The debate about whether we need to heavily censor media for our adolescents, particularly violent and aggressive content, to control and reduce aggression is highly debated, contentious for policy makers and society. A debate that precedes this technological uprising and stretching back to the Greeks (Ferguson & Dyck, 2012). This essay will critically analyze the relationship between media exposure and aggression in adolescents. Alongside this, review the implications of media censorship and what the potential effects of violent media content may be on adolescents.
Many studies have looked at the potential link between aggressive behaviour in adolescents and exposure to violent media. A positive correlation exists in some research (Anderson et al., 2010). Within Social Cognitive Theory the exposure to violent and aggressive content, particularly if repeated, may lead to desensitization, observational learning and increased acceptance of aggression (Bandura, 1973; Allen, 2017). If human learning is fundamentally social as posited here, these factors could contribute to the imitation of aggression in media, leading to potentially violent behaviour in everyday life.
Theories such as the General Aggression Model (GAM) highlight the complex interactions between cognitive processes after media exposure and then subsequent behaviour. It proposes aggressive content can influence thoughts, emotions and behaviours (Anderson & Bushman, 2002).
Establishing causality has not been conclusive to date. This is a challenge due to the variety of factors that may influence and shape aggressive behaviours; peer interactions, individual personality traits, family environment and socioeconomic status all play a part (Ferguson, 2013).
We see proponents and opponents for the role of media censoring, particularly for controlling aggression in adolescents. Advocates suggest that media censorship will promote positive behaviours and values, leading to a less aggressive society. While critics outline the potential challenges such as infringing upon freedom of expression and creative liberties. This raises concerns, ethical implications, possible restriction and contamination of public information (Irum & Laila, 2015). Some research indicates that restricting media for adolescents may be ineffective, due to the multitude of platforms available to them (Ferguson, 2013).
Current alternative strategies to manage aggression look at the importance of education, critical thinking interventions, role modelling, pro-social behaviours and parental involvement. An open and active involvement and communication with young people will be a crucial role in helping them to contextualise and understand media messages, whilst empowering them to make healthy and responsible choices (Huesmann, 2007; Huang et al., 2023; Gitter et al., 2013).
In conclusion the relationship between violent media context and aggression in adolescents is a contentious and complex issue. Some studies have positively correlated media exposure and behaviour. However, media censorship is a very controversial approach which raises ethical concerns. To address the issues of adolescent aggression this mini essay finds that a multifaceted approach is required to mitigate the negative effects of violence in modern media. Combining media literacy programs, parental involvement, positive role models, and a supportive social environment may help adolescents develop resilience and critical thinking skills.
References
Allan, J. (2017). Aggression: a social learning analysis. Taylor And Francis.
Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human Aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 27–51. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231
Anderson, C. A., Shibuya, A., Ihori, N., Swing, E. L., Bushman, B. J., Sakamoto, A., Rothstein, H. R., & Saleem, M. (2010). Violent video games effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: a meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 151–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018251
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: a social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall.
Ferguson, C. J. (2013). Violent video games and the Supreme Court: Lessons for the scientific community in the wake of Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association. American Psychologist, 68(2), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030597
Ferguson, C. J., & Dyck, D. (2012). Paradigm change in aggression research: The time has come to retire the General Aggression Model. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17(3), 220–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2012.02.007
Gitter, S. A., Ewell, P. J., Guadagno, R. E., Stillman, T. F., & Baumeister, R. F. (2013). Virtually justifiable homicide: The effects of prosocial contexts on the link between violent video games, aggression, and prosocial and hostile cognition. Aggressive Behavior, 39(5), 346–354. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21487
Huang, S., Lai, X., Li, Y., Wang, W., Zhao, X., Dai, X., Wang, H., & Wang, Y. (2023). Does parental media mediation make a difference for adolescents? Evidence from an empirical cohort study of parent-adolescent dyads. Heliyon, 9(4), e14897–e14897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14897
Huesmann, L. R. (2007). The Impact of Electronic Media Violence: Scientific Theory and Research. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(6), S6–S13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.09.005
Irum, S. A., & Laila, A. S. (2015). Media censorship: Freedom versus responsibility. Journal of Law and Conflict Resolution, 7(4), 21–24. https://doi.org/10.5897/jlcr2015.0207
Stride Mental Health 