Mediated and moderated effects of violent media consumption on youth violence
| Author | Kristina-Maria Kanz |
| DOI | 10.1177/1477370815608882 |
| Date | 01 March 2016 |
| Published date | 01 March 2016 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
European Journal of Criminology
2016, Vol. 13(2) 149 –168
© The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1477370815608882
euc.sagepub.com
Mediated and moderated
effects of violent media
consumption on youth
violence
Kristina-Maria Kanz
Institute of Criminal Sciences, Department of Criminology, University of Muenster, Germany
Abstract
Violent media consumption is often thought to lead to more aggression and violence, especially
in juveniles. Social cognitive theories assume a pivotal role for cognitive functions, such as
normative beliefs, in the explanation of human behaviour (including violence) and see violent
media as a possible and potent learning environment. Although many studies have analysed the
relationship between violent media consumption and violence, only a few are longitudinal and
apparently no study has analysed mediator effects of violence-approving normative beliefs with
data from a Western country at more than two points in time. Some researchers assume that
violent media consumption can only aggravate an already existing disposition for violence due
to other experiences such as parental maltreatment (double-dose or intensifier effect, which is
methodologically described as a moderator effect). Both assumptions – mediation and moderation
– are tested with structural equation models using cross-sectional and longitudinal data from
a German panel study. Results show that interaction effects between parental behaviour and
violent media consumption are surprisingly weak, whereas both influence the approval of violence
to a remarkable extent and mediated by this eventually, to a smaller extent, violent behaviour.
Keywords
Media violence, mediator effects, moderator effects, panel study, youth violence
Introduction
Juveniles undisputedly spend much of their time in front of a screen and in many cases
one can witness explicit violence on screen – either in killing games on the computer
Corresponding author:
Kristina-Maria Kanz, Institute of Criminal Sciences, Department of Criminology, University of Muenster,
Bispinghof 24/25, 48143 Muenster, Germany.
Email: kristina.kanz@uni-muenster.de
608882EUC0010.1177/1477370815608882European Journal of CriminologyKanz
research-article2015
Article
150 European Journal of Criminology 13(2)
or in horror movies on TV. Do we have to be concerned about that? Apart from possi-
ble addictive, socially excluding features of intensive media consumption, the burning
question is: does the consumption of violent media lead to more aggression in juve-
niles? Quite a number of research studies have tried to answer this question.1
Apparently no recent study has discovered a negative correlation between watching
violent films or playing violent video games and aggression, so that a possible cathartic
effect – implying a decrease in aggression through the consumption of media violence
– is no longer seriously expected by any researcher. Most studies yield small (to moder-
ate), positive relationships between media violence and aggression (approximately r =
.20–.25; compare, for example, the Report of the Media Violence Commission of the
International Society for Research on Aggression (ISRA) (Media Violence Commission,
2012)). It is still discussed whether these small, albeit positive, correlations and/or path
coefficients can in fact be read as proof of an aggression-enhancing impact of violent
media.2 Yet it is commonly agreed that research of high quality is needed to study this
relationship properly in order to refrain from turning a scientific question into an ideo-
logical one (Elson and Ferguson, 2014: 34; Krahé, 2014). However, only very few meth-
odologically sound longitudinal studies have been conducted and even fewer have
analysed mediator and moderator variables: Mößle et al. (2014) analysed mediation
effects only with empathy as the mediator variable using three waves of a German panel
data set, while Gentile et al. (2014) analysed both mediator and moderator effects with
the mediator variable ‘Aggressive Cognitions’ using a three-wave panel of children and
adolescents from Singapore. Thus mediation (via violence-approving normative beliefs
or aggressive attitudes) and moderation of the effects of violent media consumption have
not been analysed with data from Western countries yet. The results might be different
from the ones from analyses with data from Singapore because media content and atti-
tudes towards violence might differ between Asian and Western (European) countries.
This article seeks to provide insights into the complex nature of the effects of media
violence consumption by assessing mediator and moderator effects at the same time
using cross-sectional data from a comparatively large German panel data set. Additionally,
the supposed mediator role of violence-approving normative beliefs is – apparently for
the first time ever – analysed over a three-year period with four waves of data
collection.
Previous research and theoretical considerations
Longitudinal, especially panel studies can be regarded as the most promising type of
study in analysing the relationship between media and aggression in a real-life setting.
Panel studies collect data on events at two or more points in time from the same people,
thus being able to analyse the temporal order of events. In general, the effect sizes in
longitudinal studies are smaller than in other research designs, which can be explained
by the time lag between data collections. But almost all of the as yet comparatively few
panel studies support the thesis that media violence is a causal factor in the explanation
of violence.3 The effect sizes are quite stable but small and range from β = .08 to β = .18
(for example, Krahé and Möller, 2010; Slater et al., 2003), while cross-lagged correla-
tions of r = .28 have also been found (Anderson et al., 2008).4
To continue reading
Request your trial