Write a 1 page response to the text answering the following questions:

© 2020 The New York Times Company

NYTCo Contact Us Work with us Advertise T Brand Studio Your Ad Choices Privacy Terms of Service Terms of Sale Site Map Help Subscriptions Do Not Sell My Personal Information California Notices

ADVERTISEMENT

The Sperry Legend Edit Sponsored by Sperry

A showcase of John Legend's favorite boat shoes, sneakers and loafers.

Opinion GRAY MATTER

By Vasilis K. Pozios, Praveen R. Kambam and H. Eric Bender

Aug. 23, 2013

EARLIER this summer the actor Jim Carrey, a star of the new

superhero movie “Kick-Ass 2,” tweeted that he was distancing

himself from the film because, in the wake of the Sandy Hook

massacre, “in all good conscience I cannot support” the movie’s

extensive and graphically violent scenes.

Mark Millar, a creator of the “Kick-Ass” comic book series and one

of the movie’s executive producers, responded that he has “never

quite bought the notion that violence in fiction leads to violence in

real life any more than Harry Potter casting a spell creates more

boy wizards in real life.”

While Mr. Carrey’s point of view has its adherents, most people

reflexively agree with Mr. Millar. After all, the logic goes, millions

of Americans see violent imagery in films and on TV every day, but

vanishingly few become killers.

But a growing body of research indicates that this reasoning may

be off base. Exposure to violent imagery does not preordain

violence, but it is a risk factor. We would never say: “I’ve smoked

cigarettes for a long time, and I don’t have lung cancer. Therefore

there’s no link between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer.” So

why use such flawed reasoning when it comes to media violence?

ADVERTISEMENT

IQ test - What is your IQ? Answer 20 questions to find out

OPEN

WWW.TEST-IQ.ORGAD

There is now consensus that exposure to media violence is linked

to actual violent behavior — a link found by many scholars to be on

par with the correlation of exposure to secondhand smoke and the

risk of lung cancer. In a meta-analysis of 217 studies published

between 1957 and 1990, the psychologists George Comstock and

Haejung Paik found that the short-term effect of exposure to media

violence on actual physical violence against a person was

moderate to large in strength.

Mr. Comstock and Ms. Paik also conducted a meta-analysis of

studies that looked at the correlation between habitual viewing of

violent media and aggressive behavior at a point in time. They

found 200 studies showing a moderate, positive relationship

between watching television violence and physical aggression

against another person.

Thanks for reading The Times. Subscribe to The Times

Other studies have followed consumption of violent media and its

behavioral effects throughout a person’s lifetime. In a meta-

analysis of 42 studies involving nearly 5,000 participants, the

psychologists Craig A. Anderson and Brad J. Bushman found a

statistically significant small-to-moderate-strength relationship

between watching violent media and acts of aggression or violence

later in life.

In a study published in the journal Pediatrics this year, the

researchers Lindsay A. Robertson, Helena M. McAnally and

Robert J. Hancox showed that watching excessive amounts of TV

as a child or adolescent — in which most of the content contains

violence — was causally associated with antisocial behavior in

early adulthood. (An excessive amount here means more than two

hours per weekday.)

The question of causation, however, remains contested. What’s

missing are studies on whether watching violent media directly

leads to committing extreme violence. Because of the relative

rarity of acts like school shootings and because of the ethical

prohibitions on developing studies that definitively prove causation

of such events, this is no surprise.

ADVERTISEMENT

Of course, the absence of evidence of a causative link is not

evidence of its absence. Indeed, in 2005, The Lancet published a

comprehensive review of the literature on media violence to date.

The bottom line: The weight of the studies supports the position

that exposure to media violence leads to aggression,

desensitization toward violence and lack of sympathy for victims of

violence, particularly in children.

In fact the surgeon general, the National Institute of Mental Health

and multiple professional organizations — including the American

Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association and the

American Psychological Association — all consider media violence

exposure a risk factor for actual violence.

To be fair, some question whether the correlations are significant

enough to justify considering media violence a substantial public

health issue. And violent behavior is a complex issue with a host of

other risk factors.

But although exposure to violent media isn’t the only or even the

strongest risk factor for violence, it’s more easily modified than

other risk factors (like being male or having a low socioeconomic

status or low I.Q.).

Certainly, many questions remain and more research needs to be

done to determine what specific factors drive a person to commit

acts of violence and what role media violence might play.

But first we have to consider how best to address those questions.

To prevent and treat public health issues like AIDS, cancer and

heart disease, we focus on modifying factors correlated with an

increased risk of a bad outcome. Similarly, we should strive to

identify risk factors for violence and determine how they interact,

who may be particularly affected by such factors and what can be

done to reduce modifiable risk factors.

ADVERTISEMENT

Naturally, debate over media violence stirs up strong emotions

because it raises concerns about the balance between public safety

and freedom of speech.

Even if violent media are conclusively found to cause real-life

violence, we as a society may still decide that we are not willing to

regulate violent content. That’s our right. But before we make that

decision, we should rely on evidence, not instinct.

ADVERTISEMENT

Does Media Violence Lead to the Real Thing?

Olimpia Zagnoli

SUNDAY REVIEW SUBSCRIBE NOW LOG IN

VIEW OFFERSubscribe for $1 a week. One day only.