This paper was presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication in San Antonio, Texas August 2005.
If you have questions about this paper, please contact the author
directly. If you have questions about the archives, email
rakyat [ at ] eparker.org. For an explanation of the subject line,
send email to
[log in to unmask] with just the four words, "get help info aejmc," in the
body (drop the "").
(Feb 2006)
Thank you.
Elliott Parker
====================================================================
The Role of Animation in the Third Person Effect: A Comparison of
Live-Action and Animated Violence in Kill Bill Volume 1
By:
Christine A. Kleck
and
Letrez A. Myer
Insitution:
The Pennsylvania State University
The College of Communications
Address:
803 Lindsly St.
New Roads, LA 70760
Phone:
(225) 931-1532
E-mail:
[log in to unmask]
The Role of Animation in the Third Person Effect: A Comparison of
Animated and Live-Action Violence in Kill Bill Volume 1
Literature Review
Third Person Effect
The third person effect posits that individuals believe media content
such as acts of violence are more likely to have a negative influence
on others than themselves (Davison, 1983; Sharrer, 2002; Saliven and
Dupagne, et al., 2000; Hoffner, et al, 1999; Eveland, Nathanson, et
al., 1999; Perloff, 1999; Gunther, 1995; Cohen, et al., 1988 and
Newirth and Fredrick, 2002).
In general, third person effect studies have found support for the
hypotheses they posited – that individuals indeed feel that media
content effects others adversely more so that themselves (Davidson,
1983; Sharrer, 2002; Saliven and Dupagne, et al., 2000; Hoffner, et
al, 1999; Eveland, Nathanson, et al., 1999; Perloff, 1999; Gunther,
1995; Cohen, et al., 1988 and Newirth and Fredrick, 2002). Prior
research was mostly done through telephone surveys and had to do
mostly with formulating public policy against violence and sexual
content in the media.
In reviewing the literature about violence in the media (Gunther,
1995; King, 2000; Davidson 1983) and its impact on the third person
effect, previous research has attempted to link this phenomenon with
policies aimed at reducing depictions of violence in media content.
Past literature has cited factors such as liking (King, 2000),
identification with the characters or events (Cohen 2001; Feilitzen
and Linne, 1975), uses and gratifications (Rubin, 1983) and arousal
and enjoyment (Berry, Gray and Donnerstein, 1999) as reasons why
people choose to watch violent media programming. Past studies have
also focused on issues such as stereotyping (Neuwirth, K., 2002;
Scharrer, E. 2002), attribution theory and mean world perceptions
(Hoffner, C., Plotkin, R., Buchanan, M., Anderson, J. D., Kamigaki,
S. K., Hubbs, L. A., et al., 2001) and censorship (Hoffner, C.,
Buchanan, M., Anderson, J. D., Hubbs, L. A., Kamigaki, S. K.,
Kowalcyzk, L., et al., 1999).
Studies focusing on violence have dealt with issues related to
television violence (Scharrer, 2002) and have largely ignored the
impact of animation and film violence on the third person
effect. Past literature's focus on the combination of television
violence and the third person effect has been a guide for the
following research. Studies linking third person perceptions (Gunther
1995, Davison, 1983, Hoffner, et al., 2001) resulted in support for
the third person effect, but all of these studies have neglected to
address violence in films, in particular in animated forms of violence.
This study will look at the third person effect and its role in
animated violence. Because of the large fan base and history behind
its popularity among young age groups we hypothesize that:
H1 – Participants will perceive a greater magnitude of third person
effect for violence in animated scenes than live-action.
Animation/Film
Animation is defined by scholars as the "act of giving life," and was
considered, for a time, almost interchangeably with "life," "soul,"
and "spirit" (Wells, 1998, p.1). However, the modern definition of
animation is based upon motion and commonly associated with the work
of filmmakers (Smith, 2002) and the art of motion-picture photography
(Merriam-Webster, 2004).
Animation has largely been enjoying growing popularity in the United
States. New genres and styles of animation have hit the mainstream
(Wells, 1998). Animation has evolved beyond the days of
2-Dimensional, single-frame animation, and on towards 3-Dimensional,
computer-generated images (i.e. CGI). Japanese-inspired animation
has become a popular and growing trend in the United States. In the
early 1980's animated Japanese television shows became more
widespread and accounted for approximately 56% of the total
television exported to the United States. This new genre, known to
its fans as "anime," has invited discourse both in support of and in
opposition of its sexual and violent undertones (Newitz, 1995).
The 1990's have brought about a large expansion and creation of
growing fan bases, clubs, conventions and "fanzines" idolizing anime
in both large cities and college campuses alike (Newitz 1995).
The same can be said for movies made popular by young teenage
viewers. By age 18, the average American adolescent will have been
exposed to over 200,000 acts and/or portrayals of violence from
television alone (American Association of Pediatrics Committee, 1995).
Movies are an important part of the adolescent experience. A
recent study conducted by the Motion Picture Production Association
found that 35 percent of the movie going public was between the ages
of 12 and 24 (Center for Parent and Youth Understanding, 2004). When
teenagers were asked about those activities that were either "in" or
"out," 91% rated going to the movies as "in" (Center for Parent and
Youth Understanding, 2004). To add to the growing concern
surrounding violence and you is that most teen movie viewing is done
without supervision (Center for Parent and Youth Understanding, 2004).
This same demographic is being targeted to engage in other forms
of animated violence as seen in video gaming.
We know that exposure to media violence contributes to the third
person effect. We also know from the research that some media
scholars think that animated violence isn't as harmful as live action
violence. Having researched this, is it safe to say that animated
violence will decrease the magnitude of the third person effect?
Video games
According to a study published by Anderson and Bushman, by the
American Psychological Society, (www.kidsnet.org/medianews/research)
discussing video games, about 10 percent of children aged 2 to 18
play video games more than one hour per day. This percent increased
among boys aged 8 to 13 to more than 7.5 hours per week. And
according to figures in 1998, 13.3 percent of males entering college
played at least 6 hours a week in high school and this number
increased to 14.8 percent in only one year.
Video games began to boom in the 1990's and largely depicted killing
and games in which the task was to badly injure or kill opponents
(Anderson and Bushman, www.kidsnet.org/medianews/research), over the
years graphics and sound improvements became more prominent and
popular among young adults and available to all ages. These concerns
have produced an exigency in further research on the effects of such
violent depictions in the media by us.
Identification
Early research on the media, such as television assumed that the
viewer was a passive receiver of the medium's influence. This view
emerged into the conception of viewers as selective and as
individuals processing each media message (Diener and Woody, 1981),
thus viewers became active.
Researchers cite identification as a factor in viewers' relationship
or liking of a character. Identification is, "the desire of a viewer
to merge with a character, to be in their shoes." I identification
leads viewers to share the perspective of a character and to
experience the story through their eyes.
Hoffner and Cantor (1991) talk about viewers attraction to, liking
and perceived similarity and desire to be like characters as reasons
behind why viewers Identify with characters.
The relationship viewers create with TV characters comes to be an
important part of their involvement with the medium that they are
viewing (Cohen 1999). In particular, in fictional programs such as
animation, Cohen (1991) cites involvement and identification with
characters as the reason behind why viewers come to care about
stories that may otherwise be of no relevance to them. On the other
end, Cohen (1999) posits that characters depicting real-life
influences loyalty to TV programs. Based on these findings, we also
hypothesized that:
H2 – Participants will identify more with live action violence than
animated violence.
Why Kill Bill?
Kill Bill Volume 1 earned $12.5 million in its second week of release
and more than $43.3 million total (Holson, 2003) and was deemed by
some as the most violent movie ever made. Critics agreed that the use
of black-and-white and animation made the movie more bearable to the
American public. But does this mean that viewers would agree with
critics and that violence, animated or otherwise should be welcomed
in the American movie industry? Critics largely ignored the violent
scenes and the impact they could have
on the public. Which lead us of this project to study this film.
Additional justification for choosing this film had to do with the
fact that the film allowed us to capture aspects of both live-action
and animated violence in a film without having to resort to the use
of several different films and thus several different acts of
violence being depicted. It also allowed for some coherence in that,
although the participants only viewed one scene or another, they were
allowed to have some sort of story-line available, which made it
harder to discover the fact that they were participating in a study
on violence and third-person effect.
The Research Question
Studies show that during 1999-2001, the amount of violence in TV
programs decreased by 17%. The four majority networks (ABC, CBS, NBC
and FOX) in 2000-2001, depicted less violence. This represented a 17%
decline from 1998-1999. These studies, however, do not look at film
violence, which is steadily on the rise
(www.kidsnet.org/medianews/research). Based on the literature of
others, we in this study posed the research question:
"For 'university' students, controlling for identification and
gender, what is the relationship between presence of animation in
violent films and magnitude of third person effect?"
Methodology
Summary of Experimental Design
The design utilized for this study was a between subjects,
postmanipulation only control group design. The control group
received the independent variable in the form of "absence" meaning
that the control group will not be manipulated. We were looking for
comparative differences rather than absolute differences between our
experimental and control groups. By using this type of design, the
measurements were taken only once, so we were able to control for
internal validity threats such as maturation, measurement
sensitization and measurement learning and external validity threats
such as having a reactive sensitization, subject mortality and subject fatigue.
Participants
A total of 96 participants signed up to participate in the study,
but a total of 63 undergraduates and one graduate student actually
participated in the study. Some students were awarded extra credit
or class participation points as designated by their instructor. The
participants were recruited from six sections of an upper-level
communications course. Two researchers visited the classes and
passed around sign-up sheets. Students could choose a time and date
to participate in the study[1]. The students were told that they
would be participating in a study about violence in films.
At the beginning of the experiment, each participant was told that
signing-in at the beginning of the experiment, viewing the clip and
filling out the questionnaire was his or her implied
consent. Participants were also offered an informed consent form,
which was approved by the university's institutional research review
board. The form indicated that the study was being done to assess
how college students react to violent films, and that they were not
required to participate in the study and could withdraw from the
study at anytime without penalty. The participants were also
informed that the study would take approximately 30 minutes to
complete and that there were no risks involved. After being briefed
on the logistics of the study, the participants were told that they
would be viewing a five-minute video clip and filling out a 45 item
questionnaire in response to what they were being
shown. Participants were also assigned a participant identification
code by two of us[2] in order to keep their identities anonymous.
Demographics (Table 1)
The age[3] breakdown of participants was as follows: 1.6 % (N = 1)
of the participants were 18 years old, 3.1 % (N = 2) of the
participants were 19 years old, 29.7 % (N = 19) of the participants
were 20 years old, 35.93 % (N = 23) of the participants were 21 years
old, 23.4 % (N = 15) of the participants were 22 years old, 4.67 % (N
= 3) of the participants were 23 years old and 1.6 % (N = 1) of the
participants were 24 years old.
The ethnicity breakdown of participants was as follows: 81.25 %
White/Caucasian (N = 52), 9.38 % (N = 6) Black/African American, 3.12
% (N = 2) Latino/Hispanic, 3.12 % (N = 2) Asian and 3.12 % (N = 2) Other[4].
The gender breakdown of participants was as follows: 65.6 % (N = 42)
female and 34.4 % (N = 22) male.
Independent Variables
The independent variables were animated and live action violence in
a film. The participants viewed one of two five-minute[5] excerpts
from the movie Kill Bill Volume 1, which is rated R under the Motion
Picture Association of America. Both clips contained violent
acts. Neither clip contained characters talking, but both clips had
music throughout. One clip contained animated violence (See Figures
1 and 2) in which two of the characters were beaten and ultimately
killed by a sword. The second clip contained live-action violence
(See Figures 3 and 4). The scene featured a main character battling
with a number of opponents. The main character ultimately defeated
all of the opponents.
Dependent Variable and Control Variable
The dependent variable in this study was magnitude of third person
effect. The levels that were measured to get at the third person
effect were reactions to how violent the participant perceived the
film to be followed by how they thought other "university" students
and the public at large would perceive the film to be. A
questionnaire was used to measure the dependent variable. A total of
33 questions measured the dependent variable and an additional seven
questions each were used to assess identification and participant
demographics for a total of 40 questions.
In order to remove the effects of participants identifying with the
characters in the films clips, identification served as a control
variable. Seven items (see Table 2) were used to measure how well
the participants identified with the characters in the clip. The
items, which were adapted from a study by Meghan Sanders[6] (2003),
were manipulated to reflect the characters and situation presented in
the film clips used in the experiment[7], but the scales were
maintained. The response range for identification was an ordinal
scale and ranged from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. The
measures for identification and gender, another control variable that
was self-reported, and prior viewing of the movie were removed from
the analysis.
The remaining dependent variables (self, other PSU students and
public) were each measured using 11 items from a combination of
measures from Sanders (2003) and a study by Glenn Sparks[8] (1986),
which developed a scale to assess people's responses to frightening
films[9]. Again, the items were manipulated to reflect the
characters and situations presented in the film clips used in the
experiment, but the scales remained the same. The response range for
the third person effect was a ratio scale and ranged from Not at all
to Very Much.
Procedure
Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two conditions
(animated or live action) in the study from the time they signed up
to participate. In the animated clip (See Figures 1 and 2), the
female character was a victim, but in the live action clip (See
Figures 3 and 4), the female character emerged victorious. The
animated clip was more a familial setting. A little girl was the
main character in the animated clip. The scene showed a family being
attacked by a group of enemies. The enemy characters killed the
mother and father, but the child survived. The live action clip
showed a female character in the main role. The female was attacked
by a large group of enemies, but she fought them off successfully.
Because there were a total of eight sessions, four sessions were
given the animated treatment and four sessions were given the
live-action treatment. Participants signed-in as they arrived – to
ensure extra credit/participation points could be reported as
necessary – and asked to have a seat in one of 14 chairs arranged in
rows in the experiment room. The participants were instructed that
they were not to pick-up and read the information on the clipboard
until after the clip was show and that the experiment would start as
soon as participants stopped arriving and were settled[10].
The participants were then explained the consent information and
copies were given to students who requested them. The two
researchers also explained that the participants would be shown a
clip from a film and fill out a questionnaire based on what they
saw. The two researchers then exited the room and turned off the
lights and started the clip.[11] At the end of the clip[12], we
turned on the lights and entered the room to instruct participants to
fill-out the questionnaire that was under the seat[13] and to remain
seated (unless otherwise impossible) until all participants completed
the questionnaire.[14]
Because each section of the questionnaire had the same questions,
but for a different locus (self, other "university" Students and
Public at Large), each section of the questionnaire contained
instructions with the locus bolded so that participants could
distinguish between each part of the questionnaire[15].
After all participants completed the questionnaire, they were told
that the experiment was complete and that they could leave. The
names of the participants who attended the study, along with a short
explanation of the study's details were e-mailed to the instructors
after all the experiments were completed to ensure students didn't
pass the information on to others. The results were also presented
to three of the six classes from which participants were recruited.
Data Analyses
After all the experiments were conducted, two of us coded all the
data into a spreadsheet to run analysis. There were two missing data
values in each set (live and animated), which were filled in by the
average score for all participants on those particular questions[16].
There were a total of three analyses run on the data to examine the
results: a t-test, an ANOVA test and a MANOVA test to get preliminary
results. The final results of these tests are discussed in the
following section of this report.
Results and Analysis
To analyze the third person effect, researchers performed a MANOVA
test on the dependent measures of the results from questions
concerning the way participants feel that the film clips effected
one's self, other "university" Students and the public at large (See
Table 7). This model allowed us to examine the effect of the third
person effect, while taking into account the differences between live
action and animation on that effect.
Descriptive Statistics
The mean results for the male demographic are higher on perceived
effects on "self." The mean results for the females were higher on
perceived effects on "other 'university' students" and the "public at
large." Female participants, in general, showed a greater third
person effect while male participants almost mirror the opposite
effect. There is no gender difference observed within the
participants measuring for the effect violence has on "other
'university' students."
Because the third person effects data was highly correlated, we were
able to combine all of data to sum the measures for the elements of
the third person effect on self, other "university" students and the
public at large. In order to account for outliers, responses for the
question, "Based on this clip, how much do you think other
"university" students view the world as a violent place?" (see Table
4) were dropped. In order to keep the measurement scales consistent,
responses to the item "Violent films disturb me" (see Table 3) and
"Violent films disturb other "university" students" (see Table 4)
were reverse coded.
Identification Measures.
Multivariate analysis showed that overall the measurement items were
highly correlated with each other (a = .7265).
Third Person Measures.
Multivariate analysis showed that the items used to measure reactions
of "self" were highly correlated with each other (a = .7265). The
analysis also showed that the items used to measure reactions of
"other 'university' students" (a = .6164) and "others/public at
large" (a = .6659) were also highly correlated.
Inferential statistics
The following are the results for each MANOVA test starting without
any control variables leading up to accounting for all control variable.
The results of the ANOVA test before considering any control
variables is: F (1, 62) = 3.04, p > .05 for between subjects. The
results considering gender between subject is: F (2, 61) = 3.72, p <
.05. The results considering gender and identification between
subjects is: F (3, 60) = 7.45, p < .001. The results considering
gender, identification and prior viewing of the film between subjects
is: F (4, 57) = 5.22, p > .001.
The results for the ANOVA test for each variable are the reported
next. For gender: F (1, 61) = 4.24, p < .05. The result for
identification is: F (1,60) = 13.40, p < .001. When identification
was added as a control, gender became more significant at F (1, 60) =
5.82, p < .05. The result for prior viewing is: F (1, 57) = 1.13,
p > .01. When prior viewing was added as a control, gender decreases
slightly in significance at F (1, 57) = 5.24, p < .05 and
identification decreases in significance substantially at F (1, 57) =
11.22, p < .05.
These results indicate that the control variables, identification and
gender are very significant as are our conditions, animated and live
action. Therefore, it was important that we controlled for these
variables because they were adding noise to the study. There is a
very significant main effect for gender as it relates to the results
of the study. This main effect gets stronger when both gender and
identification are controlled for in the analysis. This main effect
disappears when prior viewing is controlled for in the
analysis. This indicates that prior viewing had no effect on the results.
The overall mean for "self" in third person effect is 18.56, "other
'university' students" in third person effect is 22.18 and "public"
in third person effect is 24.26. This shows the gradual increase in
the third person effect for the participants.
As stated previously, the research question for this study is, "For
'university' students, controlling for identification and gender,
what is the relationship between presence of animation in violent
films and magnitude of third person effect?" In short, we found out
that in both live action and animation, third person effect is
present, but the effect is more prominent in the live action condition.
We found the results of this study were concurrent with a directional
hypothesis and became highly significant when the measures for the
control variables were removed. The responses given by those viewing
the live action clip showed a higher average means than did the
responses given by those viewing the animated clip, thus failing to
reject null hypothesis (H1). The responses given by participants for
identification showed a higher average means in the animated
condition than did those for the live action condition, thus
supporting the null hypothesis (H2).
We found that for male participants the reverse of the second
hypothesis was true. In hypothesis one, we predicted that people
would identify more with live action. Following the study, we found
the exact opposite to be true, as participants identified more with
animation. We also hypothesized that third person effect would be
greater in animated violence than in live action violence in a film
clip. On the contrary, we found that the third person effect is
actually more prevalent in live action film than in animated film.
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to progress beyond primarily exploring
the impact that television and live action violence have on the third
person effect to a meaningful analysis of film and animated
violence's impact on the third person effect. From our analysis, we
found that little to no research has been done analyzing the impact
of animation on the third person effect.
While our results do not support the initial hypotheses, which posit
that a) participants will identify more with the characters in live
action film and b) animated violence in films will increase the third
person effect, it was found that participants identified more with
the characters in the animated clip and that live action violence
increased the magnitude of the third person effect. If this is so,
then further research should be performed to explore why
identification with animated characters is a factor and what effects
this may have on the way people perceive animated violence. Also,
female participants showed results in the direction of increasing
third person effect whereas males did not. Future research should
take this into account and explore why this may be a factor as well.
The results further indicated that animated violence increased the
effect on one's self, thus resulting in a first person effect. This
effect is significant to explore in further research on the
demographic of 18 to 24-year-olds and why they identify more with the
characters in films containing animated violence than in films
containing live action violence. What types of cultural phenomena
(i.e. violent video games) are taking place that may lead them to
identify more with the animated characters and increase the effects
on third person for females?
Theoretical Implications
This study seeks to go outside of the realm of current third person
effect research in regards to violence, because most of the research
concerning violence's impact on the effect is centered upon public
policy (i.e. censorship). Furthermore, most studies concerning
animation focus on the third person effect in regards to children,
parents and families. We sought to go outside of this realm because
the age group 18 to 24 is becoming the primary target of animated
television programming and film. With the emergence of such
television shows as Adult Swim, South Park, The Family Guy and
Futurama and films such as Shrek, The Incredible and Shark Tale,
targeted at this age group, the perception of animated violence as
having an effect on self and others by this group may be changing,
which may have implications on other aspects of society and
individual behavior.
In addition to the fact that little research has been done on
violence in regards to perceptions, little to no research has been
done in regards to animated violence. With this study, we attempted
to shed light on the impact that violent animation may have on the
perceptions of people and their view on what others may think about it.
Again, most of the research conducted concerning violence and the
third person effect has been centered around young children to age 12
and parents in regards to what is appropriate and what is not,
however, this research focuses on the demographic of 18 to
24-year-olds. This group deserves attention because of the buying
power they possess and the impact that they will have on future
policies and governmental laws concerning these types of
films. Also, how this age group views violence will have an impact
on how future generations will be taught to view violence.
Finally, this research embarks on a new type of experimental
condition in that it examines the third person effect in a new
way. Most prior research has been conducted via telephone surveys
and using stimulus materials such as newspapers, televisions shows
and scripted materials. This research went beyond this and conducted
the experiment in a laboratory setting and utilized a seldom studied
type of stimulus material, films. Also, the fact that the research
was conducted face-to-face with the participants allowed the
researcheers to delve into a new type of experimental procedure that
has scarcely been used before.
Practical Implications
In light of a new industry that is creating animation in numerous
forms to appeal to all ages, the findings reported in this study can
be used in numerous ways. Such groups include: society, marketers,
advertisers, gaming production companies, television and film
executives and government officials could potentially benefit from
the above findings.
For example, based on the finding that animated violence increases
the first person effect, parents and schools could potentially use
this to explain and/or prevent deviant behaviors of children in
school. One implication of repeated viewing of live action violence
in general is desensitization, but the same can also be said of
animated violence. Although participants did not report a greater
impact on others, they did report that animated violence had a
greater impact on themselves and the way that they perceive
violence. This could say something about the way younger adults are
responding to the violent programming that they see.
For marketers, advertisers and film and gaming company executives,
the results of this study could help create gaming and programming
that do not use animation to promote violence. Although the animated
content may appeal to this age group and increase sales and profits,
the impact that violence in the programming may have on the
individuals who buy it may be detrimental to their constituents.
Finally, government and organizations that play watchdog in this
segment of the entertainment industry could apply these findings as
evidence of the impact that animation has on younger adults.
Limitations
There were a number of limitations to this study that may have either
impacted the results or the way that future research concerning this
topic should be conducted.
First, the two clips shown for the experiment differed slightly in
content, although both depicted females as the main characters and
from the same film.
The differences in these clips, though they are slight, could have
affected the way participants identified with the characters in each
clip. We found that participants identified more with the characters
in the animated clip than with the characters in the live action
clip. The fact that the animated clip was more of an intimate setting
and depicted a family could be the reasoning behind why the
participants identified more with the characters in that scene, thus
increasing the identification measures. This could then become a
confound in the study that could potentially affect its internal validity.
Another limitation to this study is the structure of the
questionnaire. A study by Richard Perloff (1999) manipulated various
question order formats to determine whether question order had
anything to do with an increased finding of the third person
effect. The study concluded that the third person effect was present
across the various manipulations of question and word formats,
although some participants would be able to gather a sense of the study.
Noise
There were a number of procedural factors that could have served as
noise factors in this study atmosphere and time of day of the study.
First, the atmosphere in which the study took place could have also
made a difference. The study was conducted in a lab setting, which
mirrored a theater setting as closely as possible, but could have
impacted the responses of the participants. Suggestions to improve
this are to conduct future research in an actual theater and have
participants view the entire film and then answer the questionnaire.
Future Research
Based on the implications and limitations of this study, we suggest
that future research mainly explore the effects of animation in
violent films and the first person effect as well as the third person effect.
First, future researchers should examine other film clips. These
clips should be a combination of clips if they do not exactly mirror
each other in each condition (live and animated). Researchers should
also consider using older films or films that were not as popular in
the box office to examine the effects of violence in animation and
the third person effect.
Also, future researchers should try to avoid garnering the
participation of students who are receiving extra credit and/or class
participation as compensation for doing the study to explore the
differences between these types of participants and the ones used for
this research. It is also strongly encouraged that participants
remain of this age group, but that they are not currently enrolled in
a university pursuing a degree, which may result in moving the study
to a movie theater or other setting in which college students are not
the primary participants.
Although it was not in the scope of this research, it is suggested
that future research take into consideration racial differences among
the participants used in the study. Also, some background
information about prior experience with violent programming and
gaming should be collected and used as a control variable. Finally,
when considering the possible effects of the time of day of the
study, future researchers should vary the time of day in which the
study takes place to ensure that results are not being affected by fatigue.
Figure 1. Animated – Girl Under Bed.
[--- ??? Graphic Goes Here ---]
Figure 2. Animated – Death by Sword.
[--- ??? Graphic Goes Here ---]
Figure 3. Live-action – Sword Fight.
[--- ??? Graphic Goes Here ---]
Figure 4. Live-action – Ax to the Head.
[--- ??? Graphic Goes Here ---]
Table 1. Participants' Demographic Information.
This portion of the questionnaire asks you to give some general
information. Please check boxes, circle or write in responses where indicated.
1) The scenes you were presented with in this study were from Kill
Bill Vol. 1 have you seen this movie? If no, then skip to question 3.
Yes _ No _
2) How many times have you seen this movie?
1 2 3 4 or more
3) Age: _____
4) Gender: Male _ Female _
5) Race/Ethnicity:
White/Caucasian _
Black/African American _
Hispanic/Latin American _
Asian/Asian American _
Other _ (please specify) _______________________
6) College and Major: _______________________________________
7) Classification: Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior Graduate
Table 2. Identification Measures.
This portion of the questionnaire asks you to report your attitudes
about the clip you have just seen. Please indicate how much you
agree or disagree with each statement by checking one box on the
scale associated with each item.
Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Agree Strongly
Disagree Nor Disagree Agree
1. I could easily put myself in the place of the characters.
_ _ _ _ _
2. I tried to understand the characters better by imagining how
things looked from their perspective.
_ _ _ _ _
3. While viewing the clip, I imagined how I would feel if the events
in the story were happening to me.
_ _ _ _ _
4. While viewing the clip, I felt as if I were part of the action.
_ _ _ _ _
5. While viewing the clip, I forgot about myself and was fully absorbed.
_ _ _ _ _
6. While viewing the clip, I could feel the emotions the characters portrayed.
_ _ _ _ _
7. I felt the characters to be extremely violent.
_ _ _ _ _
Table 3. Third Person Effect Measures on Self.
The following questions concern your reaction(s) in general. Please
use the check boxes to answer the following questions.
Not at Somewhat Very
All Much
1. Overall, how violent was this video clip?
_ _ _ _ _
2. Overall, how enjoyable was the video clip?
_ _ _ _ _
3. How much do you think you would like to watch this entire film?
_ _ _ _ _
4. How likely do you think you would choose this film at a video store?
_ _ _ _ _
5. Violent films disturb me.
_ _ _ _ _
6. Based on this clip, how much do you view the world as a violent place?
_ _ _ _ _
7. Violent films entertain me.
_ _ _ _ _
8. I love the feeling of my adrenaline flowing when I watch the most
violent parts of movies.
_ _ _ _ _
9. How much do you agree with behaving violently?
_ _ _ _ _
10. How much do you think violence is acceptable?
_ _ _ _ _
11. How much do you think the violence in the clip you saw affected you?
_ _ _ _ _
Table 4. Third Person Effect Measures on Other "university" Students.
The following questions concern how you think "other 'university'
students" would react in general. Please use the check boxes to
answer the following questions.
Not at Somewhat Very
All Much
1. Overall, how violent do you think other "university" students
would view this video clip?
_ _ _ _ _
2. Overall, how enjoyable do you think other "university" students
would view this video clip?
_ _ _ _ _
3. How much do you think other "university" students would like to
watch this entire film?
_ _ _ _ _
4. How likely do you think other "university" students would choose
this film at a video store?
_ _ _ _ _
5. Violent films disturb other "university" students.
_ _ _ _ _
6. Based on this clip, how much do you think other "university"
students view the world as a violent place?
_ _ _ _ _
7. Violent films entertain other "university" students.
_ _ _ _ _
8. Other "university" students love the feeling of their adrenaline
flowing when they watch the most violent parts of movies.
_ _ _ _ _
9. How much do you think other "university" students agree with
behaving violently?
_ _ _ _ _
10. How much do you think other "university" students view violence
as acceptable?
_ _ _ _ _
11. How much do you think the violence in the clip you saw affected
other "university" students?
_ _ _ _ _
Table 5. Third Person Effect Measures on the Public at Large.
The following questions concern how you think "others" (i.e., the
public at large) would react in general. Please use the check boxes
to answer the following questions.
Not at Somewhat Very
All Much
1. Overall, how violent do you think others would view this video clip?
_ _ _ _ _
2. Overall, how enjoyable do you think others would view this video clip?
_ _ _ _ _
3. How much do you think others would like to watch this entire film?
_ _ _ _ _
4. How likely do you think others would choose this film at a video store?
_ _ _ _ _
5. Violent films disturb the public at large.
_ _ _ _ _
6. Based on this clip, how much do you think others view the world
as a violent place?
_ _ _ _ _
7. Violent films entertain the public at large.
_ _ _ _ _
8. Others love the feeling of their adrenaline flowing when they
watch the most violent parts of movies.
_ _ _ _ _
9. How much do you think others agree with behaving violently?
_ _ _ _ _
10. How much do you think others view violence as acceptable?
_ _ _ _ _
11. How much do you think the violence in the clip you saw affected others?
_ _ _ _ _
Table 6. Graph and Means for Third Person Effects Measures.
[--- ??? Graphic Goes Here ---]
Bibliography
Adler, R. B. & Elmhorst, J. M. (1999). Communicating at Work,
Principles and Practices
for Business and the Professions. Boston, Massachusetts: McGraw – Hill College.
American Academy of Pediatrics. (1995, June). Some things you should know about
media violence and media literacy. Retrieved October 20, 2004, from
http://www.aap.org/advocacy/childhealthmonth/media.htm
Anderson, Peter A., Guerrero, L. K., Buller, David B. & Jorgensen,
P. F. (1998).
An empirical comparison of three theories of nonverbal immediacy
exchange. Human Communication Research, 24(4), 501-535.
Berry, M., Gray, T., & Donnerstein, E. (1999). Cutting film
violence: Effects on
perceptions, enjoyment, and arousal. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 139 (5), 567-582.
Bosworth, K., Espelage, D. & DuBay, T. (1998). Intervention for young
adolescents:
Pilot study. Adolescence, (33)132, 785-795.
Bryant, J., & Zillmann, D. (1984). Using television to alleviate
boredom and stress:
Selective exposure as a function of induced excitational
states. Journal of Broadcasting, 28(1), 1-20.
Burgoon, J.K. (1978). A communication model of personal space
violation: Explication
and an initial test. Human Communication Research, 4, 129-142.
Cinematography. (2004). Merriam-Webster Online. Retrieved October 10,
2004, from
http://www.webster.com/cgi- bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=
cinematography
Cohen, J., Mutz, D., Price, V. & Gunther, A. (1988) (a). Perceived
impact of defamation:
An experiment on third-person effects. Public Opinion Quarterly,
52(2), 167-173.
Cohen, J. (1999) (b). Favorite characters of teenage viewers of
Israeli serials. Journal of
Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43(3), 327-345.
Cohen, J. (2001) (c). Defining identification: A theoretical look
at the identification of
audiences with media characters. Mass Communication & Society, 4(3), 245-264.
Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. The
Public Opinion
Quarterly, 47(1), 1-15.
Diener, E., & Woody, L. W. (1981). Television violence, conflict,
realism, and action:
A study in viewer liking. Communication Research, 8(3), 281-306.
Eveland, W. P., Nathanson, A. I., Detenber, B. H. & McLeod, D.
(1999). Rethinking the
social distance corollary: Perceived likelihood of exposure and the
third-person
effect. Communication Research, 26(3), 275-302.
Feilitzen, C., & Linne, O. (1975). The effects of television on
children and adolescents:
Identifying with television characters. Journal of Communication,
25(4), 51-55.
Garrison, R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a
text-based
environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Unpublished
manuscript.
Gunther, A. (1995). Overrating the x-rating: The third-person
perception and support for
censorship of pornography. Journal of Communication, 45(1), 27-38.
Hoffner, C., Buchanan, M., Anderson, J. D., Hubbs, L., Kamigaki, S.,
Kowalczyk, L. et
al. (1999). Support for censorship of television violence. Communication
Research, 26(6), 726-742.
Hoffner, C., Plotkin, R., Buchanan, M., Anderson, J. D., Kamigaki,
S., Hubbs, L. et al.
(2001). The third-person effect in perceptions of the influence of television
violence. Journal of Communication, 51(2), 283-299.
Hoffner, C. (1996). Children's wishful identification and parasocial
interaction with
favorite television characters. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic
Media, 40, 389-402.
Holson, L (2003). Careful killing keeps moviemakers ideal 'R'
territory. San Francisco
Chronicles. Retrieved on Jan. 10, 2005 from:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/a/2003/10/26/MO218781.DTL&type=movies.
Jacobson, D. (2002). On theorizing presence. The Journal of Virtual
Environments, 6(1)
Retrieved on October 15, 2004 from
http://www.brandeis.edu/pubs/jove/HTML/V6/presence.HTML.
Josephson, W (1995). Television violence: A review of the effects on
children of
different ages. Internet. Retrieved on Jan. 10, 2005 from:
http://www.nisbett.com/child-ent/printer/television_violence.htm#adol.
Kidsnet. A nation online: how Americans are expanding their use of
the internet.
Internet. Retrieved on Jan. 10, 2005 from:
http://www.kidsnet.org/medianews/research/.
King, C.M. (2000). Effects of humorous heroes and villains in
violent action films.
Journal of Communication 50(1),5-24.
Lamerichs, J., Molder, T. & Hedwig F, (2003). Computer-mediated
communication: From a cognitive to a discursive model. New Media &
Society, 5(4), 451-473.
Lombard, M. & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of
presence. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication 3(2). Retrieved on
Oct. 17, 2004 from
http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue2/lombard.html
Mueller, W (2004). Movies, movies, movies. Internet. Retrieved on
Jan. 10, 2005 from:
http://www.cpyu.org/pageview.asp?pageid=21864
Myers, S.A., Zhong, M. & Shijie, G. (1998). Instructor immediacy in
the Chinese college classroom. Communication Studies West Lafayette,
49(3), 240-255.
Nathanson, A. I., Eveland, W. P., Park, H. S. & Paul, B.
(2002). Perceived media
influence an efficacy as predictors of caregivers' protective
behaviors. Journal of Broadcating and Electronic Media 46(3), 385-410.
Neuliep, J.W. (1997). A cross-cultural comparison of teacher
immediacy in American
and Japanese college classrooms. Communication Research, 24(4), 431-451.
Neuwirth, K. (2002). Extending the framework of third, first and
second-person effects.
Mass Communication & Society, 5(2), 113-140.
Newitz, A (1995). Magical girls and atomic bomb sperm: Japanese animation in
America. Film Quarterly 49 (1).
Paul, B., Salwen, M., & Dupagne, M. (2000). The third-person effect:
A meta-analysis of
the perceptual hypothesis. Mass Communication & Society, 3(1), 57-85.
Perloff, R. M. (1999). The third person effect: A critical review and
synthesis. Media
Psychology, 1(4), 353-378.
Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. & Archer, R. (2001). Assessing
social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of
Distance Education, 14(2). Retrieved on October 7, 2004, from
http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol14.2/rourke_et_al.html.
Rubin, A. M. (1983) (a). Television uses and gratifications: The
interaction of viewing
patterns and motivations. Journal of Broadcasting, (27)1, 37-51.
Rubin, A. M. (1994) (b). Media Uses and Effects: A uses and
gratifications perspective.
In J. Bryant and Dolf Zillmann (eds.) Media Effects: Advances in
Theory and Research, 417-436. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sanders, M. (2003). Making it personal: How personality affects
identification and
enjoyment of heroes and villains. (Masters Thesis, The Pennsylvania State
University, 2003).
Scharrer, E. (2002). Third-person perception and television violence:
The role of out-
group stereotyping in perceptions of susceptibility to effects. Communication
Research, 29(6), 681-704.
Sparks, G. G. (1986). Developing a scale to assess cognitive
responses to frightening
films. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, (30)1, 65-73.
Trenholm, S. & Jensen, A. (2000). Interpersonal Communication. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing Company. Oxford University Press.
Violence. (2004). Merriam-Webster Online. Retrieved October 10, 2004, from
http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=Violence
Wells, P. (1998). Understanding animation. London, UK: Routledge.
Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1985). Affect, mood, and emotion as
determinant of
selective exposure. In D. Zillmann & J. Bryant (eds.) Selective
Exposure to Communication, (pp. 157-189). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
[1] There were a total three dates and eight times to choose
from. The first two dates had three time slots and the last date had
two time slots. The experiments were held at 6, 7 and 8 p.m. on the
first two night and 6 and 7 p.m. on the last night to allow for less
scheduling conflict.
[2] This identification code was in no way associated with the
students' name or other demographic information provided on the
forms. They were assigned after all of the questionnaires were
handed in at the end of each session.
[3] This was important to the study because the clips shown were
rated R because of extreme violence. If younger participants, under
17, had been chosen, parental consent would have been an issue.
[4] The "Other" category had a line for participants to write in the
ethnicity. They were Indian and Portuguese.
[5] The animated clip was 4 minutes 24 seconds long.
[6] Identification was assessed with seven items from a scale used
in a Master's thesis entitled, Making It Personal: How Personality
Affects Identification and Enjoyment of Heroes and Villains by Meghan
Sanders. It was completed in 2003.
[7] Sample question from Sanders' study: While viewing and reading,
I felt as if I was part of the action; Sample question from this
study: While viewing the clip, I felt as if I were part of the action.
[8] Third person was assessed with 11 items for each locus from a
scale used in a Glenn Sparks study, Developing a Scale to Assess
Cognitive Responses to Frightening Films. It was published in 1986
in Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media.
[9] Sample question from Sparks' study: Scary films entertain me;
Sample question from this study: Violent films entertain me.
[10] Because the lab was located off-campus, each experiment was
started 10 minutes after the said time to allow students time to
arrive. Two participants arrived so late that they volunteered to
view the clip alone. It was found that they're responses did not
change the analysis results, so they were kept in the study.
[11] The clips were shown on a big screen to replicate the setting
of a movie theater.
[12] One viewing of the live-action clip ran over a few seconds,
which resulted in some inaudible dialogue being presented to one group.
[13] Special care was taken to inform participants that there were
questions on both sides of the pages.
[14] This was done to control for external distractions.
[15] This was done after pre-test participants noted confusion in
determining which questions applied to each locus.
[16] Questions C-9 and D-7 had missing values for participants 6 and
45 respectively.
|
