In contrast, aggression by the male model was generally viewed as appropriate and approved by both the boys ("A1's a good socker, he beat up Bobo. I want to sock like A1.") and the girls ("That man is a strong fighter. He punched and punched, and he could hit Bobo right down to the floor and if Bobo got up he said, 'Punch your nose.' He's a good fighter like Daddy.").
Furthermore, the data reval that aggressive models are highly influential not only in reducing children's inhibitions over aggression, but also in shaping the form of their behavior. Children who observed the aggressive models displayed a great number of precisely imitative aggressive acts, whereas such responses rarely occurred in either the nonaggressive group or the control group.
The finding that film-mediated models are as effective as real-life models in eliciting and transmitting aggressive responses indicates that televised models may serve as important sources of behavior and can no longer be ignored in conceptualizations of personality development. Indeed, most youngsters probably have more exposure to prestigeful televised male models than to their own fathers. With further advances in mass media and audiovisual technology, models presented pictorially, mainly through television, are likely to play an increasingly influential role in shaping personality patterns and in modifying attitudes and social norms.
It has been widely assumed on the basis of psychoanalytic theory and other hydraulic energy models of personality that children's vicarious participation in film-mediated aggression or the direct expression of aggressive behavior will serve to discharge "pentup energies" and effects. Guided by this catharsis hypothesis, many parents, educators, and mental health workers encourage hyperaggressive children to participate in aggressive recreational actavities, to view highly aggressive televised programs, and to aggress in psychotherapeutic play-rooms and other permissive settings.
In contrast to this "drainage" view, the growing body of research provides considerable evidence that vicarious participation in aggressive activities can be highly effective in modifying observers' aggressive behavior, but not in the direction predicted by the catharsis hypothesis. These findings are perhaps not too surprising. It is highly improbable that even advocates of vicarious drive reduction would recommend community programs in which sexually aroused adolescents are shown libidinous movies at drive-in theatres as a means of reducing sexual behavior, or in which famished persons are presented displays of gourmands dining on culinary treats in order to alleviate hunger pangs.
The influential role of modeling processes in personality development is further revealed by studies demonstrating that children adopt, through observation of behavior exemplified by adults and peers, relatively complex attributes including standards of achievement and self-evaluation, patterns of emotional responsivity, syntatic styles, moral judgmental orientations, and patterns of self-gratification.
The Consequences of Rewarding Aggressive Behavior.
The manner in which rewarding or punishing consequences to the model's behavior influences imitation is demonstrated in another experiment in which nursery school children observed either an aggressive model rewarded, an aggressive model punished, or had no exposure to the models. The models were two adults, and the film presented to the children was projected into a television console. In the aggression-rewarded condition, Rocky, the aggressive model, appropriates all of Johnny's attractive play possessions and tasty foodstuffs through aggressive - domineering means. The film shown to the children in the aggression-punished condition was identical with that shown to the aggression-rewarded group except for a slight rearrangement of the film sequence so that the aggression exhibited by Rocky resulted in his being severely punished by Johnny. Following exposure to the models the children were tested for the incidence of post-exposure aggressive behavior. Children who observed Rocky's aggressive behavior rewarded readily imitated his physical and verbal aggression, whereas children who saw him punished exhibited relatively little imitative behavior and did not differ from a group of control children who had no exposure to the models.
At the conclusion of the experiment each child was asked to evaluate the behavior of Rocky and Johnny and to select the character he preferred to emulate. These data yielded some interesting and surprising findings. As might be expected, children who observed Rocky's aggressive behavior punished both failed to reproduce his behavior and rejected him as a model for emulation. On the other hand, when Rocky's aggression was highly successful in amassing rewarding resources, he was chosen by most of the children as the preferred model for imitation. The surprising finding, however, is that without exception these children were highly critical of his behavior (e.g., "Rocky is harsh" ... "Rough and bossy" ... "Mean" ... "Wicked" ... "He whack people" ...).
It was evident from the children's comments that the successful payoff of aggression rather than its intrinsic desirability served as the primary basis for emulation (e.g., "Rocky beat Johnny and chase him and get all the good toys" ... "He came and snatched Johnny's toys. Get a lot of toys" ...). The children resolved the conflict by derogating the unfortunate victim, aparently as justification for Rocky's exploitive-assaultive behavior. They criticized Johnny for his inability to control Rocky ("He's a cry baby. Didn't know how to make Rocky mind"), for his miserliness ("If he'd shared right in the beginning, Rocky might have played nice"), and generally described him as "Sulky," "Mean," and "Sort of dumb."
This study clearly demonstrates the way in which rewarding consequences to the model may outweigh the value systems of observers--children readily adopted successful modeling behavior even though they had labeled it objectionable, morally reprehensible, and publicly had criticized the model for engaging in such behavior.
In many televised and other mass media presentations antisocial models amass considerable rewarding resources through devious means but are punished following the last commercial on the assumption that the punishment ending will erase or counteract the learning of the model's antisocial behavior. The findings of an experiment by Bandura in 1965 reveal that although punishment administered to a model tends to inhibit children's performance of the modeled behavior, it has virtually no influence on the occurrence of imitative learning. In this experiment children observed a film-mediated aggressive model who was severely punished in one condition, generously rewarded in a second condition, and received no response consequences to the model in the third condition.
Consistent with the findings cited earlier, a post-exposure test of imitative behavior showed that children who observed the punished model performed significantly fewer imitative responses than children in the model-rewarded and the no-consequence groups. Children in all three groups were then offered attractive incentives contingent on their reproducing the model's behavior. The introduction of the rewards completely wiped out the previously observed performance differences, revealing an equivalent amount of learning among the children in the model-rewarded, model-punished, and the no-consequence groups. Moreover, girls had acquired approximately as much imitative aggression as did the boys.
It might be concluded from these findings that exposure of children to punished antisocial or other types of models is likely to result in little overt imitative behavior. Nevertheless, the observed behavior is learned and may be exhibited on future occasions given appropriate instigation, the instruments necessary for performing the imitative acts, and the prospect of sufficiently attractive positive rewards contingent on the successful execution of the behavior.
Closing Remarks.
Man is endowed with a capacity to behave aggressively. However, the frequency with which he exhibits such behavior, the specific forms that it takes, and the targets that are selected for attack, are strongly influenced by social experience. Societal training in aggression is partly achieved through the types of examples that it provides. There now exists a large body of evidence that the attitudes, values, and behavior of children, as well as adults, can be substantially altered through observation of the actions of others and its consequences for them.
In evaluating the effects of exposure to televised violence on the behavior of viewers it is important to distinguish between learning and doing. It has been shown that if people are exposed to televised aggression they not only learn aggressive patterns of behavior, but they also retain them over a long period of time. There is no longer any need to equivocate about whether televised stimulation produces learning effects. It can serve as an effective tutor.
Although people acquire patterns of social behavior from television, they do not necessarily perform this behavior in their everyday interactions. The casual linkages of performance are more complex because other factors enter in as determinants. This same issue applies, of course, to the influence of television on consumer behavior. For example, a well-endowed blonde begs 50 million viewers to join the Dodge rebellion. Obviously 50 million people do not jump up and purchase Dodge automobiles. The televised influence increases the probability that Dodge cars will be purchased, but one would have to consider many other factors in predicting the specific individuals who will act on what they have learned. I assume that in selling commercial time the television industry argues for the potency of televised influences with the same strong conviction that they argue for its ineffectiveness in modifying social behavior.
Findings of laboratory studies show that exposure to aggressive behavior