Literature review

 

 

The body of literature focusing on television violence is vast in the United States but very limited in South Korea.   To identify  TV violence depictions in the prime time dramas in South Korea, it is important to examine the many definitions of violence which exist in the literature.   The national television violence study conducted by Wilson, et al. (1996 & 1997) uses a definition which takes into account the consequences of violence and focuses less on the occurrences of violence.  This definition allows for a more qualitative analysis of violence where the mere scene of violence is not only counted but analyzed for the presence of various variables such as the type of violent act, the tools of the act, the initiators and victims of violence and the resolution of violence.

Definition of Violence

 Different researchers focus on different elements, or components, as they attempt to define violence.  For example, Gerbner=s definition of television violence focused on the act or threat of physical violence.  He defined violence as Athe overt expression of physical force (with or without a weapon) against self or others, compelling action against one=s will or pain of being hurt or killed, or actually hurting or killing@ (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan & Signorielli, 1980).  However, this definition is limited to overt physical acts.  

Between the more micro concept of violence and the more macro idea of antisocial behavior lies the conceptualization of aggression.  Aronson (1995) tries to distinguish between behavior that harms or does not harm others, and applies the term Aaggression@ only to Abehavior aimed at causing harm or pain,@ and then further tries to subdivide aggression into an intentional end-in-itself Ahostile@ type and a goal-oriented Ainstrumental@ type. 

Williams, Zabrack and Joy (1982) used a wider concept of aggression.  They defined it as Abehavior that inflicts harm, either physically or psychologically, including explicit or implicit threats and nonverbal behavior@ (p. 366).  Potter and his colleagues (1995) used a still broader definition: Aany action that serves to diminish something in a physical, psychological, social, or emotional manner@ (p. 497).  The key elements that broadened the definition are the inclusion of verbal as well as physical violence, the inclusion of accidents as well as intentional acts, and the inclusion of threats as well as acts that involve actual harm.  In this study,  Wilson et al=s (1996 & 1997) definition of violence is used.  Accordingly:

Violence is defined as any overt depiction of credible threat of physical force or the actual use of such force intended to physically harm an animate being or group of beings.  Violence also includes certain depictions of physically harmful consequences against an animate being or group that occur as a result of unseen violent means (p. 41).

 

Effects of TV Violence: Televised Violence and Social Learning

A great deal of scholarship has been done in the area of TV violence in the United States and Europe. Often researchers have argued that television tends to depict violence as a relatively common occurrence and this presentation can affect the minds of viewers, particularly children who are still in the formative years.  Sometimes, watching a single violent program can increase aggressiveness.  For example, Lowery and DeFleur (1988) emphasize that the viewing of thousands of acts of violence plays an important role in the cognitive development of children.  Tan (1986) points out that the symbiotic relationship between violent acts depicted on television and aggression in real life continues to be debated.  Potter et al. (1995) suggest that due to the large number of depictions of violent acts on television, youthful viewers may find the distinctions between violent occurrences in real-life and dramatized ones to be blurred.  Hence a young person=s perception of reality may be altered by the frequent presence of violent acts on television.  This issue of learning is crucial to Bandura=s ASocial Learning Theory.@

Bandura=s central proposition is that ways of behaving are learned by observing others, and that this is a major means by which children acquire unfamiliar behavior, although performance of acquired behavior will depend at least in part on factors other than acquisition.  He argued that it was learned through the process of conditioning.  In a famous behaviorist experiment on conditioning, a child was conditioned to be afraid of a rabbit by being startled with a loud bang whenever the rabbit was shown.  Fear was removed when the rabbit was associated with such pleasant experiences as eating or playing with familiar, well-liked toys (Bandura, 1973).  Comstock and Lindsey (1975) also support Bandura=s arguments; they say:

Ychildren will learn from observing portrayals on television as well as from observing the actions of live persons. ....  What has been clearly demonstrated is that children can acquire aggressive ways of behaving from television and will exhibit these aggressive responses in play behavior  (p. 26-27).

 

 A few studies have looked at the degree of reward presented for violence and antisocial acts on television.  Potter and Warren (1996) report that about 88% of antisocial acts were portrayed as being rewarded.  Williams, Zabrack and Joy (1982) found that aggression was portrayed as a successful way to solve conflicts.

  In the United States, the National Television Violence Study (1996) found that of nearly 2,700 shows analyzed in a 20 week survey of 23 channels, 57% contained at least some violence.  This study made some condemning observations about the way violence is presented in the United States.  According to the content analysis, 47% of the violent acts shown resulted in no observable harm to the victim.  Only 16% of violent shows contained a message about the long term negative repercussions of violence, and in an astounding 73% of all violent scenes, the perpetrator went unpunished (Wilson et al., 1996).  These figures, however, were based on some excessively strict guidelines.  Unlike some earlier studies, violence in comedies were not considered as violent acts.

The National Television Violence Study found 44% of the shows on network stations contained at least some violence, compared with 59% on basic cable and 85% on premium channels like HBO and ShowTime. Wilson et al. (1996) showed detailed information of depictions of TV violence.  In regard to the perpetrators, 78% were male, 76% were White; 24% with AGood Character@ and 45% with ABad Character.@  In regard to the victims, 75% were male, 77% were White; 31% with AGood Character@ and 31% with ABad Character.@  In regard to the tools of violence, the body itself was the tool of violence 40% of the time; the gun, 25% of the time; and unconventional weapons, 20% of the time.  Finally, 85% of the cases with violence were bloodless, and anti-violence themes were noted in 4% of the violent programming. 

Wilson et al. replicated the same study in 1997 and the result were very similar (Wilson et al., 1996 & 1997).  However, these researchers did not give statistics based upon frequencies of acts in hours like other researchers.  They did this to avoid public reaction to frequency when the circumstance of the violence, they claimed, was more important to the study of violence (Wartella, 1994).  This is one reason the present study follows the Wilson et al methodology. Many studies have focused on frequency of acts, but the problem with this method  is that operational definitions are so diverse it is hard to make substantive comparisons (Williams, Zabrack & Joy,1982; Cumberbatch, Lee, Hardy & Jones, 1987; Signorielli,1995, Potter et al.,1995).  

Wilson et al. (1996 & 1997) generated many facts and figures that reveal the prevalence of violence on American prime-time network television in 1996-1997.  The percentage of dramatic programs with violence increased from 72% in 1996 to 75% to 1997.  Because of this relevant data, the present study also focuses on dramatic programming to the exclusion of other genres in South Korea.                         

             South Korea=s dramatic programming is televised on three commercial stations, KBS (Korean Broadcasting System), KBS2, and MBC (Munhwa Broadcasting Company). Each station covers the entire landmass of South Korea.   Because there are fewer advertisers to sponsor programming, program budgets are much smaller than the budgets for American programs.  A successful program, produced and aired in Korea, does not generate as great a margin of profit as American programs do.

South Korean Programming Violence

Studies in South Korea most commonly focus on development of telecommunications in South Korea, press law in South Korea, and religion of Confucianism (Kim, 1993; Youm, 1996; Chen and Chung, 1994).  Although the quantity is small, some researchers have tried to explain TV violence in South Korea.

Ha and Park (1995) showed how the United States dealt with TV violence, indicating that South Korea might follow the American example in regard to dealing with violence on TV.  They explain AThe Television Violence Act of 1990,@ AChildren=s Television Act,@ and AV-Chip.@  Ha & Park=s (1995) does not explain or even mention violence on South Korean television.  The problem with many of the Korean studies is that researchers use American situations and attempt to discuss them with regards to South Korea.

S. M. Lee (1996) argued that Western movies negatively impact South Korea youth.  She surveyed 395 high school students.  She states that 75% of the movies viewed by the South Korean students in her study were American made and 78% of those American movies contained violent scenes.  Roughly half of her respondents agreed that violent scenes are related to Areal life@ crime.  Although Lee attempted to find out about violence on television, her results were based only on motion pictures.  She did not focus on the TV media.

K. H. Lee (1995) noted some problems with South Korean TV programs.  He used a case study for arguing that TV programs have a negative effect on the nation=s youth with regard to sexuality, violence, and morality.  However, he did not present enough information to back up his assertions.  He cited too few programs which caused these negative effects.  And referring to a small non-scientific sample of programs is not sufficient to survey the scope of South Korean TV programs.