It “reward” of internalization is “the content of the

It
is that: The only thing that is constant is change.

Some
changes are intentional, whereas some are a result of experiences and influence.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

We
are all on different levels we choose to better ourselves at things that have
our interest and are passionate about, not everyone can read us as and when
they want to mystery, we are.

Influence
is a big word and surrounds life, influence means several factors that are
primarily behavior based that affect a person’s emotions, behaviors, opinions,
and decision-making process. These factors are learning, perception,
self-concept, attitudes, personality, and life styles .through a combination of
these various factors a consumer displays certain tendencies toward products,
services, actions, and mentalities.

There
are three broad verities of social influence identified by Harvard psychologist
Herbert Kelman:

1.    Compliance is when
people appear to agree with others but actually keep their dissenting opinions
private (The act of
responding favorably to an explicit or implicit request offered by others.
Technically, compliance is a change in behavior but not necessarily in attitude,
one can comply due to mere obedience or
by otherwise opting to withhold private thoughts due to social pressures. The
satisfaction derived from compliance is due to the social effect of the
accepting influence.

2.    Identification is when
people are influenced by someone who is liked and respected, such as a famous
celebrity (The changing of
attitudes or behaviors due to the influence of someone who is admired.
Advertisements that rely upon celebrity endorsements to market their products
are taking advantage of this phenomenon. Yhe desired relationship that the
identifier relates to the behavior or attitude change.

3.    Internalization is when
people accept a belief or behavior and agree both publicly and privately (The process of acceptance of
a set of norms established by people or groups that are influential to the
individual. The individual accepts the influence because the content of the
influence accepted is intrinsically rewarding. It is congruent with the
individual’s value system; the “reward” of internalization is
“the content of the new behavior”.

Most of the people use these factors to push
against as they struggle to establish their own independent identities

When
individuals try to control over their lives is something everyone wants. However,
in a universe in which everything is mutually interdependent, none of them has
absolute control over anything including, much of the time, themselves.
Rather, what they all have in abundance is influence, the power of which
seems to function linearly: the closer personally and physically others are to
the individual, the greater the individual’s influence over them, and vice
versa. Even more interestingly, unlike their attempts to control, their
attempts to influence do not require their conscious intent. Which is
why their ability to influence others is so much more important than the
individual’s ability to control them; always-exerting influence simply by being
who they are, saying what they say, and doing what they do. The only real
choice they have in the matter is whether, or not the influence they exert is
good or bad.

Everyone’s
life-condition tends towards the average of those around him or her. If someone
is up and another one is down, he or she will each tend to pull one another
toward his/her own inner states, usually both moving toward the mean between
them. Some people have exceptionally resilient life-conditions that are like rigid
magnets, pulling others up or down powerfully without tending to move much
themselves under the influence of the life-conditions of others. While most of
the people may aspire to possess that strength, most of them have not achieved
it.

Children
may pull out wise protectors or fed-up disciplinarians.
Co-workers may pull out inspiring leaders or complaining gossips. Some people
are simply toxic, complaining constantly, gossiping mercilessly, and even
purposely sabotaging others.

The
factors that help influence to spread among the world are many, one of them is
Mass Media the creation of a new channel to influence people, especially those
who are young, children and youth are the most affected people regarding their
unstable, changeable and forming characters.

Therefor
what is Mass media: mass media can be described as written, spoken or broadcast
communication? Some of the popular forms of mass media are newspapers,
magazines, radio, advertisements, social media, television, Internet; music
videos, videogames, and films/movies .Mass communication refers to the
technology that is used to communicate to a large group, or groups of people in
a short time frame.

 

There are four major functions of mass media. The first is
for surveillance. This is to provide information about issues, events and
developments in society. The second is correlation. Media must interpret events
and issues and ascribe meaning so that individuals understand their roles in
society. A term that best fits with correlation is agenda setting, which means
the media does not tell you what to think, but what to think about. Media tells
you what is and is not important and to what degree. The third is cultural
transmission. This is where the media aids the transference of dominant
cultures and subcultures from one generation to the next or to immigrants. The
last function of mass media is to simply entertain.

Media today is forever changing. The fact that technology
evolves and changes “drives the development of media, because we as a society
are always using mass media there are consequences and effects that have been
laid on the forefront of mass media. Certain scholars, scientist and
researchers “believe that the mass media shape the way people view the world,
especially when people have little direct experience; others point to the media
as providing role models positive and negative imitated by members of the
audience” . The portrayal of violence in the media seems to be the most talked
about issue, but other “behavioral areas are of concern”. These arguments tend
to be based on “the supposition that the experience of the content presented by
contemporary mass media differs in some qualitative way from other material
that people have been exposed to since the beginning of social communication”.
Attempts to “hold mass-media corporations legally responsible for the criminal
acts of the consumers of their products have failed, and a general consensus
has been reached that people will have to continue to be responsible for their
own behaviors in the age of mass media”.

Mass media is one of the great factors nowadays in
influencing youth in a negative way with violence materials exposed to them.

A research on violent television and films, video games, and
music reveals unequivocal evidence that media violence increases the likelihood
of aggressive and violent behavior in both immediate and long- term context.

Well-supported theory delineates why and when exposure to
media violence increases aggression and violence. Media violence produces
short-term increases by priming existing aggressive scripts and cognitions, increasing
psychological arousal, and triggering an automatic tendency to imitate observed
behaviors. Media violence produces long-term effects via several types of learning
processes leading to acquisition of lasting and automatically accessible
aggressive scripts, interpretational schemas, and aggression supporting beliefs
about social behavior and by reducing individuals normal negative emotional
responses to violence.

So when it comes to violence we can extend to some forms of
violence just to clarify how some people apply this kind of violence influenced
by mass media:

1-   
Physical violence: physical violence is any intentional act causing injury or trauma to another person or animal by way of bodily contact.

2-   
Psychological violence: Psychological violence, though can be just as
devastating as physical violence. Psychological violence can affect the inner
thoughts and feelings as well as exert control over life, it leaves a feeling
of uncertain of the world around and unsafe .psychological violence can destroy
intimate relationships, friendships and even the one’s relationship with him or
herself. when psychological violence is applied to children impair their
development into a healthy adult

3-   
Verbal violence: a negative defining statement told to the victim or
about the victim, or by withholding any response, thereby defining the target
as non-existent. If the abuser does not immediately apologize and retract the
defining statement, the relationship may be a verbally abusive one. Anger underlies, motivates and
perpetuates verbally abusive behavior.

4-   
Sexual
violence: is a sexual act committed against
someone without that person’s freely given consent and will, Sexual violence is
a serious public health problem and has a profound short or long-term impact on
physical and mental health.

5-   
Culture
violence: is any aspect of a culture that can be
used to legitimize violence in its direct or structural form, when a person is harmed
as a result of practices that are part of his or her culture, religion or
tradition.

Going back to the influence of violence media we have to put
evidences of experiments and reports.

In 1958,   Bjorkqvist
exposed 5 to 6 year old Finnish children to either violent or nonviolent films.
Two raters who did not know which type of films the youngsters had seen then
observed the children playing together in a room , compared with the children
who had viewed the nonviolent film , those who had just watched the violent
film were rated much higher on physical assault , hitting other children ,
wresting , etc . As well as other types of aggression. The results for physical
assault were highly significant and the effect size was substantial.

Moreover, in 1987 Josephson randomly assigned 396 seven to
nine year old boys to watch either a violent or a nonviolent film before they
played a game of floor hockey in school. Observers who did not know what movie
any boy had seen recorded the number of times each boy physically attacked
another boy during the game. Physical attack was defined to include hitting,
elbowing or shoving another player to the floor, as well as tripping, kneeing,
pilling hair, and other assaultive behaviors that would be penalized in hockey
(the only verbal act included in the measure was insulting another player with
abusive name) . One added element in this study was that a specific cue that
had appeared in the violent film (a walki-talki) was carried by the hockey
referees in some conditions. This particular cue presumably reminded the boys
of the movie they had seen earlier. Josephson found that for aggressive boys
(those who scored above average on a measure of aggressiveness). The
combination of seeing a violent film and seeing the movie associated cue
stimulated significantly more assaultive behavior than any other combination of
film and cue . the effect size was moderate.

The exposure to media violence increases the physical assault.

Although witnessed violence can evoke aggression in people
who are not highly emotionally aroused at the time , several experiments have
shown that emotionally or physically excited viewers are especially apt to be
aggressively stimulated by violent scenes , In 1969 Geen and O’Neal made an
experiment , college men who had been provoked by another student and who were
also exposed to loud noise shocked their provocateur significantly more
intensely after they had watched a film of prizefight than after they had seen
a movie of a track meet. The effect size was quite large and seemed to be
accentuated by the viewers’ noise generated excitement. This study has been
replicated with variations of film content and provocation with essentially
identical results.

Exposure to media violence can cause immediate increases in
aggressive thoughts and tolerance for aggression in both children and older
youth.

In 1975 Thomas and Drabman in a study with young children,
youngsters shown a brief violent film clip were slower to call an adult to
intervene when they saw two younger children fighting than were peers who
had watched a neutral film. The single violent clip appeared to make the
children more tolerant of aggression. At least temporarily.

The
amount of television and films violence young people regularly watch affects
the physical aggression, verbal aggression, and aggressive thoughts of them .

In
1972 Mcleod , Atkins and Chaffe studied the correlations between ” aggressive
behavioral delinquency ” and viewing of Television violence in samples of Wisconsin
and Maryland high school and junior high school students. They found
significant correlations ranging from 17 to 28 for both males and females.

Frequent
viewing of violence in the media is associated with comparatively high levels
of aggressive behavior.

In
late 1970s,  Huesmann and his colleagues
began a longitudinal study of the effect of Television violence in five
countries. Representative samples of middle class youth in each country were
examined at three times as they grew from 6 to 8 or from 8 to 11 years of age.
Aggression was assessed by peer nominations in response to questions about
physical and verbal behaviors, among other things. The cross sectional
correlations between aggression and overall exposure to TV violence were
positive and small to moderate in all countries, with significant correlations
being obtained for both boys and girls in the United States. However, the
extent to which earlier viewing of television violence predicted later
aggression varied substantially between genders and among countries. In the
United States, girls’ viewing of television violence had a significant effect
equals 17, on their later aggression even after taking into account their early
level of aggression. The boys samples in the United States Television violence
alone did not predict later aggression, but those who had watched violent
programming frequently in their early childhood and who also reported a strong
identification with aggressive TV characters were generally regarded by their
peers as the most aggressive. Fifteen years after the study started, more than
300 participants in the US sample were reinterviewed when they were in their
early 20s; results from this 15-year follow up suggest a delayed effect of
media violence on serious physical aggression. The researchers found
significant correlations between television violence viewing during childhood
and a composite measure of aggression (physical, verbal and indirect) during
young adulthood for both men and women.

Turning
to the violence influence of music videos in 1995 Baron Gan and Hall reported a
study suggesting that antisocial lyrics without videos can affect behavior, but
the assessed behavior was not clearly aggressive. Male college students
listened to misogynous or neutral rap music , viewed three vignettes (neutral,
sexual and violent, assaultive) and then chose ones of the three vignettes to
be shown to an unknown female (who was actually a member of the research team)
those who had listened to the misogynous music were significantly more likely
than those in the neutral music condition to select the assaultive vignette.

Another
study examined how music videos affect adolescents’ aggressive thinking and
attitudes, American African adolescents were randomly assigned to an
experimental condition in which they viewed nonviolent rap music videos
containing sexually subordinate images of women or to a no music videos control
condition. When queried about their attitudes, the young women who saw the
demeaning videos indicated greater acceptance of teen dating violence that did
comparable women in the control condition.

One
of the most played games around the world are video games, when it comes to
video games that does not include children only also youth and adult are
addicted to video games, which opens another gate of the violence influence
through another channel of Media and technology in our life.

Several
randomized experiments have tested the effects of video famed specifically
selected to differ in violent content but no in arousal or effective
properties. Anderson al tested the effects of ten video games on physiological
arousal and several affect-relevant dimensions, including frustration,
difficulty, and enjoyment, and then selected two games that were similar on
these measures but different in violent content. In two subsequent experiments,
the violent game significantly increased aggressive behavior relative to the
nonviolent video games on aggression are independent of the games’ effects on
arousal or affect.

Studying
the correlation between time spent playing violent video games and aggression
is a must just to determine whether the frequency or the content that affects
the behavior.

Anderson
and Dill in 2000 created a composite measure of recent exposure to violent
video games, and correlated it with college students’ self-reported acts of
aggressive delinquent behavior in the past year (hitting or threatening other
students, attacking someone with the idea of seriously hurting or killing him
or her, participating in gangs fights, throwing  objects at other people) the overall
correlation between exposure to violent video games and violent behavior was
significant. The magnitude of the association decreased but remained
significant when analyses controlled for antisocial personality, gender, and
total time spent playing any type of video games.

Observation
affects the behavior cause according to observational learning theory, the
likelihood that an individual will acquire an observed behavior is increased
when the model performing the behavior is similar to or attractive to the
viewer, the viewer identifies with the model, the context is realistic, and the
viewed behavior is followed by rewarding consequences. A child immediate
imitation of observed behaviors would probably be the simplest example of
observational learning though some scholars would suggest that there should be
a lag before the imitation occurs for it to be called learning.

The
influence of violence mass media nowadays is a big problem that concerns not
only the scientist but also the public as a fear of what is coming and
affecting generations, how this world wide important point turn the future more
than it is turning the present , because of the great opened gate to media and
the acceptance of its good and its bad we are more in danger , the negativity
keeps on getting bigger and bigger every day due to the lack of control .

We
introduced some of the meanings of psychological influence, media success
invading and changing life, violence and its effects then studies with proved
experiments as an evidence of the influence of media violence on youth and life
in general.

We
live in a generation of not being in love, and not being together, but we sure
make it feel like we are together.

 

 

Reference:

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/happiness-in-world/201505/the-power-influence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_influence

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2003.pspi_1433.x