and birdcage. H opens door of van. LW gets inside van. H closes door. Scene changes to inside of van. C4 HARDIN: LONDA WYETH: H: LWz' H: LW: H: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: H: LW: LW: (HONKS HORN AND GETS OUT OF VAN) Forget it, sonny. Sonny? You're not exactly a senior citizen! Wow! Hey, you are Londa Wyeth, aren't you? Who are you? Sharkey sent me. Oh, you know Sharkey. . . No, I don't exactly know him. I'm a friend of a friend of Sharkey's; I'm the contact man. My name is Hardin. Uh. . .I was just sent to pick you uo and take you to where you're gonna live. I really lucked out. Let's go. Okay., Now! Here, I can take the bird. (TAKES CAGE) Hey, you some kind of gypsy or something? Something? I'm not some kind of anything. I'm an artist, man. I got lots of awards. Oh, yeah? Yeah! I even won the Andy. What's that? What is the Andy? You don't know what that is? (SHAKES HER HEAD) H That's the first prize at Le Grande Gallerie in Seattle. Far out. Yeah! I'll tell you what--wanna come to my studio? I'll show you some of my paintings. Ooh. . .I thought the lure this year was etchings. Okay, I'll show you some of my etchings too. I didn't know you were an etching freak Okay, let me get you in. I'm sorry if it's dusty. That's okay. on! Okay. LW takes out cigarette. H offers a light for her cigarette. LW lights her own cigarette. Camera sweeps over moun— tain scenry. Camera back to inside of van. LW: C5 LW: H: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: Say, you got a last name? (QUICKLY) No. I mean, yes, but just Hardin's good enough. . . Mystery man, huh? Yeah, lotta people say that about me. .Hey, I'll tell you what. I'll tell you my IaSL name, if you tell me your real name, because Londa Wyeth, that doesn't sound very much like a real name to me. Well, listen. If you don't ask me any personal questions, I won't ask you any. okay? Okay. (LOOKING OUT WINDOW) Quaint little town. Never been around here before, huh? Nope.‘ Hey, are you married?. I mean, have you ever been married? Uh, uh, uh, no personal questions. Oh, yeah.(LAUGHS) To me it's the relationship that counts. How about you, have you ever been married? No, and I don't wanna get married, either. I've lived with lots of chicks though. I been around. Oh, I can tell. Van drives up to front of house and parks. H gets out of van goes around to the other side to open door for LW. LW gets out of van. H and LW walk to back of the van H opens van door. H takes suitcase and bird- cage. H gives birdcage to LW. H and LW walk to the house. H unlocks door to the house -- opens the door. H and LW walk into the house. C6 LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: Thank-you. Sorry if it was a little uncomfortable. Anyway, I can't tell you what a great pleasure it was for me to drive you here and meet you and everything. Let‘s get your luggage. Okay. Excuse me. I'm sorry. It's alright. I'm sorry. ,Okay, now you wanna take this? I'll take her. (TO BIRD) Come on, Honey. That's a nice pet to have. Yes. Boy. You're sure gonna-add a lot of class to this neighborhood. -Sure am. So, what do you think about it? Can you smell the fresh clear air? It's terrific. Yeah. I'm sorry, I realize this isn't exactly the White House . But. . .maybe that's more fortunate for you. Ha ha. Well, we tried to find a place that's, like, as innocuous as possible. Don't worry about it, kid, I've seen worse. Let's just open it up for you. Okay. Excuse me. : .May I present you with your key, Madamoiselle. H leaves house. C7 LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: Ah, merci beaucoup. I'll give you your tip later. Oh, I wish you would. (LONDA LAUGHS) Here. You can put your birdcage down, uh, anywhere. So listen, what do you think? It's quite a place.- Yeah. It's not really as glamorous as you're probably used to. Hey! You know what? I'll tell you what, I'll, I'll bring some of my paintings and we'll put them on the walls and that'll jazz it up a bit. It's alright. You're very sweet, but don't bother. You sure? Positive. Okay. I guess you want to rest and fresher up, huh? Yeah.' Listen, would you like to have dinner with me at my place tonight, and.I'll show you some of my paintings? (LAUGHING) I thought they were etchings. I'll show you some of my etchings too. Well, then of course I'll have_dinner with you. Oh great. I just have some things to do, so it may be awhile til I get you. Perfect. Okay? I'll be here. Listen, if you want, you can bring your pet. Oh, I thought thrcc'. - crowd. I might come alone. - Oh, well, that would be better. I'll see you later. Bye. Bye. Scene changes to PS's office . PS is sitting behind desk. H knocks on door and opens t. - H walks into office and sits in a chair in front of the desk. PS rises from his chair. H rises and leaves the room. ' C8 H: PIKE SMITH: PS: PS: H: PS: H: PS: PS: PS: PS: PS: Oh, sorry to disturb you, Dad. No, no. Come in. I'll be up all night with this anyway. How did it go? Oh, it went fine, just fine. You get settled in the house alright? Yeah, yeah. Everything's cool, and I even checked with Martha and she promised to bring the lady's name up for jury duty. So that's it I guess, huh? Hey, Dad, that chick--she sure is something. She is dynamite. You remember what I said. You're out of it now. You're to have no further contact with, uh. . . Londa, Londa Wyeth. Wyeth. Listen, Dad, I had an idea. About your problem with Jerry Bounds. Well, I know his wife, Elizabeth, pretty well. I mean she's a fan of mine--she likes my work-~she comes to the art shows all the time. So I figured maybe if I talked to Elizabeth Bounds-- You leave Mrs. Bounds out of this. I don't want you messing around with her either. I'm not talking about messing around with her—-I couldn't anyway. She's not that kind. She digs her old man too much. How do you know that? How do I know? Because I pick up on the vibes. I understand women pretty well. Well, you leave Mrs. Bounds and Londa Wyeth alone. I don't want you to so much as talk to either one of them. Now that's an order. Do you understand? Why don't you just stay-cogl, Dad, huh? How 'bout some beer and cheese? No, I can't. I've got a date. Well, have fun. Yeah, well I'm sure as hell gonna try. .C9 I'll see ya. PS: I don't know where that kid got his wild seed from. Scene changes to room with LW and H. LW is drinking wine and laughing. H takes a drink of wine. LW pours more wine. H shows picture to LW. LW takes out cigarette. H lights LW's cigarette. .CIO LW: H: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: (LAUGHING) ’What's. . .what's so funny? I had a pretty hard competition for this. Why are you laughing? (STILL LAUGHING) Come here. Tell me, how would you paint me? With or without clothes? Well, that would be up to you. You're the artist. I should think that would be up to you. Well, you have such a beautifu1--your figure is like the Naked Miya by Goya. You know that one? Hnnn. . . I have it, I'm gonna show it to you. Yeah, this is it. See? The Naked Miya, by Goya. Ummm, very beautiful. He was from Spain. This is a master- piece--this is one of the greatest masterpieces in the whole world. You see, he painted this woman--she was in Spain too, this happened in Spain--and she was brilliant and beautifu1--beautifu1 woman-~of noble birth. And that's it. That's his avowal. From Spain. From Spain, yeah. This, as a matter of fact, caused a terrific scandal in Spain at the time. Oh, it would cause a big scandal here right now. (LAUGHING) Well, you see, what a lot of people fail to recognize is that a woman's body is like a work of art. . . and unfortunately, we have some very H pours more wine. LW takes off her dress. LW is completely nude 000.. ao...............A ,c11 LW: LW: LN: LW: LW: LW: LW: crass and, uh, crude people who. . . are not able to. . . Oh, excuse me, I'm sorry. . .are not able to appreciate anything above the level of a prurient. Oh, you should have been a lawyer. You speak so properly. Yeah, well that's what my Dad--hey, listen. Uh. . .you're not gonna tell anybody about our meeting here like this, are you? I mean, it's much better if we can keep it a secret just between us. Now who would I tell? well, I don't know. You're gonna be here for awhile, you're bound to make some friends. I didn't come here to make friends, so don't worry. Your secret is safe with me. You can trust me. Besides, I'm going to be a recluse while I'm here, just jury duty and then back to the seclusion of my magnificent hideaway. (THEY LAUGH) Tell me something. Are you sure you're not married? Oh, I'm not, I swear to God. But I do have a girlfriend and she's, uh. she's crazy about me. She's very possessive, very fiery, jealous and hot-tempered, and-- Yes, I understand. You're not going to be here for that long. . I understand. You need to protect your future. Yeah, that's right. That's right. Well, if you're going to paint my picture and make me famous, let's get going, huh? Uh, yeah. Right now. I'm gonna get my sketchbook. How would you like me to pose? : Oh} you know, just, uh. . .any way you H fumbles with his sketch pad. 1‘, LW reclines naked on couch. LW drinks wine. H moves over to couch. LW and H embrace and start kissing passionately. . H lays on top of LW. LW removes H's shirt- they continue to kiss. Heavy breathing, camera scans shadows on the wall. Scene changes to courtroom. r----4 p--4 1--°°-°°':--°-:-*- ............................................. .... ........ ...................... - C12 LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: LW: like. I mean, just so that . . . uh, the candle light just . . .just, uh, flickers through your hair. Let's see, I have an idea. How's this? Oh, that's perfect. . .oh that's really perfect. (LAUGHING AT HIM) Say, do you mind is I drink my wine while you work? No, anything that makes you feel less uptight. . .more. . .more relaxed. Y'know, I like you. You're alright, kid. Really? You're not just saying that? Oh, no. I really, really like you. You. . .you really mean that? (NODS) Well, I'll tell you what. . Just for aesthetic reasons. I don't want you to think I'm making advances-- Oh, no. Why don't we just do that. Okay? You really are §p_sweet. You really do think so? Oh, yes. I feel like kissing you. Do you mind? Oh, no. . People in courtroom clap. People in courtroom rise and walk around. PS pushes bailiff. JB approachs PS. PS slaps JB across the face. PS walks away. LW approachs JB. C13 PIKE SMITH: JUDGE: BAILIFF: JERRY BOUNDS: PS: JB: PS: JB: PS: LW: JB. LW; Strike that from the record! It is irrelevent, incompetent and immaterial. Please, please! I will not tolerate a disturbance in this courtroom. We will now have our afternoon recess. All rise. Right this way, please. Watch your step. Pike, you're a bully! You know it's our custom to let the jury out of the box before we leave the courtroom. I don't give a damn about your customs. You had no right to shove that bailiff. Who the hell are you to tell me how to behave in court? Why are you interfering? I didn't touch you. If the court knew about this, the judge could fine your ass for contempt-- wait a minute-- No damn schiester tells me what to do. Excuse me. I think you better put some water on here before it swells. Yes, I walked right into that, didn't I? ' Uh, please don't say anything about this. We wouldn't want the judge to know. . . Oh, no. C'mon, I'll fix it for you. C'mon. JK walks into restaurant and sits on stool at the bar. Waiter leaves table where MS is seated. JK walks over to booth where MS is sitting. JK sits in booth with MS. C14 American Gigolo (General murmur of crowd) L: JK: W: JK: JK: JK: JK: JK: JK: I told you so. No that's 0k, Jim. Excusez moi, Madame. Un moment. Excusez moi. Puis-jeinasessior instant. J'ai surprit votre conversation. : Mais, bien sure. Je m'appelle, Julian.Kaye. : Excusez moi, Michelle Jones. Enchante. : Puis-je vous offrier quelque chose. Avec plaisir. : Mr. Kane would like another drink. Qu'est-ce que vous voulez? Dry Manhattan on the rocks. You speak English. : You speak English. JK: You fooled me. : And you me. How long have you been over here? Los Angeles? : I live here. Scene changes to sportscar -driving down a highway. JK is driving the car. Music in background. Camera scans the countryside. Car drives up to house and parks near» the entrance. JK gets out of car and walks up to the door. Scene changes to JK'S apart- ment. ' C15 JK: MS: JK: MS: JK: MS: JK: MS: JK: You live here? I don't understand. You wouldn't. I'm just trying to refresh my college French. I usual- 1y practice with a friend but she's not here yet. Where are you from? I was born in Torrino, but I studied at Nantes. You hardly have any accent at all. I've been travelling too much. I envy you. I love to travel. I used to travel a lot but my hus- band's involved with local poli- tics...and...so now I just practice French. He thinks it's chic to have a bilingual wife. I think he's right. Where are you going? I made a mistake. 'C16 JK wipes cocaine? from small mirror by qggdside and rubs VOCALS- it on his gums. ' ' JK takes suit jackets out of closet and lays them on bed-- goes through drawers -- lays shirts on bed-- lays ties on top of jackets. JK ties his shoes-- buttons his pants -- ties his tie. JK: JK answers phone. VOCALS: JK: VOCALS: (Music with vocals; JK sings along.) There you were, Beautiful Promise of love was written on your face You lead me on, with all your kisses Oh, you held me captive in your false embrace Quicker than I could bat an eye. Seems you were telling me good-bye. Just a minute ago your love was here, All of a sudden it seemed to disappear ' Sweetness was only heartaches Camaflage, ~ ' The love I saw in you was just a mirage. We used to meet in romantic places, You gave me the illusion that your love was real Now all that's left are distant traces From the kisses you only pre- tended to feel And now my needing you leaves a void And so my world you have destroyed. Just a minute ago your love was here, Oh baby all of a sudden it seemed to disappear The way you read my life was lights of the dawn Oh, yeah. You only fill me with dis- pair. Yeah, says she's a friend? Where does she know me from? OK, send her up. Green oasis where there's. Knock on door. JK opens the door. MS walks in the apartment. JK crosses room and picks up a print-- looks at it. He puts it down. JK crosses over to MS. .......o....o.....................H., ' c17 MS: JK: MS: JK: MS: JK: MS: JK: MS: JK: MS: ' JK: JK: MS: JK: MS: JK: MS: JK: MS: I'm Michelle Bon Soir. How did you find me? It wasn't hard. Are you surprised? What do you want? I would have thought that you'de live in a place with thick red carpet, big circular bed and mir- rors on the cieling. Bordello. This is my apartment. Women don't come here. Oh. You going out? Yeah. Business? Maybe. Isn't it a little late? Isn't it a little late for you? My husband's still in New York. I'm a- lone. I thought it would be easier. What did you say? I said, I thought it would be easier. What would be? To be with you. To procure you. I told you, you're mistaken. Why are you doing this to me? What am I doing? Embarassing me. Scene changs to JK and MS naked in bed. They are kissing and caressing. Camera shows arms, legs, and breasts. Music in background. JK looks at a neck lace that MS is wearing. P----m--.ub-‘ .OOOOO0.0. .OOOCOOOOOO...‘ C18 JK: MS: MS: JK: MS: JK: MS: JK: MS: MS: I'm not embarassing you. I can't keep up this front much longer. I came here. I found out who you were, where you live. I came here in the middle of the night. I wanted to know what it would be like to fuck you. You want it? No. Good, cause you're not going to get it. I want to know every- thing about you. Right now. God, why? I don't know. It seems important. We just made love didn't we? Yes. Then you know everything there is to know. That's silly. Where you from? Scene changes to banquet hall with people seated at tables. Speaker (A) ia at the podium. Audience applaudes Speaker (CS) moves to podium. Applause JK sitting at table with MSL. Applause 1............ - C19 Ca 7': .0 3 (A CS:. MSL: JK: MSL: CS: MSL: Don't know, from anywhere. I'm from this bed. Anything worth knowing about me you can learn by letting me make love to you. That's not true. Please welcome, Charles Straton. Mac, Thank you. I hope you're having as good a time as the rest of us trying to figure what this stuff is on our plates. But most of all, I'm happy to have the opportunity to speak to you in an informal way about the space scene in Southern California. More than any other community in the country Do you follow California poli- tics Julian? Not very much. You're smart,they're all whores. But we also have the technological means and know how to help free America from the grip of fossil fuels. In times of austerity, like these, it is the privileged who should lead the way, who should set an example for the rest of the country. I believe... This guy's a real comer. Scene changes to a reception line. JK standing in line next to MSL. MS is stanking with CS. JK shakes CS's hand. C20 JK: MSL: CS: MS: CS: MSL: CS: MS: MSL: MS: MSL: JK: She's pretty, isn't she? Yes, very. did, you know Michelle. Hello. Mrs. Laudner. How nice of you to come. It's always a pleasure to see you. Bullshit. But I like it. Can we talk later? Certainly. Mrs. Laudner, my wife’ Michelle. How do you do? How do you do? Pleasure to meet you. And this is Julian Kane. Honor to meet you Senator, enjoyed the speech. Mrs. Straton. You're a fortunate man Senator. APPENDIX D PRETEST III QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX D PRETEST III QUESTIONNAIRE SLsFactor l/Sexual liberalism (ordinary) SP-Factor 2/Sexual permissiveness (extreme) SMsFactor 3/Sex & media (belief in efrects) Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with Each statement below by circling one number for each item. 1. (SL 4.) 8. (SP -) 9- 10. Women should take care of running their homes and leave running the country-to men. -5 -4 .3 -2 -1 o 1 , 2 3 a s STRONGLY - STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE Except in special cases, the husband should provide the family with money and the wife should do the cooking and cleaning. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE Women are much happier if they stay at home and take care of their children. . -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 -2 3 4 5 ~STRONGLY STRCIGLY DISAGREE AGREE Men should be concerned with their careers rather than the duties of child rearing and house tending. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SD . SA Although women hold many important jobs, their proper place is in the home. -5 -4 -3 L2 -10 1 2 3 4 s so .SA I approve of a woman providing the financial support for the family while the husband does the household chores. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 . 5 SD . SA I could not respect a man if he decided to stay at home and take care of his children while his wife worked. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O l 2 3 4 5 SD _ SA I approve of necking and petting on the first date. -5 -4 -3 -2 - -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 50 SA It bothers me to see men allow the women they date to open doors and seat themselves.‘ -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA I disapprove of a married person cheating on his or her spouse. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA DI (5L +) 11. (SL +1 ‘2- (SP +) 13. (SL -) 14. 15. 16. (SP - 17. SM +) (SP + 18. SM +)' 19. 20. (SP +)ZT. (SL 1122. (SP :123‘ ' DZ A approve of sexual intercourse on casual dates or encounters. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE I approve of sexual intercourse if the couple is in love or in a serious relationship. -5 -4 -3. -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA The government should not legislate what is permissible sexual activity between consenting adults. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 Z 3 4 5 SD SA I disapprove of premarital sex even if the couple is to be married. -5-4-3-2-1012 3 4 5 so - - SA Pregnancy out of wedlock is nothing to be ashamed of as long as the ~coup1e is in love. -5 -4 -3 -2 -l O 1 2 3 4 5 SD . SA There are situations where I could approve of a person having an abortion. -5 ‘ -4 -3 -2 -l O 1 2 3 4 5 SO - ' SA I could not have respect for a person who had homosexual experiences. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 Z 3 4 5 SD ‘ SA It is all right for women to wear men's clothing. -5 -4 -3 -2 -l O l 2 3 4 5 SO SA I am irritated by the sight of a man wearing a skirt or even kilts. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1' 2 3 4 5 SD SA People who find pain pleasurable are seriously ill. -5 .4 -3 -2 -l O 1 2 3 4 5 SD , SA There are times when sex between two people of the same sex can be as good as sex between people of the opposite sex. . -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O l 2 3 4 5 SD . SA Pornography should be strictly regulated. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O l 2 3 4 5 SD ‘ SA I could not bring myself to touch a person who was lubricated with Mazzola oil. - . - -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 '2- 3 4 5 SD SA (SL - SM +) (SM 4’) (SM i') (SM t) (SM 4') (SM +) (SL +) '03 24. If there wasn't so much sex on TV, today's youth wouldn't be so sexually promiscuous. -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 o l 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE 25. If children are exposed to sexual themes in the media that are new to them, they are likely to learn something positive. -5 -4 -3. -2 -l o 1‘ 2 3 4 5 SD SA 26. They are likely to tolerate certain sex behaviors or lifestyles in others. -5 -4 -3 -Z -l O l 2 3 4 5 SD SA 27. They are likely to experiment with sex-related behaviors. -5 -4 -3 -2 -l 0 l 2 3 4 5 SD - _ SA 28. How would you rate your own sexual attitudes in relation to the - general adult population in the U.S.? -s -4 -3 -2 -1 o -1 2 I 3 4 5 MEAN=1.18S VERY VERY CONSERVATIVE LIBERAL For the following items, please indicate whether yOu think the things described are right or not. Circle one number for each item. l. To encourage sterilization. 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO NEVER ALHAYS RIGHT RIGHT 2. To have some sort of sexual expression at least every day. 0 l. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEVER ALWAYS RIGHT RIGHT 3. For a man to be an interior decorator. 0 l 2 3 4 ' 5 6 7 8 9 IO NEVER ALHAYS RIGHT RIGHT 4. Not to have any sexual experiences before marriage. 0 l 2 3 ' 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO NEVER ALHAYS RIGHT RIGHT S. For a man to play witha woman's breasts. 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO NEVER ALHAYS RIGHT ' RIGHT (SL +) (sL_ +1 (SL +) (SP +) (SLi') (SL +) (SP +) (SP -) (SL + AND SP +) To read "dirty" magazines. 0 I 2 3 4 5 NEVER RIGHT 7. To go to a prostitute. IO. II. 12. I3. I4. l5. 0 I 2 3 4 5 NEVER RIGHT To look at "dirtY" pictures. 0 I 2 3 4 5 NEVER RIGHT To avoid orgasm until the other person is ready. 0 I 2 3 4 5 NEVER RIGHT To experiment with various positions for sex. 7 O I 2 3 4 5 NEVER RIGHT To use contraceptives. o l 2 3 4 - s NEVER RIGHT To go to X-rated movies. 0 l 2 3 4 5 never RIGHT To have extra-marital intercourse. O I 2 3 4 5 NEVER RIGHT To masturbate. O I Z 3 4 5 NEVER RIGHT To tell your children it is wrong to masturbate. O I 2 3 4 5 NEVER RIGHT To engage in oral sex. 0 I 2 3 4 5 NEVER RIGHT 6 6 6 7 7 IO ALHAYS RIGHT IO ALWAYS RIGHT IO ALMAYS RIGHT IO ALHAYS RIGHT IO ALWAYS RIGHT IO ALHAYS RIGHT IO ALWAYS .RIGHT IO ALHAYS RIGHT IO 0 ALHAYS RIGHT IO ALl-EAYS RIGHT IO ALWAYS RIGHT '05 Listed below are some quotes which may or may not refer to an act of sexual intercourse. Please indicate whether you feel each quote does indeed refer' to sexual intercourse. MEAN 5.0. 1. ”It would be the easiest thing in the world to have a relationship with you.“ . D l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4.1 2.3 DEFINITELY ND ‘ DEFINITELY 2. “Alan was unfaithful to Jackie." YES 0 l 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 '0 6.8 2.5 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 3. "You're the most beautiful girl I've been to bed with in a long time." o l 2-~ i3 4 s 6 7 a 9 10 9.2 .9 DEFINITELY. DEFINITELY . "0 . - YES , 4...~‘It will be my punishment for the night we spent together.“ '0 l 2 3 4 s 6 7 3 9 10 7.3 2-4 DEFINITELY _ DEFINITELY NO YES 5. I'm not into celibacy." O l 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 7.0 2.9 DEFINITELY _ DEFINITELY ND . YES 6. "Maybe we‘ll do more than just talk." 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 7.0 2.2 DEFINITELY . DEFINITELY NO YES ,7. ”I slept with you just to further my career.“ 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 9.2 1.0 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 8. "We can sit in the back seat the 'get down.'" 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.0 2-3 DEFINITELY - DEFINITELY N0. . YES 9. ”Bobby slept with Janet." D l 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 l0 8.3 1.8 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 10. “He picked me up and carried me over to the bed and made love to me." D l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 9.5 .7 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES ll. ”How could I possibly seduce a woman in that condition?" ' D l 2 - 3 4 5 6'. 7 8 9 l0 6.4 3.1 DEFINITELY _ . DEFINITELY NO ' YES IZ. I3. I4. l5. I6. 17. I8. I9. - 06 “Here's to afternoon delights.” , D l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 92 10 6.6 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES ”He talked some business and then went to bed.” 0 » 1 Z 3 4 5 6 7 8 -' 9 10 6.2 DEFINITELY - DEFINITELY NO YES "I don't think anything could be more beautiful than last night." 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.6 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES “A groupie is a listener who likes to do a lot more than just listen.“ 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 5.7 DEFINITELY . DEFINITELY ND ' YES "If youre trying to tell me that Nola slept around, I agree with you." D l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8.8 DEFINITELY ' 4 ' DEFINITELY NO YES “I'm just not sure I want to exchange my best friend for my best lover." D. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 7-6 DEFINITELY DEFINITEYY ND , YES "I hope last night was as heavy for you as it was for me.“ o l 2 3 4 s ' 5 7 8 £3 10 6-6 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY ND - YES ”Rick and Monica had one night together.“ 0 l 2 3 z: s 6 7 a. 9 10 7.2 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY no YES‘ MEAN 3.0 2.5 1.7 2.4 2.8 2.2 . 07 For the following questions, assume that a man and a woman have engaged in sexual intercourse. l. How old do you imagine the woman to be? YRS. 2. How old do you imagine the man to be? YRS. 3. How likely is it that they are married to one another? 0 - l 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 lo definitely - definitely no yes 4. How likely is it that the act took place in an automobile? 0 l 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 lo DEFINITELY . DEFINITELY NO YES 5. How likely is it that the act took place in the woman's home? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lo DEFINITELY. DEFINITELY ND ‘ YES 6. How likely is it that the act took place in the man's home? 0 l 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 l0 DEFINITELY - DEFINITELY "0 , YES 7. How likely is it that the act was initiated by the woman? .0‘ l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lo DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 8. How likely is it that one of the partners was a prostitute? 0 l 2 3 4 5 . 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY ND . YES 9. How likely is it that the two partners were on their first date? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY no . YES 10. How likely is it that one or both of the partners were married to someone else? 0 l 2 3'. 4 5 s 7 3 9 l0 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY no YEs D8 Please anewer the following questions about your own behavior. 1. How likely are you to engage in sexual intercourse during the next week? 0 l 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 2. Howkgager are you to engage in sexual intercourse during the next wee ‘ D l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NOT VERY AT ALL ‘ EAGER 3. How often during the last year have you attended an X-rated movie? TIMES 4. How often during the last year have you watched an R-rated movie? TINES 5. How often during the last year have you read Playboy. Playgirl. ' Penthouse. or other sexually-oriented magazines? THES . 6. How many sexually-oriented books have you read during the last year? BOOKS . g 7. Have you ever engaged in (heterosexual) sexual intercourse? YES NO IF YES: How often have you engaged in sexual intercourse in the past month? 9. Have you ever had a homosexual experience? YES NO IF YES: How often have you engaged in homosexual sexual activity in the past month? - D9 Now we'd like you to answer some questions about yourself. I. 2. IO. How old are you? yrs. ’Nhat is your gender? MALE FEMALE To what ethnic group(s) do you belong? (Check all that apply.) BLACK NATIVE AMERICAN ° HISPANIC HHITE ORIENTAL OTHER "hat is your current marital status? SINGLE. NEVER MARRIED MARRIED SEPARATED/DIRORCED HIDONED INGLE: How would you describe your present living arrangements? k all that apply.) LIVE ALONE LIVE HITH PARENTS OR OTHER FAMILY LIVE WITH ONE OR MORE PEOPLE OF SAME SEX AS YOU LIVE HITH ONE OR MORE PEOPLE OF OPPOSITE SEX IF SINGLE: Do you have a close, romantic relationship with a member of the opposite sex? no, NOT AT THIS TIME YEs. AND HE DO NOT LIVE TOGETHER __ YES, AND NE 00 LIVE TOGETHER Nhat is your college class standing? FRESHMAN' SOPHOMORE JUNIOR SENIOR GRADUATE STUDENT what do you consider to be your main sexual preference? HETEROSEXUAL BISEXUAL ' HONOSEXUAL Hhat is the approximate yearly income of your family? 5 “__._ Nhat is/are the occupation(s) of the person(s) responsible for your support (e. g. , mother, father, wife, husband, yourself)? OCCUPATION: HHO: OCCUPATION: HHO: §§=fi a u: HI II. IZ. 13. I4. ' DID Nhat city or town do you consider to be your hometown? CITY: STATE: Nhat is your religious preference? CATHOLIC JEWISH PROTESTANT: Please indicate the specific religion: OTHER ' _ NONE How often do you attend religious services? ONCE A HEEK OR MORE 2 OR 3 TIMES A MONTH ONCE A MONTH SEVERAL TIMES A YEAR LESS. OR NEVER Do you consider yourself to be a member Of the Moral Majority? YES NO NOT SURE Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. IS. I6. I7. I8. I9. "It is important for each of us to spread the word of God." -5 -4 -3 -2 -I 0 I 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE 'Abortion should remain legal.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -l D l 2 3 4 5 SD Sfi "The U.S. should increase its military spending.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 —l O l 2 3 4 5 SD SA 'Nelfare payments to the poor should be reduced.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -l 0 l 2 3 4 5 SD SA ”Capital punishment should never be used." -5 -4 -3 -2. -l o l 2 3‘ 4 5 so so THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP! APPENDIX E FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX E FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE Below is a list of movies. Please put an "X" by all movies you have seen, either in part or totally. You may have seen these movies on TV or at a theatre. __ CATCH-22 _ SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER __ BLUNE IN LOVE _____lCABARET __ PATTON __ OELTA Pox __ STRAH Dons . __'__ RESURRECTION __ ALL THAT JAZZ __ THE STUNT NAN __ THE SPECIALIST _APocALYPSE NOR AHERICAN GIGOLO FOR OFFICE USE ONLY CODE: 7 ID: DATE: E1 E2 This questionnaire asks about your attitudes. perceptions, and behavior on several topics. Some of the questions deal with adult topics, and some may ask for personal information. While you are of course free to leave any item blank which you fEel you cannot answer, ae would very much appreciate it if you would answer as many questions as you possibly can. Please keep in mind that we do not want to know your name; gg.ggt:out your name or student number anywhere on this questionnaire. Ne would further appreciate it if when you choose not to answer any question, you would please indicate in writing on the questionnaire why_you choose not to answer. Thank you for your help. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY CODE: ID: DATE: E3 1 Ne' d like you to answt ome questions about the movie in'48flt you just saw. For each question, please CIRCLE ONE NUIBER between D and :O which represents thewa _y .m— feel about the segment. 1. How much of the segment was about the drinking_ of alcohol? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NONE ALL OF IT OF IT 2. How much of the segment was about the use. of druos? D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NONE ALL OF IT OF IT 3. How much of the segment was about automobile driving? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO .NDNE ALL ° 0" 1" OF IT 4. How much of the segment was sexual in nature? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NONE ALL OF IT . OF IT 5. How much of the segment was violent in nature? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NONE ALL OF IT CF IT 6. How explicit was the verbal sexual content in the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 18 NOT AT EXTRENELY ALL EXPLICIT EXPLICIT 7. How explicit was the visual sexual content in the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NOT AT EXT RENELY ALL EXPLICIT EXPLICIT 8. How explicit was the sexual content in the segment overall? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NOT AT EXTRENELY ALL EXPLICIT EXPLICIT 9. How realistic was the drinking of alcohol in the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NOT AT EXACTLY ALL LIKE LIKE REAL LIFE REAL LIFE IO. 11. 12. 13. 14. IS. 16. 17. 18. 19. E4 2 How exciting was the automobile driving in the segment? 0 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 NOT EXTREMELY AT ALL - EXCITING How exciting was the segment in genera}? O I Z 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 NOT EXTREHELY AT ALL EXCITING How sexually stimulatipg_was the sexual content in the segment? 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NOT - EXTREMELY AT ALL SEXUALLY ‘ STIHULATING How sexually stimulating was the segment in general? ‘ O 1 2 3 4 5. 6 7 8 9 10 NOT EXTREMELY AT ALL ' . SEXUALLY « STINULATING How certain are you that the couple in the segment engaged in sexual intercourse? O - I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 THE THEY DEFINITELY DEFINITELv um 10.1. 9.12 How humorous was the drinking of alcohol in the segment? 0 I ‘ 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 NOT EXTRENELY AT ALL HUNOROUS How humorous was the sexual content in the segment? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NOT EXT RENELY AT ALL HUNOROUS How humorous was the segment in general? 0 1 2 3 ' 4 E 6 7 8 9 10 NOT EXTREMELY AT ALL HUMOROUS How a ro riate would this segment be for viewing by a typical 6-year-old chilag O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NOT VERY AT ALL APPROPRIATE How appropriate would this segment be for viewing by a typical 12-year-old? o I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NOT - . . VERY AT ALL . , APPROPRIATE E5 3 20. How appropriate would this segment be for viewing by a L,pical 16-year-old? O 1 Z 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 NOT ‘ VERY AT ALL APPROPRIATE 21. How appropriate would this segment be for viewing by a typical adult? 0 1 2 3 4 S 6 ‘ 7 8 9 10 NOT VERY AT ALL APPROPRIATE 22. fipg_plp.would you say the main female character in the segment was? YRS. 23. M3141 would you say the main'male character in the segment was? YRS. Listed below are some quotes which may or may not refer to an act of sexual intercourse. Please indicate whether you feel each quote does indeed refer to sexual intercourse. 1. "It would be the easiest thing in the world to have a relationship with you.“ O 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 ' 8 9 ID DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO . YES 2. "Ne talked some business and then went to bed." 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY ~ DEFINITELY NO YES 3. “I don't think anything could be more beautiful than last night.“ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 4. "Here's to afternoon delights.“ D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO . YES 5. "I hope last night was as heavy for you as it was for me." D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ID DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES E7 4 He would like to know how you feel about different ideas. Please answer the following questions as they refer to you. Indicate whether you agree or disagree with each of the following.statements: (CIRCLE ORE NUMBER FOR EACH ITER.) 1. £0 10. 11. "Capital punishment should never be uSed." -5 -4 -3 —2 -1 0 l 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE “If children watch alcohol use on TV, they are likely to learn semethinc positive." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 I 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY , STRONGLY DISAGREE . - AGREE "All drugs should be legalized." --5 -4 -3 -2 -I D 1 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY ' _ STROHDLV DISAGREE - AGREE "It is wrong to have sex with someone who is married to someone else." -5 -4 -3 -2 «I D 1 2 3 4 5 SD . SA “It is important for each of us to spread the word of God." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 C 1 2 3 4 5 50 SA “If children watch sexual themes on TV that are new to them, they are more likely to experiment with sex-related behaviors."- -5 -4 -3 -2 -l O 1 2 4 5 SD SA “I approve of necking and petting on the first date.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA ”I could not have respect for a person who has had a homosexual experience.” -5 -4 -3 -2 ‘ -1 o 1 2 3 4 5 so - . SA "It is desirable to engage in some sort of sexual activity every day.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA “It is wrong to go to X-rated movies." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 SD SA “I approve of the use of alcohol to enjoy oneself." -s .4 -3 -2 -1 o 1 2 3 4 s so . -. - sn 0) a. m 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 20. 21. 22. 23. E8 5 ”Sex should take place only in the Jar. " -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE "Welfare payments to the poor should be eliminated.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 o 1 2 3 4 s STRONGLY STRDRGLY DISAGREE sense “If children watch sexual themes on TV that are new to them, they are likely to learn something positive." -5 -4 -3 -2 -I O I 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY STRC ZLY DISAGREE . AGREE "I approve of sexual intercourse if the couple is in love but not married." '-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 D 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA "It is OK to masturbate." ‘ -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 D 1 2 3 4 5 50 SA “I approve of the use of drugs to enjoy oneself." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA "Drinking alcohol is an appropriate thing to do before having sex." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA “Pornography should be strictly regulated by the government.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 o 1 2 3 4 s so SA “If children watch drug use on TV, they are more likely to tolerate the use of drugs by others." -5 -4 -3 -2 . -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA "I disapprove of premarital sex even if the couple is to be married." -5 -4 -3 -2 -l 0 , 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA “It is wrong tn read sexually-oriented magazines.” -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 .50 SA ”1 could still respect someone who is addicted to some type of drug." -5 -4 -3 -2 -I O 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. E9 6 ”It is 64 ‘a" a woman to make the first move toward having sex.“ -5 -4 ~i -Z -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE “Abortion should remain legal." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 S STRONGLY STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE ”If there wasn't so much sex on TV, young people wouldn't be so sexually promiscuous.“ -s -4 -3 -z -1 o 1 2 3 - 4 s 51:20:4va smug-45:3 DISAGREE - AGREE .“Soft drugs (like marijuana) should be legalized.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SO SA “If children watch alcohol use on TV, they are more likely to tolerate the use of alcohol by others." -5 . -4 -3 -2 -l O I 2 3 4 5 SD SA ”It is wrong for a man to fondle a woman's breasts.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SO SA "Using drugs is an appropriate thing to do before having sex." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 I 2 3 _ 4 5 SD ‘ SA “The U.S. should increase its military spending.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -I O 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA “Sex between two people of the same sex can be as satisfying as sex between people of the opposite sex." -5 -4 -3 -2 --1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA “If children watch drug use on TV, they are more likely to experiment with drugs.” -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SO SA "I approve of sexual intercourse on casual dates." -5 -4 ‘3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SO SA 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. c I .9 . 43. E10 ”It is OK to go to a prostitute." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 o 1 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE "It is wrong to have sex with someone who is seriously involved with someone else." , . -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 A 5 STRONGLY STRONGLY DISAGREE AGREE ”The legal drinking age requirement should be eliminated and people of all ages allowed to drink alcohol." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O l 2 3 4 5 STRONGLY STRORGLY DISAGREE . AGREE “If children watch sexual themes on TV that are new to them. they are . more likely to tolerate certain sex behaviors in others." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2‘ 3 4 5 SD - SA "It is OK to experiment with various positions for sex." -5 -4 -3 » -2 -l O 1 2 3 4 5 SD ~ SA ”1 could not have respect for someone who is an alcoholic." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 o 1 2 3 4 s so SA “If children watch alcohol use on T¥.they are more likely to experiment with alcohol.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 50 SA “The government should not legislate what is permissible sexual activity between consenting adults." -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SD SA "It is wrong to engage in oral sex." -5 -4 -3 -2 ‘ -1 O 1 2 4 5 50 SA “If children watch drug use on TV, they are likely to learn something positive.“ -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 4 5 SD 5 (.0 q n E11 8 Below are a war.:: a? pairs of idnzs. For each pair, we would like you to tell us how different (or how far apart) they are. Please write a number in the blank after each pair which represents how different you feel the two things or ideas are. To do this, think of the distance between the colors "red" and ”white" as 100 UNITS. Use this distance as a "yardstick" in Judging the distances between EETrs of ideas. If you think a pair of ideas are more different than “red" and "white,“ write a number greater then 100. If you think a pair of ideas are more similar than ”red" and "white," write a number smaller than 100. If you think there is no difference between them, write 0. There is no one correct answer to any of these questions. HOTE: THESE ARE HOT o-1OO SCALES! YOU CAN GIVE'R SCORE GREATER THAN 100. YOU can USE RHY HUHBCR YOU HISH AS LOHC AS IT IS GREATER THA: O EQUAL TOT: _ - If “red" and “white" are 100 UNITS apart, how far apart are: GOOD and ALCOHOL DRUGS and SOAP OPERAS GOOD and DRUGS ‘ DRUGS and SEx 6000 and TV ‘ DRUGS and HE GOOD and EHORRRASSIHO Tv ' and EHaRRRASSIHG GOOD . and IHRUEHOO Tv and IHHUEHOO GOOD - and SOAP OPERRS Tv and SOAP OPERRS GOOD and SEx TV X and SEx GOOD and HE Tv and HE ALCOHOL and DRUGS ERERRRRSSIHG and IHHUEHOO ALCOHOL and Tv EHBRRRRSSIHC and SOAP OPERAS ‘ ALCOHOL and EHBnRRnSSIHe EHRRRRRSSIHG and SEx ALCOHOL and IRHUEHOO EhaRRRASSIHG and HE ALCOHOL and SOAP OPERAS IHHUEHOO and SORP OPERAS ALCOHOL and SEx IHHUEHOO and szx ALCOHOL and HE IHRUEHRO and HE DRUGS and Tv . SOAP OPERRS and SEx DRUGS and EMBARRASSING SORP OPERRS and HE DRUGS and IHHUEHOO SEx and HE E12 9 ' For the following questions, imagine that a person has been drinking alcoholic beverages. 1. ‘How old doyou imagine this person to be? YRS. 2. Do you imagine this person to be male or female? MALE ’ TALE 3. How many other people do you imagine this person to be with? PERSONS 4. Did the drinking take place in an automobile? (CIRCLE ONE-NURSER) O 1 2 3 a 5 6 7 8 9 ID DEFINITELY DEFINITELY no YES 5. Did the drinking take place in a bar? 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY ‘ DEFINITELY NO YES 6. ‘ Did the drinking take place during the day? 0 1 2 3 4 5 - 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY . DEFINITELY NO YES 7. Is this the person's first drinking experience? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 8. How many drinks do you imagine this person has drunk? DRINKS For the following questions, imagine that a person has just been taking drugs. ' 1. 2. 4. How old do you imagine this person to be? YRS. Do you imagine this person to be male or female? HALE FEMALE How many other people do you imagine this person to be with? PERSONS Did the use of drugs take place in a public place? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES Did the use of drugs take place during the day? 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO ‘ YES ’ Is this the person's first experience with drugs? 0 I 2 3 _ 4 5 ‘.6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY . . DEFINITELY NO ' YES E13 10 For the following questions, imagine that a man and a woman have just had sexual intercourse. I. How old do you imagine the woman to be? YRS. 2. How old do you imagine the man to be? , YRS. 3. Are the two people married to one another? - O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY ° DEFINITELY NO YES 4. Did the act take place in an automobile? 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 5. Did the act take place in the woman's home? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 6. ' Did the act take place in the man's home? 0 l 2 3 4 5 _6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO ' YES 7. Has the act initiated by the woman? 0 1 2 3 4 5 ' 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO , YES 8. Has one of the partners a prostitute? D I 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 ‘ 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 9. Here the two partners on their first date? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO ' YES 10. were one or both of the partners married to someone else? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 11. Here one or both of the partners seriously involved with someone else? 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 12; Had one or both of them been drinking alcohol? 0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES E14 11 13. Had one or both of then been using drugs? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO_ YES 14. Did the act take place in the dark? 0 I 2 3 4 5 6, 7 8 9 ID DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 15. Did the act take place during the day? 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 16. How often do you imagine this couple has had sexual interc0urse during a typical month? ____Tues Please answer the following two questions about yourself. 1. How likely are you to engage in sexual intercourse during the next week? 0 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY I DEFINITELY NO YES 2. How eager are you to engage in sexue. intercourse during the next week? 0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 . 3 9 10 NOT VERY AT ALL - EAGER For the following questions, imagine that ygg_arr s.’. to have sexual intercourse “IT‘Q with someone of the opposite sex. How likely a“; the following things? 1. Hill the act take place in your home? 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 2. Hill the act take place in the other person's home? 0 1 2 3' a 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY . DEFINITELY NO YES 3. Is the other person married to someone else? 0 I 2 3 3 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES 4. Hill the act be initiated by you? ' O I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO . YES E15 12 Hill the act be initiated by the other person? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ID DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES Is the other person a prostitut. (mzle or female)? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ID DEFINITELY DEFINITELY ND . - YES Are you on your first date with this person? 0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY N YES Are you married to the other person? 0 I 2 3 4 S 6 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES Is the other person seriously involved with someone else? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ID DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES . Will you have been drinking alcohol? 0 . 1 2 3 4 5 6 ID DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO ' YES . Nill you have been using drugs? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 10 DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES Hill the act take place in the dark? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ID DEFINITELY DEFINITELY NO YES will the act take place waving the day? 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 ID DEFINITELY ' DEFINITELY NO YES E16 13 Listed below are some quotes which may or may not refer to drinking of alcoholic beverages (including beer and wine). Please indicate whether you feel each quote does indeed refer to drinking of alcohol. 1. "She really got blasted last 0 1 2 3 4 DEFINITELY N0 "Tom was so stoned he couldn' O 1 2 3 4 DEFINITELY NO night.“ 10 5 6 7 8 9 DEFINITELY ' YES t see straight." 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY YES “A little relaxation never hurt anyone." 0 1 2 3 4 DEFINITELY N0 . "Just one more for the road?" 0 1 2 3 4 DEFINITELY N0 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY YES 10 DEFINITELY YES ' “I might indulge if you twist my arm.“ 0 - 1 2 - 3 4 DEFINITELY N0 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY YES Listed below are some quotes which may or may not refer to an act of sexual intercourse. to sexual intercourse. “Ne can sit in the back seat and ’get down.'" 1. 2. 0 1 2 3 4 DEFINITELY N0 "Bob slept with Shari." D 1 2 3 4 DEFINITELY NO ”If you‘re trying to tell me D 1 Z 3 4 DEFINITELY- N0 “I'm just not sure I want to exchange my best friend for my best lover. 0 1 2 3 4 DEFINITELY N0 "You're the most beautiful 91 D I 2. . 3 4 DEFINITELY . NO Please indicate whether you feel each quote does indeed refer 5 6 7 8 9 10 ' DEFINITELY YES 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY YES that Pat slept around, I agree with you." 5 6 7 8 9 10 DEFINITELY YES 10 DEFINITELY YES rl I‘ve been to bed with in a long time." 5 .6 7 8 9 10 - DEFINITELY YES 5 6 7 8 9 £17 14 Please answer the following questions about your own behavior. 1. 10. 11. How likely are you to drink alcoholic beverages during the next week? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO DEFINITELY DEFINITELY. NO , . YES How eager are you to drink alcoholic beverages during the next week? 0 I 2 3 4 5 5‘ 7 8 9 :. NOT ' JERY AT ALL EAGER How many bottles or glasses of beer have you consumed in the past week? BEERS How many glasses of wine have you consumed in the past week? GLASSES OF MINE ' How many drinks of hard liquor or mixed drinks have you consumed in the past week? __ DRINKS. How often do you use drugs to get high? (CHECK ONE) __ EVERY DAY A COUPLE TIMES A WEEK ONCE A NEEK A COUPLE TIMES A MONTH LESS THAN ONCE A NDHTN How many X-rated movies have you seen in the last year? __ X-RATED MOVIES ' How many R-rated movies have you seen in the last year? __ R-RATED NDVIES ‘ How many issues of sexually-oriented magazines (such as Playboy. Playgirl, and Penthouse) have you read in the last year? . ISSUES How many sexually-oriented books have you read during the last year? BOOKS ' Have you ever engaged in (heterosexual) sexual intercourse? YES NO IF YES: How many times have you had sexual intercourse in the past month? ______TINES - Have you ever had a homosexual experience? YES NO IF YES: How many times have you engaged in homosexual sexual activity in the past month? TIMES E18 15 Now we'd like you to answer some questions about yourself. 1. 2. How old are you? _____ YRS. Nhat is your gender? HALE __ FET’JLLE . To what racial and ethnic group(s) do you belong? (Check all that apply.) BLACK __ NATIVE AFTERICH: __ HISPANIC ‘____HHITE _ ORIENTAL ' _____.0THER: Hhat is your current marital status? __ _ SINGLE. NEVER MARRIED __ ..- MARRIED __ SEPARn’I‘ED/DIVORCED __ NIDONFTJ IF SINGLE: How would you describe your present living arrangements during the week? (Check all that apply.) LIVE ALONE LIVE WITH PARENTS OR OTHER FAMILY LIVE NT’” ONE OR KORE PEOPLE OF SGHE SEX AS YOU LIVE WITH ONE OR MORE PEOPLE OF OPPOSITE SEX IF SINGLE: Do you have a close, romantic relationship with a member of the opposite sex? NO. NOT AT THIS TIME YES. AND HE DO NOT LIVE TOGETHER YES, AND HE DO LIVE TOGETHER t is your college class standing? FRESHl-lAN ' SOPHOI‘IORE JUNIOR SENIOR GRADUATE STUDENT Hhat do you consider to be your main sexual preference? __ MEMBERS OF THE OPPOSITE SEX (HETEROSEXUAL) ______NENBERS OF EITHER SEX (BISEXUAL) __ MEMBERS OF THE SAME SEX (HONOSEXUAL) l a: 3' 12. 14. E19 16 Hhat is the approximate yearly income of your family? o 0 What is/are the occupation(s) of the person(s) responsible for your support (e.g., mother, father, wife, husband, yourself)? OCCUPATION : HHU: OCCUPATION: NHO: Do you consider yourself to be a member of the floral Majority? ______YES . . . . .. NO __ NOT SURE Nhat is your religious preference? __ "ITHOLIC __ JEHISH . '_____ PROTESTANT: Please indicate the specific religion: __ OTHER: __ NONE How often do .you attend religious services? ONCE A NEEK OR MORE 2 DR 3 TIi-sES A .‘iONTH. ONCE A MONTH SEVERAL TIiiES 5". YEAR LESS. GR NEVER £20 ' 17 Thank you very much for your participation in this study! Your assistance has been much appreciated. -Please remember to not put your name or student number anywhere on this que.izionnaiie. flake sure, ho'ever, that you have filled out a COM 100 extra credit form and a depantmental research conSent form before you leave this room. You will not receive your extra credit if you do not complete these two forms. Also. we would appreciate it if you do not speak toa anyone about this study at the presert time, in hot we will be conducting the study over a period of several weeks. Participants such as you have been asked to do a variety of things for the study, and we don't want future participants to form expectations about the study. This is ve ry important to the research. You will receive information telling you what exactly the study was about in your CON 100 class sometime before the end of the term. Again, thanks: APPENDIX F SAMPLE PAGE FROM RANDOM ASSIGNMENT SCHEDULE ID 001 002 003 005 006 007 003 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 0.17 013 019 020 021 022 023 024 025 026 027 023 029 APPENDIX F SAMPLE PAGE FROM RANDOM ASSIGNMENT SCHEDULE 3ng A1 , c3 A3 A2 32 A3 A3 c3 33 32 A2 A1 A3 32 ' 33 A3 31 33 ca A3 - 32 31 32 32 A1 A1 c3 A3 A2 DATE F1 10 030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 044 045 046 047 049 .050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 ' 053 CODE DATE' C3 81 81 82 A3 C3 82 81 A2 81 82 83 83 81 81 C3 81 A2 B3 82 A2 81 A3 C3 A2 82 A2 83 83 ,3»!- APPENDIX G: 1W ,. NE" sea-e .1- ' mega—manner > in," 4mm , I v .1. F, W., __.ww1—- _ ' , j j .ausac-i‘fif" PICTURES OF VIEWING , Iv 44.; Aha-a» .hn-mms 4”} W‘fl .. we- PVtiu‘fl—‘L , .en- 61 ROOM ll HHH HUN 1 I . l APPENDIX H DIAGRAM OF VIEWING ROOM APPENDIX H .- DIAGRAM OF VIEWING 300M; -~A. . a . - .L ..- - - -3-.. , .-___“..__, Diagram of Viewing Room. .._-- - (One square - one ft.) '1 . h...)- - . .ll‘lllllllllilllllll'allllllll III-00.080104 Exterior window TV stand FOOIIO'OO‘OO‘O'IL Avouo>00v eoommmmfiu wcuconvm cu Joana: Couch 1.""I""OIIIII|IIIIIJ Bookcase AO‘V'8'I'i-n Avouu>oov acoummmau mcqafionvu cu sovcflz . Ramp - elevation of 181/4 "a Vol.8..-" 8" '01 'Door H1 APPENDIX I DATA COLLECTION PROTOCOL APPENDIX I DATA COLLECTION PROTOCOL Protocol (SUBJECT APPROACHES.) Hi, are you here for the Communication Study? What is your name? (CHECK OFF SUBJECTIS NAME ON SIGN-UP SHEET IN 800K.) Please have-a seat and fill out this form. Bring it back to me when you‘re finished. (GIVE MOVIE LIST AND PENCIL TO SUBJECT. (WHEN SUBJECT RETURNS FORM AND PENCIL:) Thank you. Now just have a seat and I‘ll call you when I’m ready for you. (ASSIGN ID AND CODE FROM BOOK TO SUBJECT, FILL IN ON MOVIE LIST. DATE BOTH MOVIE LIST AND BOOK. REMEMBER TO NOT ASSIGN SOMEONE WHO HAS SEEN A.G. ANY OF THE "A" CODES -- GIVE THEM THE FIRST AVAILABLE "8" OR "C" CODE. IF THE SUBJECT IS A "C3 " KIP TO HER WHEN ROOM IS EMPTY, PUT SUBJECT'S MOVIE N ENVEL PE ON DOOR AND ESCORT SUBJECT INSIDE. WHEN INSIDE, GIVE SUBJECT THE NOTICE OF "R" RATING TO READ...) Come with me... Please sit down and read this. (PUT APPROPRIATE TAPE IN, REWIND ALL THE WAY, AND PLAY. PUT VOLUME AT . CORRECT LEVEL AS MARKED. WHILE LABEL IS ON SCREEN, TAKE THE NOTICE AWAY FROM SUBJECT.) Now, when you see this label again (POINT TO SCREEN), that means the tape is over. So when you see it, don' t touch the machine -- just get up. come out and tell me that you' re finished with this part of the study, and I' ll tell you what to do next. OK? (DON'T LEAVE THE ROOM TIL THE TAPE BEGINS SUCCESSFULLY. YOU CAN WATCH FROM THE RAMP AREA WITHOUT BEING OBTRUSIVE. WHILE YOU WAIT OUT IN THE HALL, TRY TO TIME THE TAPE, AS SOME PEOPLE WILL KEEP SITTING THERE NO MATTER WHAT WE TELL THEM. WHEN SUBJECT COMES OUT, GIVE HIM/HER HIS/HER OWN MOVIE LIST FROM ENVELOPE 0N DOOR, AND SEND HIM/HER TO THE LIBRARY ROOM.) Now take this form and go to that room down there with all the windows. Give the form to the researcher who is in that room. (QUICKLY RETURN TO TV, STOP TAPE AND REMOVE IT FROM BETAMAX.) ==— (MEANWHILE IN THE LIBRARY) ----------------------------- Hi. May I have your form? (GIVE SUBJECT TWO NEW FORMS: EXTRA CREDIT FORM AND DEPARTMENTAL RESEARCH . CONSENT FORM. ALSO GIVE SUBJECT A PENCIL.) Please fill these forms out and bring them back to me when you‘re done. I1 12 Protocol -- p. 2 (AS SUBJECT FILLS OUT FORMS, CHECK BOOK TO SEE THAT SUBJECT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED THE CORRECT CODE. FILL OUT INFO. ON FRONT PAGE OF APPROPRIATE QUESTIONNAIRE ("C" OR "A/B") AND STAPLE MOVIE LIST TO FRONT. WHEN SUBJECT RETURNS WITH TWO FORMS COMPLETED, TAKE THEM AND GIVE QUESTIONNAIRE AND PENCIL TO SUBJECT. Please fill out this entire questionnaire. As it says on the front page, some of the information we ask for is personal, but we really don't want to know your name and would appreciate it if you would answer as many questions as you possibly can. (WHEN SUBJECT IS FINISHED, TAKE QUESTIONNAIRE AND PENCIL. MAKE SURE THAT ALL INFO. ON FRONT PAGES OF QUESTIONNAIRE IS FILLED IN. FLIP THROUGH QUESTIONNAIRE QUICKLY AND IF ANY ENTIRE PAGE IS BLANK, ASK SUBJECT IF HE/SHE MISSED THAT PAGE. MAKE SURE THAT SUBJECT HAS FILLED OUT CONSENT FORM AND EXTRA CREDIT FORM.) ‘ Thank you very much! 13 Things to Know and Remember If someone who is a C3 asks why they didn't get to go in Rm. 258 or why they didn't get to "see a movie," tell them honestly that "Different participants in this study are asked to do different things.“ If they want to know "Why me?" say, "It's just random selection." If someone does not wich to see the videotape, assign them the next available C3 and proceed (Let me know if this happens more than once or twice). If they 00 not want to fill out the questionnaire, do not try to pressure them. We g§g_obliged to give them extra credit; the rules are that they may drop out at_agy point and still get extra credit. Just make sure they fill out the extra credit and consent forms. DO ' NOT ADVERTISE this option -- it is intended only for people who have some moral or religious objection. and we may indeed get a few of 'those people. Correspondingly, don't pressure anyone to do anything. We don't need trouble. Send them to me (Kim Neuendorf, 443 Comm. Arts, 355-5190) if there's a problem. Never give your own interpretation of questions or your own opinion of ‘tfie videotapes: If you must discourage a talkative subject, say, "I'm sorry, but I'm not permitted to discuss this with you until you're finished." See enclosed list for definitions you can give. Tom is scheduled to be here every morning and will therefore be responsible for opening up. He will get the keys from Kim's desk, unlock the two rooms, and put the keys in 258 for the duration of the day. In an emergency, Pat Cesarz in the Dean's office on 2nd floor is building manager and has a master key. All materials should be stored in 258, NOT in the Library. The last people each day should return all materiETs to 258, lock both rooms, and return keys to Kim's desk. We are responsible for any theft from the Library room, so watch it closely. Never leave it unlocked. Light switches in both rooms will be marked so we have a constant environ- ment. The volume on the TV will also be marked. Don't forget to turn the TV and betamax off at the end of each day! I4 9. If asked what a term means, first respond with, "Whatever it means to you." If they persist, then offer one of the listed definitions. * 10. DO NOT let any questionnaires, blank or completed, get out of the research area. 00 NOT let your friends or “interested parties“ read them now. These things can cause a variety of unwanted problems -- wait until we have our data in hand: 15 Definitions INNUENDO -- "something that is implied or hinted at" EXPLICIT -- "open or definite" INITIATED -- "started“ SERIOUSLY INVOLVED -- "has a steady boyfriend or girlfriend" HETEROSEXUAL -- "Someone who prefers sex with someone of the opposite sex" BISEXUAL -- "someone who enjoys sex with anyone of either sex" HONOSEXUAL - "someone who prefers sex with someone of their own sex" APPENDIX J DEBRIEFING HANDOUT APPENDIX J DEBRIEFING HANDOUT TO: Research Participants, "TV Study," Fall, I981 FROM: Kimberly Neuendorf RE: The nature of the study in which you participated. First of all. thank you very much for your participation in the study!' Two hundred and fifty-one people participated in the study, making it a very success- ful data collection. With this data, I will complete my Ph.D. dissertation and hopefully get out of here one of these days. I'm sure you are wondering what the exact purpose of the study was. .This notice is intended to try to answer some of your questions. Each of you is probably familiar with the issue of I!_violence and how it aff- ects young people's perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. Studies over the past 15 years have examined this; while the evidence is mixed, there seems to be some support for a social learning theory of aggression in which young people exposed to violent models on TV are more likely to perceive the world as violent, be approving of aggressive behaviors, and behave aggressively them- se ves. The purpose of the "TV Study" was to apply social learning theory to the area of sexual behaviors on TV. Amazingly, while literally thousands of studies have explored the violence issue, none have looked at sexuality. We tried to test the impact of sexual TV content by exposing participants to edited movie segments with different levels of sexual activity. The levels were: 1. High sexual activity: This included verbal and contextual references to sexual intercourse, and also some physical display of sexual inter- course, but not with full exposure; it was representative of R-rated . sexual content in movies, as is typical of films shown on pay TV. 2. Low sexual activity: This included verbal and contextual references - only, without physical display. It consisted of the segment described in #1 with the physical content edited out. It was fairly typical of movies edited for TV. 3. No sexual activity: This version contained no verbal, contextual, or physical sexual content. It consisted of the segment described in . #1 with all sexual content edited out. 4. No segment: Some participants saw no TV segment: they operated as a control group. ' ,Two different movies were edited into the three versions: Ihg_$pecialist and American Gigolo. So, you could have seen one of sex different segments, or no segment at all. You were randomly assigned to a group. The questionnaire you filled out after watching the TV segment asked a wide variety of questions. The main variables we were interested in, and for which we hypothesized differences among the groups were: . Perce tions of frequency and circumstances of real-life sex. . Expectations of sexual behavior in real life for one's self. . Attitudes toward sex. . SEEUET—Values. . Desire to Behave sexually. While I had hoped to have results of this study available by this time, the process of data handling and analysis is complex and tedious, and we do not yet have results. Basically, we will be comparing the groups who saw different levels of sexual activity to see if they differ for any of the variables listed above (i.e., if viewing televised sex has any impact on one's reported percep- tions, attitudes, and behaviors). ‘ If you would like to see our results when we finish (probably early Winter term) please feel free to contact me: Kim Neuendorf . 443 Comm. Arts, 355-5190 Thanks again and have a good vacation! thrJo-a J1 “ITIIITT'IIITIIIT