8204549
| Question | Answer |
| Barker & Petley 1998 | There is an obsession with trying to prove that the media are responsible for a range of social problems |
| Hypodermic Needle Model | Audiences are injected with media |
| Cultivation Theory | We form views and opinions about people over time as a result of exposure to media, and thus people become stereotyped |
| Desensitisation | The more violence we see, the less shocked we are by it |
| Copycat Theory | Individuals act out what they see modelled on screen. Famous examples are the Columbine and Anders Brevik killings |
| Uses and Gratifications Theory | People consume media to satisfy various needs |
| Reception Theory | Audiences interpret different (polysemic) meanings from the same media text, influenced by lifestyle choices |
| Ethnography | Peoples’ responses to the media from their point of view in their reading contexts |
| Postmodernism | Boundaries between reality and media have become blurred |
| Why does Gauntlett suggest there are no connections between the media and people's behaviour? | 1. There are no links in the first place 2. The research approach is being done the wrong way around Should start with the social problem and look for reasons with reference to the people’s backgrounds, lifestyles |
| What did Hagell & Newburn discover in 1994? | Young offenders watched less TV etc, no interest in violent programmes and less access to technology. That if you start with the issues/perpetrators you come to different conclusions i.e. not media that caused it |
| Browne & Pennell 1998 | Could only hint that some violent individuals like watching violent content more than some non violent people. Showed them video content first-not in context-seen in isolation etc |
| How can Reception Theory be applied? | Looks at individuals rather than society and therefore can only look at the meanings individuals decode from polysemic media Can only generalise the effect media will have - people decode different meanings |
| How are children characterised? What do Buckingham and Gauntlett say? | As Inadequate, they are seen as inferior. They disagree. They see kids to be intelligent, cynical, thoughtful, critical and media literate |
| What did George Gerber 1994 say? | "We are awash in a tide of violent representations" |
| Why is it important to look at meaning rather than just the amount of violence? | Meaning is subjective and polysemic. Amount can be prosocial as well i.e. throwing a book down in disgust, sabotaging nuclear missile etc |
| Can representations of ‘antisocial behaviour’ be measured objectively? Will it always affect children negatively? | No because polysemic. |
| Why does Gauntlett say that in the effects field findings are often unreliable? | Unqualifiable data, subjective nature of measuring amount and meaning. Conclusions aren’t backed up logically |
| How is some research artificial? | Research not experimental, and not in context as it takes too much time and money. There are too many factors |
| What does Borden (1975) suggest can affect children’s behaviour? | Presence, gender and appearance of an observer |
| Do effects studies consider all violence depicted in the media? If not, what isn’t included? How is this problematic? | No. News is not counted. It is argued that fictional violence produces certain behaviour characteristics, but factual media is discounted |
| What does Gauntlett mean by ‘the effects model assumes superiority of the masses’? | That it is only ‘lesser’ people-kids, lower classes etc-who are effected-not media researchers etc! |
Want to create your own Flashcards for free with GoConqr? Learn more.