What Is a Media Effect?

This chapter focuses on the idea of media effect. The chapter begins with an analysis of the key elements that we must consider when thinking about media effects, then uses those elements to build to a broad definition. The chapter then presents two Media Effects Templates (METs) as a way of organizing the great variety of effects. These METs serve as the maps of media effects that will be used to structure all remaining chapters.

DEFINING MEDIA EFFECT

It is important to use a broad perspective on media effects in order to understand the incredibly wide range of influence the media exert and also to appreciate the truly wide range of effects research that has been produced by media scholars. However, when people in their everyday lives think about media effects, they typically limit their thinking to negative things that happen to other people after watching too much “bad” content. For example, people believe that exposure to media violence causes aggression; media stories with sexual depictions lead to risky sexual behaviors; and bad language leads to coarse expression in the population. These beliefs continually show up in public opinion polls. And these topics are popular among media effects researchers. This type of public opinion and this type of research are so prevalent that many people have come to think of media effects as primarily being negative behaviors that show up immediately after exposure to particular media messages. This perspective is a useful starting place for thinking about media effects, but then we need to move on to a broader perspective. To begin this movement toward a broader perspective, let’s examine the key issues we need to deal with when considering a complete conceptualization of media effects.

Key Issues in Media Effects Definitions

When we look across all the ways that scholars write about media effects, we can see that there are eight issues that concern them. These issues are timing (immediate vs. long term), duration (temporary vs. permanent), valence (negative or positive), change (difference vs. no difference), intention (or non-intention), the level of effect (micro vs. macro), direct (orindirect), and manifestation (observable vs. latent). When you understand these issues, you

can appreciate why we have such a wide variety of things that have been identified as

media effects.

Timing. In everyday life, most people think that media effects are things that show up during

a media exposure or immediately afterward. For example, if parents notice that their

young children begin to wrestle aggressively when they watch Saturday morning cartoons,

those parents are likely to see a connection between the TV shows and their children’s

aggressive behavior. Of course, the media exert immediate effects, but they also exert influences

on people over the long term, when it takes a long time before we can see any evidence

of an effect.

Duration. Some effects last a short time, then go away, while other effects are permanent.

For example, Cindy may listen to the words of a new song on her iPod and remember those

words the rest of her life, or she may not be able to remember them an hour later.

Valence. In everyday life, people typically think of media effects as being negative, such as

exposure to violence leading to antisocial behavior. But the media also exert positive

effects. We can learn all kinds of useful things by reading newspapers, magazines, books,

and websites. We can use music and stories from all kinds of media to shape our moods

and trigger pleasant emotions. We can use the media to interact with other people and

make us feel part of interesting communities, both real and virtual.

There are times when a particular effect can be either negative or positive depending on

the context. Let’s take the desensitization effect as an example of an effect that can be

either positive or negative. Desensitization can be positive when a therapist helps her

patient overcome an irrational fear of flying in airplanes by showing her patient television

shows about people happily boarding airplanes and enjoying air travel. But desensitization

can be a negative effect when people lose their natural inclination to feel sympathy for

other people after watching years of characters being victimized by violence.

Change. When we think of effects, we typically think of change, that is, a change in behavior

or a change in attitude. If there is no change, some people argue that there is no effect.

But some effects—perhaps the most important and powerful media effects—show up as

no change. For example, most advertising has as its purpose the reinforcing of existing

habits among consumers. Advertisers do not want their brand-loyal customers to change;

instead they want to reinforce existing buying behaviors. If we ignore the reinforcement

effect—where there is no change in behavior—then we will have too narrow a perspective

on media effects.

Intention. When the media industries are criticized for negative effects, one of their defense

strategies is to point out that they did not intend to create a negative effect. For example,

when the media are criticized for presenting so much violence in Hollywood movies, producers

of those movies will say that they are merely trying to entertain people, not teach

them to behave violently. However, there are many effects that occur even though the

producers of those media messages, as well as the consumers of those messages, did not

intend them to occur.

Level. Most of the research on media effects looks at individuals as the targets of the effects.

Scholars have produced a very large literature documenting a wide array of effects on individuals.

But the media also exert influences on more macro-level entities such as the public,

society, and institutions.

The research studies that examine individual-level effects differ fundamentally from the

research studies that examine macro-level effects. These differences are not only in methods

needed to measure the effects but also in the types of questions addressed and the

types of conclusions presented. Typically, individual-level studies use an experiment or a

survey as they focus on how individual people respond to different media messages. In

contrast, macro-level studies gather aggregated data from institutions, such as the courts

(rates of conviction and incarceration), education (rates of graduation, average scores on

standardized achievement tests by school district, and such), religion (size of memberships,

attendances at various services, and such), politics (voting rates, public opinion polls on

various issues and support for candidates, and the like).

Direct and Indirect. Sometimes the media exert a direct effect on individuals, while other

times the effect is more indirect, such as through institutions. For example, a direct effect

occurs when a person watches a political ad and decides to vote for a particular candidate.

An indirect effect occurs when the media continually raise the prices for political advertising,

so that candidates must spend much more time raising money, which makes them

more beholden to organizations that give them the most money, which influences thepolicies they support most, which influences the services that governmental bodies provide,

which influences us as individuals. Even people who are never exposed to political

ads are affected by them indirectly.

Manifestation. Some effects are easy to observe, such as when someone changes her behavior

soon after being exposed to a particular media message. For example, Heather might be

watching TV and see an ad for a special offer for a pizza. She grabs her phone, dials the number

on the screen, and orders a pizza. But other effects are very difficult to observe; this does

not necessarily mean they are not occurring or that the media are not exerting an influence.

The Definition

Now that you have seen the list of issues that underlie the thinking about media effects,

you are ready for the working definition that structures this book. That definition is, Mediainfluenced

effects are those things that occur as a result—either in part or in whole—from

media influence. They can occur immediately during exposure to a media message, or they

can take a long time to occur after any particular exposure. They can last for a few seconds

or an entire lifetime. They can be positive as well as negative. They can show up clearly as

changes but they can also reinforce existing patterns, in which case the effect appears as

no change. They can occur whether the media have an intention for them to occur or not.

They can affect individual people or all people in the form of the public. They can also

affect institutions and society. They can act directly on a target (a person, the public, an

institution, or society) or they can act indirectly. And, finally, they can be easily observable

or they can be latent and therefore much more difficult to observe.

This definition of media effect is, of course, very broad. As such, it includes many things.

That is the point of the definition. Remember that media messages are so constant and so

pervasive that we are continually being exposed to media information either directly from

media exposures or indirectly by other people talking about media exposures. Therefore,

we need to acknowledge that the media are continually exerting an influence on us.

However, this does not mean that the media are constantly causing effects in us, because we

are always able to reject the media influence and create our own effects. But in order to

reject the media influence, we have to know what it is we are rejecting, that is, what effects

will occur if we do not do something to head them off. For this reason, it is important that

you learn what the full range of media effects are and how the media influence contributes

to those many effects.