Christopher Layton and David Hansen
ABSTRACT
This article reports the results of a three sample follow-up quantitative study involving 588 participants. Those sampled were students of three institutions of higher education, namely: Brigham Young University, Illinois State University and Texas Christian University. The three samples involved three different religious and non-religious affiliated institutions to evaluate the impact of religious affiliation on mediation strategies and self-censorship in mass media viewing choices. We used a 47-point, cross-sectional survey instrument to operationalize our hypotheses. Surveys were administered by faculty members at each of the universities and by members of our research team to each class. We discovered significant relationships between gender and mass media viewing habits and attitudes toward mediation strategies. In addition, there were some clear yet surprising results concerning religious affiliation and parental mediation strategies and the efficacy of those strategies.
The Influence of Gender and Religion in Parental Mediation: Attitudes and Self-censorship
According to Albiniak’s (2003) study on sexual material in the media, there has been a tremendous influx in the amount of explicit content and conversation in everyday television programming viewed by children and adolescents. Similarly, Brown and Hayes (2001) note an increase in the amount of violent media viewed by young people. They further note in their work that parents have been increasingly concerned by such trends in media content. Parents have good reason to be concerned according to a recent publication by The Future of Children (2002). In a content analysis of television viewed by young children, this organization discovered that the average child before graduating from elementary school has seen 100,000 acts of violence on television. This number doubles before the child has graduated from high school. Due to this notable upsurge in sexual and violent behavior viewed by youth, parents have taken a more active role in determining what their children view on television (Atkins et al., 1989).
PARENTAL MEDIATION
Over the last two decades there has been a general increase in the public discourse of parental mediation strategies, because of this rise in parental concern for their children’s viewing habits. In like manner, much research has been done to study the strategies, motivating factors and effects of parental mediation on young persons’ viewing behaviors of and attitudes toward objective material in television programming (Austin, 1993; Nathanson, 2001; Nathanson & Botta, 2003; Nathanson, et al., 2002; Valkenburg, et al., 1999; Warren, et al., 2002).
As defined by Nathanson (1999), “Mediation has been conceptualized as a three-dimensional construct encompassing…talking with children about television…setting rules about children’s viewing behavior… [and] watching television with children.” Valkenburg et al. (1999) agree upon the same three basic categories of mediation strategies commonly implemented in the home. They also mention a fourth parental mediation strategy as originally identified by Bybee et al. (1982) known as “unfocused mediation.” However, in their study on mediation, Valkenburg et al. showed the ambiguity of such a category and the lack of validity in testing for such an elusive mediation strategy.
MEDIATION STRATEGIES
Some researchers have argued that mixing instructive, restrictive and coviewing mediation strategies is the most effective technique (Desmond, Hirsch, Singer, & Singer, 1987; Fujioka & Austin, 1999). However, these methods can also be employed separately as well, which makes category distinction difficult. Studies have found that the majority of parents surveyed reported using every kind of mediation strategy (Warren, Gerke, & Kelly, 2002). Whether used separately or individually, in this study the three main classifications of mediation will be used as classified by Nathanson (1999) namely, restrictive, instructive (or active), and coviewing mediation. Definitions of these same strategies can differ slightly from scholar to scholar, but, the same three categories appear consistently in academic discourse concerning parental mediation (Warren, et al., 2002).
The first subcategory of mediation strategies is restrictive mediation. This “include[s] parents’ rules for a child’s viewing and include[s] restrictions on the amount and/or time of viewing, forbidden content, and the use of viewing as a reward/punishment system” (Warren, et al., 2002). Restrictive mediation is the most common form of mediation. As cited by Austin (1993), a 1989 Gallup poll showed that parents were seven times more likely to turn the channel or forbid a program than to actually discuss offending content.
Researchers have shown that restrictive mediation used properly can positively affect the responsible decision-making of young media consumers. However, if used excessively this mediation strategy can have detrimental effects upon media choices in youth (Nathanson, 1999).
The second subcategory of mediation is instructive or active mediation, which involves discussing or clarifying media content with the child either during or after viewing (Valkenburg, et al., 1999). As is common with many other communication constructs, this mediation strategy takes on more than one form. Some studies have suggested a need to distinguish between positive active mediation, which endorses media content, and negative active mediation, which disapproves of media content (Austin, et al., 1999). Positive discussion and negative discussion in mediation are characterized by different motivations and behaviors. Parents engaging in one form of active mediation are likely to engage in the other, but some parents use one or the other active mediation style exclusively (Austin, et al., 1999). As illustrated in their 2002 study about parental mediation, Nathanson et al. showed that parents were less likely to participate in active mediation when dealing with sexual content than with violent content. This should come as no surprise, however, due to the social inhibitions associated with discussing sexual content with children.
Active mediation has shown to foster positive effects in children’s and adolescents’ media literacy and responsible media use (Austin, 1993; Nathanson, 1999). Unfortunately, there have been no longitudinal studies done to evaluate the lasting effects of such mediation strategies.
The third mediation strategy is coviewing, which consists of “shared viewing with no discussion of content” (Warren, et al., 2002). Research indicates that coviewing can result in both positive influences, such as learning educational content, and negative consequences, such as learning violence from television (Nathanson, 2001). Researchers estimate that parents coview over half of the time while children watch television (Warren, et al., 2002).
RELIGIONS AND MEDIA USE
According to Sapp and Jones (1986), “historically, many philosophers and theologians have maintained that religious belief is the progenitor of moral judgment and moral conduct.” This was the theoretic basis of Hamilton and Rubin’s (1992) study on the influence of religion on television viewing habits. They found that conservatism in religious beliefs correlated strongly and negatively with viewing of “sexually oriented” material. In addition, they found that this relationship seemed to hold true for all offensive media content (violence, sexual content and offensive language) and religious conservatives.
Warren (2001) defines religions as interpretive communities. In her study, Warren focused on Southern Baptists; however, she makes the assertion that religions in general are examples of interpretive communities because of an authoritative dictating of theological or core belief-based interpretations shared by the congregation.
In like manner, Lindlof (2002) notes that religious organizations draw upon common core principles to conduct media viewing decisions. This makes religious organizations an ideal population to study interpretive communities and the media.
In her work concerning Christians and the media, Buddenbaum (2001) notes the strong relationship between the theological teachings and media uses among three religious groups. She compartmentalizes Christians into three perspectives on media use, namely: Catholics, Mainline Protestants and Conservative Protestants. Because these three groups differ in core beliefs, they naturally, view media in differing ways as well, according to Buddenbaum (2001).
CATHOLIC PERSPECTIVE
Until the late 1960s, Roman Catholics were told which movies, books and television programs were inappropriate through their ecclesiastically endorsed Index of Forbidden Books (Buddenbaum, 2001). Today, the Catholic perspective is still heavily influenced by church leaders. However, Buddenbaum notes that these leaders are taking a much more participatory stance on media literacy and encouraging members to derive meaning from media consistent with “Catholic social teachings” and to shun productions opposite in nature (Buddenbaum, 2001). It would seem from this type of a shift from ecclesiastically restrictive mediation to participatory, instructive mediation, Catholic parents would become more involved in instructive mediation in the home with their children.
PROTESTANT PERSPECTIVE
In Buddenbaum’s (2001) study, she divides Protestants into two groups, Conservative and Mainline Protestants. She noted that because there are over 100 “old line” or Mainline Protestant churches it is more difficult to unify their beliefs when compared with Roman Catholics. Yet, Mainline Protestants are shallowly similar in their codes of belief and they collectively have “different philosophical and theological underpinnings” as compared to the other two groups (Buddenbaum, 2001).
The major theologically differentiating factor between the Mainline Protestants and the other two groups is their belief in church authority. Although they share beliefs in God, Jesus Christ and other gospel doctrines, they do not believe in the sovereignty of ecclesiastical leadership. This plays an enormous role in their media consumption practices, in that each individual is responsible for his or her own guidelines for right and wrong media decisions. Buddenbaum discusses their activity in media literacy programs. Yet, because of their lack of unified, core beliefs from which they derive meaning and embrace or shun media programs, they tend to develop personal systems, which are less doctrinally and more socially based. On the other hand, Mainline Protestants share common theological threads regarding the existence of good and evil, deity and personal responsibility which makes them a viable group to study as an interpretive community (Buddenbaum, 2001).
Although Conservative Protestants share common theological ties with the Mainline Protestants, their perspective on media use and ecclesiastical leaders’ authority differs greatly (Buddenbaum, 2001). According to Buddenbaum, Conservative Protestants rely greatly upon ecclesiastic leaders’ decisions and guidelines to dictate codes of conduct to them. Because of this authoritative difference, leaders of Conservative Protestant groups tend to participate more in rule-setting and other ecclesiastical, restrictive mediation according to Buddenbaum (2001). As a result, one would expect members of such religious groups to participate in similar parental mediation strategies.
Something of note in Buddenbaum and Stout’s observations of Conservative Protestants is that their intolerance of current media content has driven them to create contemporary “hybrid” media outlets. These mass media outlets combine the religious rhetoric of their creeds with the current mass media outlets such as television sitcoms, talk shows and popular music (Buddenbaum, 2001; Stout, 2001). Although this does not illustrate a specific connection to parental mediation strategies within the religious group, it may be a confounding factor in studies concerning types of and amounts of media consumed.
LDS PERSPECTIVE
Because the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is neither a Protestant nor Catholic Church, it is necessary to place it into a separate group because of organizational and theological differences. Theologically, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints shares similar beliefs with Roman Catholics about the authority of divinely appointed ecclesiastical leaders. They also believe in the divinity and practical application of the scriptures as do the Conservative Protestants (WWW.LDS.ORG, 2004). For this reason, in Buddenbaum’s (2001) study the LDS perspective was included with the Conservative Protestant perspective. However, these differences necessitate a separate group for the LDS perspective.
In Stout’s work entitled “Protecting the Family: Mormon Teachings About Mass Media,” he writes of the recent counsel of LDS ecclesiastical leaders “…to protect their families from the potentially harmful effects of the mass media” (Stout, 1996, 86). Church leaders have encouraged a variety of mediation styles within the family including the afore-mentioned styles of restrictive, instructive and coviewing mediation (Stout 1996). In a well-known article within an LDS periodical known as the Ensign, church President Ezra Taft Benson counseled the youth and general body of the church to not “…see R-rated movies or vulgar videos or participate in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive, or pornographic” (Benson, 1986, 45). Further evidence of such instruction is found in an Ensign article entitled, “Making the Most of TV” (pp. 70-71), in which LDS church leaders support and offer the following ten instructive points to assist parents and individuals in television mediation:
1. Apply “selective viewing”
2. Limit the amount of time watching television
3. Turn off objectionable programs
4. Watch “wholesome” and “educational” programs
5. Discuss programs with children
6. Teach children critical viewing skills
7. Turn off programs that reflect values inconsistent with church teachings
8. Turn off programs that are violent
9. Use TV as a springboard for reading
10. Develop a personal perspective about TV
Within these suggestions, one can find examples of each of the three approaches to parental mediation.
Since its early years in the Salt Lake valley, the church has often been known for its use of restrictive mediation with its members, but it is rarely cited for its use and recommendation of other mediation practices such as the above-listed suggestions (Stout 1996).
PARENTING AND MEDIATION STYLES’ LASTING EFFECTS ON CHILDREN
Although a substantial amount of research has been done on the immediate effects of parental mediation styles upon children and adolescents in the home, there is a general lack of research into the longitudinal effects of mediation styles on adolescents’ media choices made at the college level. In a recent study by Nathanson and Botta (2003) about parental mediation strategies and body image issues in young women, they discovered a dichotomy between the attitudes and decisions of adolescents living in their parents’ homes and those who were living independently in a college setting. The results of their study showed a possible delayed onset of parental mediation effects. In fact, there was a marked difference between the attitudes and personal behaviors of the adolescents living in their parents’ homes and those who were in college (Nathanson and Botta, 2003). Similar relationships between perceived parenting strategies and college students’ behavior have been shown in a recent study done by Marsiglia (2002). In her study, she found that parenting strategies have a longitudinal effect upon children’s behavior, which is the basis for this study about the lasting effects of perceived parental mediation strategies on personal media choices.
As is clearly the case, there is a need for additional research concerning the longitudinal effects of parental mediation strategies upon adolescents and children. Nathanson and Botta’s findings provide a solid base for a study relating to longitudinal effects of mediation strategies. However, many factors need to be investigated while considering such effects, such as: which parental mediation strategies yield the highest levels of self-censorship? How do religious affiliations affect parental mediation strategy use and effectiveness? Certainly, there is a relationship between parenting strategies and learned behaviors in youth as Marsiglia noted in her study. This study will further establish some of these relationships in college students with relation to their perceived parental mediation strategies. In previous studies, gender has shown significant differences in relation to parental mediation strategies and their effects, so they will be accounted for as well in this study.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES
H1: Males and females will differ in terms of reported parental mediation style.
H2: Males will show less self-censorship than females.
H3: Subjects’ reported parental mediation styles will differ based on religious affiliation.
H4: Subjects’ self-censorship will differ based on religious affiliation.
H5: Individuals who report greater instructive mediation by their parents will exercise greater self-censorship in media consumption than individuals who report less instructive mediation by their parents.
H6: Individuals who report greater restrictive mediation by their parents will exercise greater self-censorship in media consumption than individuals who report less restrictive mediation by their parents.
H7: Individuals who report greater coviewing by their parents will exercise less self-censorship than individuals who report less coviewing by their parents.
H8: Subjects who report greater use of instructive mediation by their parents will also report more positive attitudes toward instructive mediation.
H9: Subjects who report greater use of restrictive mediation by their parents will also report more positive attitudes toward restrictive mediation.
H10: Subjects who report greater use of coviewing by their parents will also report more positive attitudes toward coviewing.
METHOD
Sample
Given the exploratory nature of this survey and the difficulty in contacting a truly representative sample, our study used a convenience sample at three universities: Illinois State University, Brigham Young University, and Texas Christian University. The sample was comprised of 588 university students. Obviously we must be careful not to make inappropriate generalizations because our research is based on a non-probability sample; however, this is not the first study that has used non-probability sampling to look at the impact of mediation (Nathanson & Botta, 2003). We attempted to make our sample as representative as possible under the circumstances by administering surveys to large general education classes where we could find students from many different backgrounds and class-statuses.
We used a 47-point, cross-sectional survey instrument to operationalize our hypotheses. Surveys were administered by faculty members at each of the universities and by members of our research team to each class.
The average age is about a year less than the national average age for college students, 20.5 years (ECAC, 1997). This is not surprising because many of the students who attend general studies classes are younger. In fact, over 80 percent of our respondents were freshmen or sophomores. Our results may also be influenced by the fact that 60 percent of our subjects were female. We have no explanation for why more females responded to our survey than men, but we recognize that this may have an impact on our results. The fact that the portion of our sample that came from Brigham Young University is larger than the number of students from the other two schools is less consequential than might be expected because religious affiliation was intentionally considered as a variable in our study.
Measures
Fifteen questions adapted from Valkenberg et al. (1999) were used to operationalize the mediation styles used by subject’s parents. The internal consistency of the five variables used to measure instructive mediation was adequate (Alpha = .86). These five variables were combined to create a total instructive mediation score. This total score was used to assess levels of instructive parental mediation. The internal consistency of the five variables used to measure restrictive mediation was also adequate (Alpha = .87). Again, these five variables were combined to create a total restrictive mediation score. This total score was used to assess levels of restrictive parental mediation. The internal consistency of the five variables used to measure coviewing was also adequate (Alpha = .89). These five variables were combined to create a total coviewing score. This total score was used to assess levels of coviewing as we tested our hypotheses.
Self-censorship, the extent to which respondents limit their own exposure to television and movies, proved difficult to operationalize. Because different religious groups and individuals have differing standards and expectations about the morality of media content, we decided that the most unbiased measurement of self-censorship available to us involving movies would be using the MPAA rating system. We asked respondents how often they watched R-rated and NC-17-rated videos. Due to issues involving approval of our survey at Brigham Young University, most of the Latter-day Saint subjects were not asked about NC-17-rated or “adult” movies; however, it is unlikely that subjects who did not watch R-rated movies would watch many NC-17-rated or “adult” movies. This means that for questions involving these two variables, at the 95 percent level the sampling error is 5.82 percent rather than 4.04 percent as for other variables. We also asked how often respondents walked out of a movie or turned off a television show that contained material that made them feel uncomfortable and how often they watched television that their parents would not approve of. These two measures of self-censorship used a 5-point Likert scale (1 Never, 2 Rarely, 3 Sometimes, 4 Often, and 5 Almost always).
Attitude towards the instructive mediation style was measured by two, 5-point Likert scale questions. Students were asked how much they agreed with the following statements: “The best way for parents to influence their children’s TV and movie watching is to explain the motives, morality, or circumstances of TV and movie content,” and “When my parents explained media content, I understood it better.”
Attitude towards the restrictive mediation style was measured by the four, 5-point Likert scale questions. Students were asked how much they agreed with the following statements: “The best way for parents to influence their children’s TV and movie watching is to restrict what children can watch;” “I feel that my parents were too strict in regulating my TV and movie watching;” “I feel that no one should control the extent of my media consumption (TV, movies, internet, etc.) but myself;” and “I feel that parents should control the amount of media that their children watch.”
Attitude towards coviewing was measured by two, 5-point Likert-scale questions. Students were asked how much they agreed with the following statements: “Just watching TV with children can help children understand media content better,” and “The best way for parents to influence their children’s TV and movie watching is to watch with them.”
RESULTS
Hypothesis 1: Gender and Mediation Style
We had hypothesized that males would differ from females in terms of reported parental mediation style. As shown in Table 1, our results suggest that females were more likely to report higher levels of all three parental mediation styles. Females (M = 15.27) reported higher levels of instructive mediation than males (M = 13.85) and the difference was statistically significant (t = 4.17, p < .001). Females (M = 16.64) reported higher levels of restrictive mediation than males (M = 15.89) but the difference was not statistically significant (t = 1.83, p < .069). Females (M = 18.33) reported higher levels of coviewing than males (M = 16.21) and the difference was statistically significant (t = 6.42, p < .001). It seems possible that females report higher levels of parental mediation in general, but these results also suggest that parents may be more likely to use coviewing or instructive mediation with female children.
Hypothesis 2: Gender and Self-censorship
We had originally hypothesized that male subjects would be less likely than female subjects to exercise self-censorship. As shown in Table 2, males (M = 2.11) were not necessarily more likely than females (M = 2.26) to walk out of a movie that contained material that made them uncomfortable because the relationship was not statistically significant (t = 1.55, p < .13). However, males (M = 3.36) were less likely than females (M = 3.57) to report that they would turn off material that made them uncomfortable when watching TV alone and the difference was statistically significant (t = 2.12, p < .05). Males (M = 2.45) were also more likely than females (M = 2.27) to watch television or movies that their parents would not approve of (t = 2.17, p < .05). Males (M = 2.53) were also more likely than females (M = 2.89) to watch R-rated movies, and the difference was statistically significant (t=3.17, p < .01). Males (M = 2.24) were also more likely than females (M = 1.86) to watch NC-17-rated movies, and the difference was statistically significant (t = 2.602, p < .01). Males (M = 2.38) were also more likely than females (M = 1.91) to watch “adult” movies, and the difference was statistically significant (t = 2.97, p < .01). These results suggest that our hypothesis was correct: males exercise less self-censorship than females.
Hypothesis 3: Religion and Mediation Style
We had hypothesized that subjects’ reported parental mediation styles would differ based on religious affiliation. Our results suggest that religion does make a difference in terms of how subjects reported parental mediation. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) test found significant differences between religious groups in terms of reported coviewing (f = 8.09, p < .001). A Bonferroni post hoc analysis showed that Latter-day Saints (M = 16.57) reported lower levels of coviewing than Catholics (M = 18.59) and the difference was statistically significant (p < .01). It also showed that Latter-day Saints (M = 16.57) reported lower levels of coviewing than Protestants (M = 18.25) and the difference was statistically significant (p < .01). Another analysis of variance (ANOVA) test showed that religions differed in terms of how much television they watched as children (f = 20.03, p < .001). According to a Bonferroni post hoc analysis, Latter-day Saints (M = 2.51) reportedly watched less television as children than Catholics (M = 3.42), Protestants (M = 3.50), and respondents who were not religiously affiliated (M = 3.50) and these differences were all statistically significant at the .001 level. It is possible that Latter-day Saint’s tendency to watch less television than other religious groups explains part of the difference between Latter-day Saints and Catholics and Protestants in terms of coviewing. However, our results do not suggest a correlation between reported levels of television viewing as a child and coviewing (r = .062, p < .069), so it is possible that Latter-day Saints really are less likely to engage in coviewing than Catholics or Protestants.
An analysis of variance (ANOVA) test found significant differences between religious groups in terms of reported restrictive mediation (f = 2.43, p < .05), but the post hoc analysis did not reveal which differences were significant. However, independent samples t-tests showed significant differences between religious groups in terms of reported restrictive mediation. Protestants (M = 17.18) reported higher levels of restrictive mediation than respondents who were not religiously affiliated (M = 14.79) and the difference was statistically significant (t = 2.63, p < .01). Protestants (M = 17.18) reported higher levels of restrictive mediation than Catholics (M = 15.59) and the difference was statistically significant (t = 2.28, p < .05).
An analysis of variance (ANOVA) test did not find significant differences between religious groups in terms of reported instructive mediation. However, an independent samples t-test did find that Catholics (M = 15.55) reported higher levels of instructive parental mediation than Latter-day Saints (M = 14.33) and the difference was statistically significant (t = 2.33, p < .05). Overall, our data supports our hypothesis that religion is related to parental mediation style.
Hypothesis 4: Religion and Self-censorship
We had also hypothesized that reported self-censorship would differ based on religious affiliation. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) test found significant differences between religious groups in terms of how frequently respondents watch NC-17-rated movies (f = 6.13, p < .001). A Bonferroni post hoc analysis showed that Protestants (M = 1.71) watched NC-17-rated movies less than Catholics (M = 2.31) and the difference was statistically significant (p < .01). This post hoc test also showed that Protestants (M = 1.71) watched NC-17-rated movies less than respondents who were not religiously affiliated (M = 2.31) and the difference was statistically significant (p < .05).
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests showed differences between religions in terms of how often respondents watched R-rated movies (f = 273.75, p < .001). A Bonferroni post hoc analysis showed that Latter-day Saints (M = 1.70) watched fewer R-rated movies than Catholics (M = 3.96), Protestants (M = 3.80), and respondents who were not religiously affiliated (M = 4.06) and these differences were all statistically significant at the .001 level. Another analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests showed differences between religions in terms of how often respondents reported that they watched television that their parents would not approve of (f = 6.92, p < .001). A Bonferroni post hoc analysis showed that Latter-day Saints (M = 2.16) watched less television that their parents would not approve of than Catholics (M = 2.63) and Protestants (M = 2.55), and both of these differences were statistically significant at the .01 level. Another analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests showed differences between religions in terms of how often respondents reported that they turned off the television that contained material that made them uncomfortable while alone (f = 22.65 p < .001). A Bonferroni post hoc analysis showed that Latter-day Saints (M = 3.88) were more likely to turn off the television that contained material that made them uncomfortable while alone than Catholics (M = 2.85), Protestants (M = 3.24), and respondents who were not religiously affiliated (M = 2.84) and these differences were all statistically significant at the .001 level. Another analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests showed differences between religions in terms of how often respondents reported that they walked out of movies that contained material that made them uncomfortable (f = 19.54, p < .001). A Bonferroni post hoc analysis showed that Latter-day Saints (M = 2.56) were more likely to walk out of a movie that contained material that made them uncomfortable than Catholics (M = 1.59), Protestants (M = 1.91), and respondents who were not religiously affiliated (M = 1.63) and these differences were all statistically significant at the .001 level. These results support our hypothesis that religion can be related to self-censorship.
Hypothesis 5: Instructive Mediation and Self-censorship
We had hypothesized that reported instructive mediation by parents would be positively correlated with self-censorship. Our results indicate that instructive mediation by parents may be related to self-censorship under limited circumstances. Instructive parental mediation was positively related to turning off the TV when watching material that makes a subject uncomfortable (r = .15, p < .001). For female respondents, a significant relationship appears to exist between instructive parental mediation and walking out of a movie that made them uncomfortable (r = .18, p < .001), but this was not true for males. Our data does not suggest a relationship between instructive parental mediation and how often respondents watched R-rated movies, NC-17-rated movies, “adult” movies, or television or movies that the subjects’ parents would not approve of. Our results provide only limited support for our hypothesis.
Hypothesis 6: Restrictive Mediation and Self-censorship
We had hypothesized that reported restrictive mediation by parents would be positively correlated with self-censorship. The results of our study indicate that restrictive parental mediation could be related to higher levels of self-censorship. Restrictive parental mediation was positively related to turning off the TV when watching material that makes the subject uncomfortable (r = .213, p < .001) and to walking out of a movie that contained material that made the subject uncomfortable (r = .157, p < .01). Restrictive parental mediation was negatively related to watching NC-17-rated movies (r = -.141, p < .01). For males, restrictive parental mediation was inversely related to watching R-rated movies (r = -.202, p < .01). These results indicate that, in accordance with our hypothesis, restrictive parental mediation can be associated with higher self-censorship.
Hypothesis 7: Coviewing and Self-censorship
Originally, we had hypothesized that coviewing by parents would be negatively correlated with self-censorship. Our results indicate a limited relationship between coviewing and self-censorship may exist, but this relationship is likely to be gender specific. For females, coviewing was positively related to watching R-rated movies (r = .186, p < .001). For males, coviewing was positively related to turning off the TV when watching material that makes the subject uncomfortable (r = .159, p < .01). Our data provides only limited evidence for a relationship between coviewing and self-censorship.
Hypothesis 8: Instructive Mediation Attitudes toward Instructive Mediation
Out initial hypothesis stated that instructive parental mediation would be positively related to positive attitude toward the instructive mediation style. Our research shows that instructive parental mediation is positively related to reporting that the best way for parents to influence their children’s TV and movie watching is to explain the motives, morality, or circumstances of TV and movie content (r = .328, p < .001). Instructive parental mediation is also positively related to reporting that parental explanations of media content helped subjects understand better (r = .417, p < .01). When we controlled for reporting other mediation styles and attitudes toward different mediation styles these relationships were weakened only slightly. Gender and religion also appear not to impact these relationships. These results appear to confirm our hypothesis.
Hypothesis 9: Restrictive Mediation Attitudes toward Restrictive Mediation
We had hypothesized that restrictive parental mediation would be positively related to positive attitude toward the restrictive mediation style. Restrictive parental mediation was positively related to agreement that the best way for parents to influence their children’s TV and movie watching is to restrict what children can watch (r = .362, p < .001) and to agreement that parents should control the amount of media that their children watch (r = .322, p < .001). In agreement with our hypothesis, restrictive parental mediation was inversely related to agreement with the following statement: “I feel that no one should control the extent of my media consumption (TV, movies, internet, etc.) but myself” (r = -.287, p < .001). However, restrictive mediation was also positively related to subjects agreeing that their own parents were too strict in regulating TV and movie watching (r = .204, p < .001). This may indicate that reported restrictive mediation by parents is related to positive attitude toward restrictive mediation itself, but that some resentment toward parents exists.
Gender, attitude toward other mediation styles, and reporting other mediation style use by parents do not appear to have any sizeable impact on these relationships; however, these results do differ based on religious affiliation. For those subjects who were not religiously affiliated, only the relationship between restrictive mediation and agreeing that their own parents were too strict in regulating TV and movie watching (r = .416, p < .01). For Catholic respondents each of these four relationships has a slightly stronger relationship, and for Latter-day Saint respondents each of these relationships was slightly weaker. For Protestant respondents, there was not a statistically significant relationship between restrictive mediation and agreeing that their own parents were too strict in regulating TV and movie watching, but the other relationships remain with very little change. The results suggest that our hypothesis was valid, but that gender and religion may be mediating factors.
Hypothesis 8: Coviewing Attitudes toward Coviewing
We had hypothesized that coviewing by parents would be positively related to positive attitude toward coviewing. Coviewing by parents was positively related with agreeing that just watching TV with children can help them understand media content better (r = .205, p < .001) and with agreeing that the best way for parents to influence their children’s TV and movie watching is to watch with them (r = .206, p < .001). These relationships weakened when we controlled for reporting other mediation styles and attitudes toward different mediation styles, but were still significant. This is not surprising because coviewing by parents is positively related to instructive parental mediation (r = .432, p < .001). Gender does not appear to influence these relationships.
These results also differ on the basis of religious affiliation. For Catholics and subjects who were not religiously affiliated, there is not a significant relationship between coviewing by parents and agreeing that just watching TV with children can help them understand media content better. However, for subjects who were not religiously affiliated coviewing was more strongly related to agreeing that the best way for parents to influence their children’s TV and movie watching is to watch with them (r = .333, p < .05), and also for Catholics coviewing was more strongly related to agreeing that the best way for parents to influence their children’s TV and movie watching is to watch with them (r = .271, p < .05). For Protestants, the data suggest stronger relationships with coviewing by parents being positively related with agreeing that just watching TV with children can help them understand media content better (r = .317, p < .001) and with agreeing that the best way for parents to influence their children’s TV and movie watching is to watch with them (r = .343, p < .001). For Latter-day Saints the data suggest weaker relationships, with coviewing by parents being positively related with agreeing that just watching TV with children can help them understand media content better (r = .120, p < .05) and with agreeing that the best way for parents to influence their children’s TV and movie watching is to watch with them (r = .137, p < .01). The fact that these relationships are weaker for Latter-day Saints may be explained by the fact that Latter-day Saints reported lower levels of coviewing overall. Our results suggest that our hypothesis was correct, but that religion may be a mediating factor.
DISCUSSION
This study found gender differences in reported attitudes toward parental mediation and self-censorship. Males tend to exercise less self-censorship than females. This supports research by Hamilton and Rubin (1992). Gender appears to impact not only what mediation style parents used but also the relationship that mediation style has with eventual behaviors and attitudes. In all further research examining the possible impact of mediation on children’s attitudes and self-censorship levels, gender should be taken into account.
Although overall our data supports our hypothesis that religion is related to parental mediation style many of our results are surprising. Latter-day Saints are less likely to engage in coviewing and no more likely to engage in instructive or restrictive mediation than other religious groups, but they are statistically more likely to exercise self-censorship than other religious groups. This is especially surprising when our results also suggest that higher levels of restrictive parental mediation are associated with higher self-censorship levels. This suggests that although religion and mediation style are related, they have independent impacts on self-censorship. It seems clear that religion and parental mediation may have an influence on self-censorship, but that other factors are involved. The results also suggest that under certain circumstances religion may be a more reliable predictor of self-censorship, as in the case of Latter-day Saints.
Respondents seem to agree with the mediation style used by their parents. Furthermore, religion seems to be a mediating factor in determining some attitudes towards the mediation styles used by parents. The fact that subjects who were not religiously affiliated did not seem to agree with restrictive parental mediation when religiously affiliated subjects did suggests that a lurking variable may exist. For example, religion may instill greater respect for parents that translates into agreement with mediation styles employed by parents. Future research should be done to compare religious subjects to nonreligious subjects in order to better understand why religiously affiliated groups show agreement with the mediation style used by their parents when subjects who are not religiously affiliated do not.
The results of this study relate to several different theories of communication. For example, the results of our study may have important implications for cultural theories of communication. The study suggests that subculture may be a factor in mediating the effects of both parents and media, and potentially counteracts what humanists have been arguing for decades—that social science ignores the influence of culture and attitudes on effects (Williams, 1974).
The fact that different groups exhibit different trends in self-censorship may be explained by a theory put forth by Rokeach (1967) about attitudes, beliefs, and values. Rokeach suggested that individuals have a highly organized system of varying beliefs. Within this system, beliefs may be general or specific, important or unimportant. Beliefs that are important to an individual are core beliefs that are relatively unchangeable. Other, less important beliefs are peripheral. Rokeach argued that attitudes are groups of beliefs that are organized around a specific object. It is possible that while each of the religious groups we studied had some belief or doctrine that influenced their self-censorship and attitudes toward mediation styles, the groups varied in terms of the centrality of those beliefs in their belief system. Further research should be considered examining not only the extent of beliefs and attitudes, but also how central these beliefs are to the belief systems of individuals.
The fact that the relationship between coviewing and self-censorship may be gender specific may have important implications for Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon, which was later adopted by Foucault (McKinlay & Starkey, 1998). Essentially, both the panopticon and coviewing operate on the principle that behavior is moderated when someone else is watching. Although coviewing is not entirely panoptic because children know when parents are watching, it may have the same effect. When research is finally dedicated to understanding not only how but also why mediation styles have the impact that they do, our research suggests that gender should be examined as a potential confounding variable.
Parental mediation may also have important implications for cultivation theory studies, because parents mediate the exposure and impact of television. Our research also suggests that religion and gender are also mediating factors in how media are perceived. Cultivation researchers may need to consider not only religion and gender, but also parental mediation influences in assessing cultivation effects on children.
Our results suggest that religion and parental mediation style are related closely enough that future researchers may want to consider including using both parental mediation and religion in studying impact on attitudes and behaviors.
REFERENCES
- Albiniak, P. (2003, February) More Sex on TV, But Safer, Too. Broadcasting & Cable, Vol. 133, Issue 6. American Academy of Pediatrics Web Site. (2003). “Some Things You Should Know About Media Violence and Media Literacy.” Retrieved on August 3, 2003 from http://www.aap.org/advocacy/childhealthmonth/media.htm.
- Atkin, D. J., Heeter, C., & Baldwin, T.F. (1989). How presence of cable affects parental mediation of TV viewing. Journalism Quarterly. 66, 557-563, 578.
- Austin, E. W. (1993, Spring). “Exploring the effects of active parental mediation on television content,” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 37, 2, 147-159.
- Austin, E. W., Bolls, P., Fujioka, Y., & Engelbertson, J. (1999, Spring). “How and why parents take on the tube,” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43, 2, 175-193.
- Ballard, M.R., “Be Strong in the Lord, and in the Power of His Might.” (2002, March). Retrieved August 3, 2003 from http://www.lds.org/broadcast/ces030302/transcript/0,12845,395,00.html
- Benson, E. T. (1986, May). To the youth of the noble birthright. Ensign, 43-46.
- Brigham Young University Website. (2003). Retrieved August 3, 2003 from http://admissions.byu.edu/faq.html#11
- Brown, D., & Hayes, T. (2001). Family attitudes toward television. In J. Bryant & J. A. Bryant (Eds.), Television and the American family (2nd ed., pp.111–135). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Buddenbaum, J. A. (2001). Christian perspectives on mass media. In Daniel A. Stout & Judith M. Buddenbaum (Eds.) Religion and Popular Culture. (pp. 81-94). Ames: Iowa State Press.
- Bybee, C., Robinson, D., & Turow, J. (1982). Determinants of parental guidance of children’s television viewing for a special subgroup: mass media scholars. Journal of Broadcasting. 26, 296-710.
- Christopher, F. S., Fabes R. A., & Milson, P. M. (1989, April). Family television viewing: implications for family life education. Family Relations, 38, 2, 210-214.
- Desmond, R. J., Hirsh, B., Singer, D., & Singer, J. (1987). Gender differences, mediation, and disciplinary styles in children’s responses to television. Sex Roles, 16, 375-389.
- Fujioka, Y., & Austin, E.W. (1999, May). The relationship of family communication patterns to parental mediation styles. Paper presented to the annual conference of the International Communication Association, San Francisco, CA.
- Lindlof, T. R. (2002). Interpretive community: An approach to media and religion. Journal of Media and Religion. 1(1), 61-74.
- Making the Most of TV. (1990, October). Ensign, 70-72.
- McKinlay, A. & Starkey, K. (1998). Foucault, Management and Organization Theory: From Panopticon to Technologies of Self. Sage publications: London.
- Nathanson, A.I., (1999). Identifying and explaining the relationship between parental mediation and children’s aggression. Communication Research, 26, 124-143.
- Nathanson, A. I., (2001). Parent and child perspectives on the presence and meaning of parental television mediation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 45, 2, 201-220.
- Nathanson & Botta. You have this one. I am unsure the date of publication. It has the information about parental mediation strategies carrying over to College students’ behavior.
- Perry, L.T. “The importance of the family.” (2003, May). Ensign, 40.
- Risk heightened by exposure to violence in the community, at school and in the media. (2002, Summer/Fall). The Future of Children. 12, 2.
- Rokeach, M. (1967, Winter). Attitude change and behavioral change. Public Opinion Quarterly. 30, 4, 529-541.
- Salkind, N. J., (2003). Exploring Research (5th Ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 192-214.
- Sears, D. O., & Freeman, J. L. (1967, Summer). Selective exposure to information: A critical review. Public Opinion Quarterly, 31, 2, 194-213.
- Steinberg, L. (2001). We know some things: Parent-adolescent relationships in retrospect and prospect. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 11, 1, 1-19.
- Stout, D.A. (2001). Beyond culture wars: An introduction to the study of religion and popular culture. In Daniel A. Stout & Judith M. Buddenbaum (Eds.) Religion and Popular Culture. (pp. 3-15). Ames: Iowa State Press.
- Stout, D. A. (1996). Protecting the family: Mormon teachings about mass media. In Daniel A. Stout & Judith M. Buddenbaum (Eds.), Religion and mass media: Audiences and adaptations. (pp. 85-99). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
- Valkenburg, P. M., Krcmar, M., Peeters, A. L., & Marseille, N. M. (1999). Developing a scale to assess three styles of television mediation: instructive mediation, restrictive mediation, and social coviewing. Journal of Broadcasting & ElectronicMedia, 43, 1, 52-67.
- Warren, R., Gerke, P., & Kelly, M. A. (2002). Is there enough time on the clock? Parental involvement and mediation of children’s television viewing. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46, 1, 87-111.
- Warren, H. (2001). Southern Baptists as audience and public: A cultural analysis of the Disney boycott. In Daniel A. Stout & Judith M. Buddenbaum (Eds.) Religion and Popular Culture. (pp. 169-185). Ames: Iowa State Press.