Cultivation hypothesis

"Gerbner tried to develop a new approach to the study of mass communications , focused on studying the process of mass communication as such." ^[8] The cultivation hypothesis, according to Miller, was not designed to study the specific effects of television (for example, children watching Superman try to fly by jumping out of the window), but rather the all-encompassing effect of television on how we see the world around us. ^[3] Hence the term “Cultivation Analysis”. The hypothesis is based on the following assumptions:

• Television is fundamentally different from other media. ^[9]

Researchers Gerbner, Gross, Morgan and Signorelli argued that if religion and upbringing previously had a greater influence on social trends, now television from infancy brings up in the viewer its predispositions and preferences that had previously been shaped by other sources. Thus, television acts as a "wholesale supplier of images, and a repetitive series of images and messages produced by television forms the main common symbolic medium. ^[10]

Thanks to its universal accessibility to the masses, television has become the “central cultural force of society.” ^[9]

• Television determines the way of thinking of society

Gerbner and Gross write that "in essence, the consciousness formed by television is reflected not so much in specific attitudes and opinions, as in basic life concepts and evaluation criteria on which the conclusions are based." Simply put, the realities created by television are not true. Gerbner noted that, on average, television has access to the viewer seven hours a day. While watching television offers a "systematic narrative." Gerbner argues that the main cultural functions of television are the stabilization of patterns of behavior and the cultivation of immutability. ^[9]

According to the observations of Gerbner, people are exposed to television on average 7 hours a day, which acts as a "centralized system of presenting information." ^[11] Gerbner argues that the main cultural function of television is to ensure the sustainability of social behavior models, as well as the cultivation of resistance to change. We live within the framework of the stories we tell, and the television provides us with these stories through news, dramas and advertising. ^[9] Thus, the various categories of television viewers, which together comprise the population of the United States (whether they are children from poor families from Georgia or members of women's university clubs from the west coast), begin to think similarly under the influence of television, as they receive the same information. All TV shows are based on similar, repetitive models, which are also called myths, “facts” or ideologies. The impact of such models over a sufficiently long period of time is likely to lead to "the firm rooting of the dominant orientations for most viewers." ^[2]

• The impact of television is limited

According to the Gerbnerian Ice Age analogy, “Just as a change in the average temperature of only a few degrees can lead to the ice age, or the election results can be resolved with a small margin in votes, so a relatively small, but pervasive influence can lead to significant changes. The scale of the impact is much less important than the direction of its sustainable impact. ” ^[12]

• Dynamic interaction takes place between television and the audience ^[2]

The degree of cultivation by spectators of models presented by television depends on a number of factors. Some viewers are more susceptible to cultivating effects due to their personal characteristics, characteristics of the social environment, cultural traditions, or even what they previously watched on television. ^[2] J. Gerbner and his colleagues explain the interaction in the following way: “Television can help determine, for example, how do you belong to a particular social group. This interaction of television and the viewer is a long process, starting in infancy and continuing until death ” ^[2] .

• All TV shows are quite homogeneous, and the viewers are not selective when watching them ^[2]

Researchers studying the phenomenon of cultivation, evaluate the impact of television on the amount of time that the viewer spends in front of the screen. In their opinion, different types of programs (cartoons, melodramas, detectives) are often built on the same narrative structures, which is reflected in the selection of characters, storytelling techniques and other aspects. In this sense, the content of the gear is uniform. The concept of indiscriminate viewing is based on the idea of ​​ritual or habitual viewing, that is, watching TV programs at a certain time, regardless of their content. ^[2]

The cultivation hypothesis suggests that the impact of television over time "cultivates" the perception of reality by the viewer. Gerbner and Gross argue that "television is a means of socialization for most people and standardizes their behavioral roles. Its function is defined by the word" inculturation . " ^[10] In his work, Gerbner drew attention to three concepts: institutions, communications and the public, which he tries to analyze In addition, Gerbner was less concerned about the effect of the cultivation on aggressive behavior and “more concerned that television influences the viewer's beliefs about the world around them, and the experiences associated with these cies. " ^[13]

“Herbner’s basic assumption was that the world on television would be perceived as real by people who abused watching television rather than people who were moderately watching television.” In other words, people who spend more time watching television perceive the world in accordance with the picture that television offers. ^[14]

Gerbner studied in detail the effects of television violence on viewers, since he believed that violence was the central message of television. Gerbner and his colleagues suggested that the violence on the screen directly influenced how Americans see the world around them, but they needed facts to confirm their hypothesis. Consequently, they measured the so-called “dramatic violence”, which Gerbner defined as “undisguised expression of violence or the threat of physical force as part of the plot”. ^[ten]

In 1968, Gerbner conducted a survey to prove the hypothesis. According to his results, Gerbner divided TV viewers into three categories: those who watched rarely (less than 2 hours a day), watched medium (2-4 hours a day), and watched often (more than 4 hours a day). He found that the beliefs of often-watched viewers are most consistent with what television depicts. ^[15]

Studies to test the cultivation hypothesis reflect the idea that frequent television viewing has an impact on psychosocial health. Those whom Gerbner classifies as “often watching” were much more likely to experience shyness, loneliness, and depression than those who spend less time on television (or maybe because they watch TV more because they are shy and / or alone) and / or depressive). This study also supports the view that media influence attitudes, values, and attitudes. But, unfortunately, due to the nature of the research, it is not possible to establish a direct link between television viewing and mental health. ^[sixteen]

Nevertheless, Uliu Katz, one of the adherents of the theory of use and satisfaction , argues that the media satisfy some of the needs of the audience, including the need for parasocial relationships and "feelings of friendship and emotional connection between the viewer and the media persona." ^[17]

In 1967, the project of cultural indicators began annual content analysis of television programs in prime time . The goal was to identify the most stable, common and repetitive images in terms of showing violence, family, gender roles, racial and ethnic stereotypes, professions and other realities of life over a long period of time ^[8]

Gerbner developed the cultivation hypothesis as one of the parts of a cultural indicator research project. The concept of cultural "indicator" was developed by Gerbner as a general concept of a social indicator. ^[five]

Analysis of the institutionalization process

The first part is known as an analysis of the process of institutionalization . This implies the study of the processes of production, management and distribution of media information, that is, it has been studied how decisions are made in the media, how media organizations operate. The second part of the study, known as the analysis of the message system, has been used since 1967 to track the most stable and common images in media content. This part of the study is connected with the concern of the researchers: why the media produce messages the way they do it. Researchers working in this direction seek to penetrate behind the scenes of media companies in order to understand their policies and practices. ^[five]

Message System Analysis

The analysis of the message system consists in the study of media images presented on television, for example, images of violence, sexes, minorities, certain professions. ^[18] As part of the study, the question was asked: which images, messages and facts, values ​​and lessons presented by the media are dominant? "Based on the analysis of the message system, cultivation researchers began to think about how people would think if all of their knowledge about any problems or phenomena was based on what television presented. ^[8] For more than two decades, the team of researchers of Gerbner randomly in the fall, she chose a week and recorded prime time television (from 8 to 11 pm). In addition, they conducted an analysis of Saturday and Sunday children's television programs (from 8 am to 2 pm). Then the team of researchers measured the overall level of violence, using a formula that included the rate of programs demonstrating violence, the frequency of violence in these programs, and the percentage of characters involved in the scenes of physical violence and murder.The study found that this annual rate was extremely stable and high. ^[5]

In addition, Gerbner analyzed a special type of scenes of violence - dramatic violence. Dramatic violence is an expression of physical strength, including the threat of pain and death to any character in the plot against his will. Although dramatic violence does not include verbal abuse, threat, or buffoonery, it includes cartoon violence, as in Pokemon and Coyote and Road Runner. The study conducted by Gerbner showed that the level of violence in the media, although it remains stable, is unevenly distributed among viewers, primarily by age categories. So, children and older people are more likely to face violence in the media than young people and middle-aged people. Gerbner also noted that minorities such as African Americans and Hispanics are victims in scenes of violence in the media more often than white Americans. Two other groups, which are also much more likely than other segments of the population, to become victims of violence are women and workers (blue collars). The ironic result of such a tendency for these social groups is a greater risk of becoming victims of violence in real life. ^[five]

Cultivation analysis

The final part of the study is a cultivation analysis. “The cultivation hypothesis analyzes how television content can affect viewers, especially individuals who spend a lot of time in front of the screen.” ^[five]

Since J. Gerbner considered violence to be the basis of television and understood that the level of television viewing differed among social groups, he wanted to find the so-called "cultivational differential". He used the term “cultivation differential” instead of the effect of media exposure, since the latter term implies a comparison between the states “before television exposure” and “after television exposure”. According to Gerbner, since television enters the lives of people from infancy, such a state as “before the television exposure” simply does not exist. ^[five]

It was the cultivation differential that Gerbner tried to discover in his research. Griffin defines the cultivation differential as the percentage difference between people who rarely and often watch television, relative to the number of answers to questions corresponding to the television picture of the world. ^[5] Gerbner sought to find out how often people who spent a significant amount of time in front of the screen were influenced by television and accepted the point of view that was offered to them on the screen. Gerbner was convinced that there is no “pre-TV” stage in human life. He argued that television influences a person’s life from birth. Gerbner focused his efforts on four aspects: 1. perceived chance to become a victim of violence, 2. fear of walking in the dark, 3. perceived activity of the police, 4. general distrust of people. According to the study, it became clear that the more a person watches TV, the more he is convinced that he may become a victim of violence; that telemans are more inclined to be afraid of walking in the dark; что люди, злоупотребляющие просмотром телевизора, считают, что «5 процентов населения работают в правоохранительных органах» ^[5] (в действительности — 1 %); наконец, люди, часто смотрящие телевизор, в целом более недоверчиво относятся к людям, чем редко и средне смотрящие. Такой взгляд на мир описывается термином «синдром злого мира» ^[5]

Положительная корреляция между просмотром телевизора и страхом стать жертвой преступления

Большинство опросов, проведенных Гербнером, показывают небольшую, но статистически значимую связь между просмотром телевизора и страхом стать жертвой преступления. Ответы респондентов в опросах Гербнера наглядно подтверждают гипотезу: смотрящие телевизор редко считают, что вероятность стать жертой в течение недели равна 1 к 100; смотрящие часто утверждали, что вероятность равна 1 к 10. На самом же деле статистика показывает, что вероятность стать жертвой преступления составляет 1 к 10.000. ^{[5] [19]}

Восприятие работы органов правопорядка

«Люди, часто смотрящие телевизор, считают, что в органах правопорядка работают около 5 процентов населения. Согласно их искажённому телевидением восприятию, мир наполнен офицерами полиции, судьями и агентами госбезопасности. Зрители, реже смотрящие телевизор, говорят о более реалистичной цифре — 1 процент». ^[five]

Недоверие к окружающим

«Люди, злоупотребляющие просмотром телевизора, с подозрением относятся к мотивам других людей. По их словам, эти люди всегда ожидают наихудшего». Такие лица более склонны утверждать, что «люди действуют только в своих интересах», «нельзя быть слишком осторожным с другими людьми». Именно такое мышление Гриффин назвал «синдром злого мира». ^[5] Кроме того, согласно первоначальным исследованиям Гербнера, телеманы гораздо больше других боятся выходить на улицу в тёмное время суток. Эта тенденция проявляется и на более глобальном уровне: американцы, злоупотребляющие просмотром телевизора, гораздо более склонны считать, что они как нация должны держаться в стороне от международных вопросов. ^[20]

Television as the greatest storyteller - wholesale supplier of images . In our age, television has replaced the storytellers and epic narrators. Television programs are made to satisfy all the needs of the public, and even the smallest viewers fall under the hypnosis of a blue screen. All TV shows are based on similar, repetitive models, which are also called myths, “facts” or ideologies. The impact of such models over a sufficiently long period of time is likely to lead to "the firm rooting of the dominant orientations for most viewers." ^[21]

"Mainstreaming". Mainstreaming is one of the fundamental concepts underlying cultivation analysis; The concept of mainstreaming suggests that within different cultures there are dominant complexes of beliefs, attitudes, values ​​and customs. Certain models are also formed by television - models of outcomes of various situations, models of gender roles, images of minorities, etc. These models together form the prevailing complexes of beliefs, attitudes and values, which are periodically reflected in the content of television programs. Viewers who spend a lot of time and in front of the screen tend to develop similar beliefs and attitudes. ^[22] Nancy Signorelli and Michael Morgan, who study the cultivation phenomenon, give the following definition of the prevailing trend: “Mainstreaming means that systematic and long-term viewing of television programs can weaken and erase differences in perception and behavior, which usually depend on other factors and influences. In other words, the differences in the reactions of different categories of TV viewers, the differences usually associated with the diverse cultural, social and political characteristics of these categories, are weakened or even absent in the reactions of viewers belonging to different categories, but consuming large amounts of television information " ^[2]

"Resonance". Resonance takes place in the case when real events confirm the distorted image of reality presented on TV screen. When the direct experience of the viewer corresponds to the media information received by him, its impact is enhanced - it resonates, contributing to the effect of cultivation. For example, studies have shown that TV viewers, who are most afraid of becoming victims of crime, live in disadvantaged areas with high crime rates. ^[2]

"The coefficient of hostility of the world." Gerbner and co-authors developed the “Hostile World Ratio”, which consists of three points:

• Most people think only of themselves.
• You can not be too careful in communicating with people.
• Most people will take advantage of you if given the opportunity.

The coefficient of world hostility demonstrates that long-term consumption of television content with frequent scenes of violence cultivates in the viewer the image of an evil and dangerous world. People who abuse TV watching think that more serious law enforcement is needed, and argue that most people "think only of themselves" and "they cannot be trusted." ^[12]

"Dramatic violence." Open demonstration or serious threat of physical violence as part of the plot. ^[five]

"The principle of accessibility." In drawing conclusions, a person relies on the smallest bits of information that most quickly come to mind.

Telemany. TV viewers who spend behind the screen more than 4 hours a day. ^[five]

Meta-analysis . A statistical research method that analyzes the results of numerous empirical studies and independent studies of the same relationships between variables (for example, watching TV and the fear of becoming a victim of crime). ^[five]

• The effect of the cultivation hypothesis on children

Studies show that the frequency of watching television in childhood has a direct impact on the beliefs and attitudes of an adult regarding social reality. ^{[1] [5]}

• The impact of human interaction on the effect of cultivation

Personal interaction has a direct impact on the strength of the cultivation effect. For example, sharing television with children and parents, family and peer support may affect the degree of adolescent cultivation, that is, high group cohesion leads to adolescents becoming more resistant to cultivation. ^[14]

• International cultivation analysis

Cultivation effects have also been studied in countries that import large volumes of television products from the United States. Gerbner and co-authors of the hypothesis found that in countries where television programs were more diverse and less frequent than in the United States, research results were less predictable and more controversial. However, most studies have discovered the cultivation of attitudes toward violence, values, social stereotypes and other phenomena that correlate with distorted images of reality presented by television. Importing TV shows from other countries can lead to different reactions depending on the cultural context and type of television program. For example, among Korean girls who regularly watch American programs for a long time, there were liberal moods regarding family and gender roles, while Korean men who spend the same amount of time in front of the screen watched American television programs caused a hostile reaction towards the United States. and the desire to preserve Korean culture. A study in 2007 found that in Belgium people over 30, often watching television, were more likely to believe that most young people take drugs. ^{[23] [2]}

Several cognitive mechanisms explaining the effect of cultivation were proposed by Scar in 1995, 1996 and 1997. ^{[24] [25] [26]} L.J. Scar argued that viewers do not think about the reality of events occurring on the screen, but television images are used every time a cognitive assessment of social issues. Viewers who consume large amounts of television information answer questions more confidently. This suggests that a kind of cognitive “shortest path” is formed, which allows you to get quick access to the answers. Scar's explanation suggests that the cultivating effect strengthens the viewer’s gaze rather than changes it. ^{[27] [2]} R. P. Hopkins and S. Pingri suggest that training and design are involved in the cultivation process. When watching TV, the viewer is trained by perceiving and memorizing their content. The viewer constructs a worldview based on the information that is given by television. ^[2]

Although Gerbner investigated primarily the effects of television violence on the viewer, his hypothesis can also be applied in other areas. The work of many other theorists associated with the cultivation hypothesis covered other aspects of the cultivation effect.

Music videos and the cultivation hypothesis

Kathleen Byullens, Keith Rowe and Jan Van den Balk conducted a study on the consumption of alcohol in music videos . The study showed that frequent viewing of music videos leads to a false perception of the effects of alcohol consumption. Musicians, in their opinion, advertise alcohol and create a false image of alcohol and the consequences of its consumption. Beullens, K., Roe, K., & Van den Bulck, J. (2012). “Music Video Viewing of the Driving After the Consumption of Alcohol”. Substance Use & Misuse, 47 (2), 155-165.

Homosexuals, sex, and sex on television

Sarah Baker Netzley, based on the experience of Gerbner, conducted a study of the image of homosexuals on television. The study showed an extremely high level of sexual activity of homosexuals on television. Thus, people who abuse TV watching got the impression of extreme sexualisation of the gay community. " ^[28]

Scientists are convinced that the cultivation hypothesis focuses more on the fact of the impact, rather than on who and how is exposed. Critics blame the authors for the logical inconsistency of the cultivation hypothesis, noting that the methods used by the researchers do not correspond to the wide range of phenomena covered by the hypothesis. Also, critics note that there may not be a direct connection between television and the fear of crime, as there is no connection between a snotty nose and a sore throat , that is, neither of them causes the other, and both are symptoms of something else. ^[five]

In addition, J. Gerbner is reproached for the insufficient breadth of his approach. Within the framework of the cultural indicators project, Gerbner divided his research into three parts. Critics claim that these three parts do not exhaust all possible variables that can be investigated. ^[29] In addition, the cultivation hypothesis does not take into account other factors that may affect the world view of the viewer. So, people living in areas with a high crime rate will spend more time at home watching television and believe that they are more likely to become victims of crime than people living in calmer areas. Daniel Chandler argues that "when the viewer has direct life experience associated with a particular phenomenon, it may not be so strongly affected by the effect of cultivation." ^[thirty]

J. Gerbner was criticized for “knocking together” all forms of violence. Violence on TV, which was investigated by Gerbner, is not systematized or differentiated in any way, as are television programs that are subject to analysis, that is, violence and violence on the screen are not homogeneous, as in Gerbner’s hypothesis. ^[30] Critics also talk about the need for precise definitions of the basic concepts of the hypothesis and argue that the validity of such concepts as resonance and mainstreaming is difficult to verify using rigorous scientific methods of sociology. In addition, critics are calling for more intensive scientific research that would reveal the cognitive processes that underlie the cultivation effect. ^[2] Cultivation analysis was also criticized by the humanist movement for the superficiality of researching such a large-scale cultural issue. ^[31]

Finally, some argue that the Gerbner studies do not demonstrate obvious correlations between variables. Critics insist that the correlation between watching TV and the fear of becoming a victim of crime can be interpreted in different ways. As Gerbner claimed, television watching can cultivate this fear, however, this assumption can also be reversed: because of the fear of becoming a victim of crime, people watch TV more. In the end, most TV shows display a “just world” in which the “bad guys” get what they deserve. ^[five]

In November 2009, Nielsen Media Research told the general public that “television has reached unprecedented heights up to this point”. ^[23] In our time of high technology, we have access to television at almost any time of the day. Many research projects have expanded and modified the hypothesis in order to fit these changes. With the advent of the Internet, the viewer has much more choice than before. ^[32] Hulu , YouTube , TiVo, On Demand, and other websites have made browsing more accessible, faster, and easier. Thus, researchers working in the framework of the cultivation hypothesis, seek to expand the scope of its application.

At the moment, cultivation analysis has been applied to other means of mass communication, including video games . A long-term controlled experiment by Dmitry Williams, conducted in 2006, investigated the effect of cultivation in online games . After a month of play, participants in the experiment changed their perception of the dangers of the real world. Nevertheless, these ideas are connected exclusively with situations and events that were present in the game world, but not with other crimes. ^[33]

Michael Morgan and James Shanahan, in their article “The State of Cultivation,” argue that “cultivation has acquired certain paradigmatic qualities” and that they see “the future of research on the effect of cultivation in the context of changing media.” This means that the hypothesis of cultivation takes on new forms, and scientists begin to perceive the influence of the media on the public in a different way. ^[23]

The concept of the cultivation effect received the status of a hypothesis , rather than a formal theory of media action , which is explained by the lack of empirical evidence revealing this phenomenon. In particular, the studies could not explain the psychological mechanism of the effect of cultivation, that is, how television viewers learn to construct their own perception of social reality. ^[2]

• George Gerbner (in English)
• Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania (in English)
• Coefficient of the evil world (in English)
• Media impact
• Theory of Use and Satisfaction