top of page

How Does The Media Affect Human Behavior? 

 

        Technological advancement has resulted in a transformation of the media landscape, particularly an abundance of easily accessible media platforms and instant connectivity for people around the globe. This world of new media, while offering great benefits, also raises challenges, from risks of misinformation across news forums to streaming service wars triggered by the continual release of new shows and movies. The concept of “media and self” explores how media impacts one’s self identity, attitudes, behaviors, and communication. This is especially relevant where progress directly influences individuals and society as a whole, shaping perceptions and behaviors. For instance, new ways in which we communicate—such as text messaging, email, or video calls—offer great convenience and instantaneous contact. However, replacing face-to-face, in-person interaction detracts from the nuances of visible emotions and body language, fostering a “cold” online environment. Similarly, media content molds how people view the world, and, consequently, interact with it. The persona of even fictional characters on television subconsciously impacts individual behaviors and choices. The rapid evolution of media poses challenges in human interaction and behaviors, but at the same time results in many favorable outcomes.  

        Both real and fictional media outlets can heavily influence behaviors and perceptions. News media provides immediate access to more information, allowing people to be better educated about the world. While on the surface it may seem counterintuitive that make-believe characters can strongly impact human conduct—after all, people typically recognize they are scripted and not real—it is the exposure to the stimuli themselves that affects people’s mindset. According to Canadian philosopher Marshall McLuhan, shifts in social behavior are triggered by changes in media of communication (Meyrowitz, 3). McLuhan argues that media is an extension of a person’s senses, especially given it has become deeply intertwined with modern society. Furthermore, the introduction of a new medium to culture, the emerging media platforms, for instance, changes humans’ “sensory balance”—altering their consciousness. Essentially, he believes that the media has become so integral to how people relate to the world that it molds choices and behaviors. For example, watching a tragic story on the news can generate sadness or negativity. According to careersinpsychology.org, the human brain is hardwired to focus on tragic events. Therefore, repeated exposure to unfortunate news stories triggers persistent negative thoughts, leading people to naturally view their lives as more distressing than they actually are and respond accordingly, behaving more cautiously or worriedly. Fictional stories on the silver screen can elicit the same effect. 

        In addition to the subconscious impacts of media, media conversations are also affected by the perceived change of place. Electronic media has combined previously distinct social settings, such as two different countries, and has weakened the relationship between social situations and physical locations (Meyrowitz, 308). Media has, in essence, stripped one’s sense of place: location is no longer a factor in communication and interacting with others at great distances is easy. Yet, this “change of place” has significant ramifications for human interaction. Behavior in an environment is dictated by the patterns of access to, and restriction from, the social information in the environment (Meyrowitz, 42). Canadian sociologist Erving Goffman explains that the behavioral region is “bounded to some degree by barriers” (Meyrowitz, 35). Before media communication, face-to-face interactions determined the degree and extent to which these interactions and behaviors existed. People were typically polite and courteous to one another as they were conscious of people in their physical surroundings and could hear and see them; this thought process dictated how they acted (Meyrowitz, 39). Electronic media has overridden this, leaving people feeling freer to act as they wish. Conversing over FaceTime, for example, is not the same as physically interacting with someone present. Since a person is not actually in the room, people feel less tied down to social boundaries. In essence, electronic media as a means of communication removes the traditional notion of physical location as a determinant of behavior, creating a new normal where people act more freely ‘on screen’, less inclined to conform to social norms.

        Understandably, there has been much attention and debate over the extent to which media is detrimental to human interaction. Specifically, there is much concern regarding unfavorable consequences of online forums. The emotions or expressions intended in a simple text or email can be easily misconstrued by the recipient, in a manner less likely to occur when speaking face to face. This ambiguity can cause negative emotions such as anger or feeling insulted. For example, sarcasm intended in good humor can be misconstrued as an attack, inadvertently offending an individual or group. In turn, the person or group behavior may be altered to become aggressive or angrier. Additionally, social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, are sometimes used to publicly harass, embarrass, and ridicule others. This has led to increased bullying and changes in behavior, offering more aggressive personalities new avenues to be aggressive, and opened a broader range of victims who may otherwise be less easily under attack. For example, the CDC’s 2019 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System study indicated that approximately 16% of high school students were bullied through social media within the year prior to the survey being conducted. This number is only supplemental to the percentage of teens bullied in person. The issue is further exacerbated by the ability to shield one’s true identity online and attack or threaten someone else anonymously. Some people who avoid physical confrontations may be more inclined to fight or attack in the ‘safety’ of an anonymous, non-violent online environment. Furthermore, anything posted on the media is permanent, even once seemingly deleted, allowing the possibility of long-term consequences for either the aggressor or victim. While in-person behavior can pose its own risks, such as aggressive physical contact, social media has expanded methods of attack and given rise to new sources of tension between individuals and groups. In fact, according to a medicalnewstoday.com article, cyberbullying has been linked to people committing suicide, even more so than in-person bullying. The era of rapidly emerging technological advancements unfortunately brings with it a rise in misbehavior and psychological challenges.        

        Media can also affect someone’s behavior in that people are influenced by what they see on the screen. In the 1960s, a study was conducted to see the effects that viewing media violence has on children. Children watched a video of adults acting violently. An inflatable “bobo doll” was then provided to them. It was observed that children were more likely to frequently strike the doll after watching the adults’ violent actions on the video (Giles, 52). While the intent of the study was to evaluate the extent to which children mimic adult behaviors, a byproduct was the outcome that the media—and in this case, a videotape—can directly result in imitation. It is commonly believed that people mirror what they see through the media and on television. Psychology professor Dolf Zillmann of the University of Alabama offers a different perspective. He introduced the concept of “excitation transfer,” which states that emotions are physiological responses to which we assign appropriate labels according to a variety of factors (Giles, 54). Excitation transfer occurs when the adrenaline produced by a stimulus carries over to a later activity, yet it is often misidentified as a result. Essentially, Zillmann believes that people do not imitate what they see on television, but rather, their seemingly imitative actions are a consequence of excitation residue from what they watched, rather than them imitating what they saw on the media itself. In this sense, the correlation between what is viewed on media and behavior is less direct. People are stimulated by a mental rush rather than copying what they have seen. This theory offers a more nuanced approach to how media affects behavior.

        Just as the media can be seen to instigate poor choice of actions, it can foster positive conduct. Contrary to bullying, cyber relationships allow for the creation of “diasporic cyber communities” (Giles, 270). A 1998 study by psychologists John A. Bargh and Katelyn Y. A. McKenna demonstrated that media was healthy for users who felt marginalized in face-to-face interactions. To further prove this point, many people have used media as a way to reveal their true sexual orientation, which has allowed, for example, for virtual gay communities online. People appreciate the comfort and more likely acceptance offered by an “online community” over an in-person setting. By creating a comfortable outlet, social media has brought people greater confidence and support in being true to themselves and accepting others for doing so. Online communities or even social media forums can drive support and camaraderie, making others behave better, nicer, and more comfortably with each other and allowing individuals to feel less alone. Other online communities include those for people with illnesses, where participants may join discussion groups and other forums that allow them to connect to others in similar circumstances, often bringing a sense of comfort and hope. Furthermore, just as media violence can affect how people behave, so too can positive media. A 1979 experiment conducted by professors Stanley Baran, Lawrence Chase, and John Courtwright proved this concept. Children ages seven to nine watched different segments of The Waltons containing “cooperative” “non cooperative” or “neutral” behavior. Then, an associate experimenter passed by the room and intentionally dropped his books. The study showed that children who watched the “cooperative” segment were 81% more likely to assist in picking up the books, and did so more quickly (Giles, 76). This illustrates that positive messages from the media can alter human behavior for the better. While it is true that the media can cause people to behave negatively and violently towards one another, it can also foster companionship, productive dialogue, and a sense of community.  

        Overall, fueled by technological advancements, new media forms have enhanced communication globally, having undeniable impacts on how humans interact, behave, and perceive the world around them. As virtual interaction replaces face-to-face encounters in this new social setting, both positive and negative changes can be observed in human conduct. Some use media to espouse their views and gain influence, others to harass, and yet others to build virtual support systems, camaraderie, and healthy information sharing and learning. In addition, whether timely current events or fictional television and film, negative and violent media content people view can impact their subsequent choices; the same holds true for positive content. With a fair balance between the media’s drawbacks and benefits in the realm of human interaction, it is important to create an awareness that encourages appropriate and productive media usage to allow for good behavior. After all, as society and technology further progress, media content, usage, and platforms will only continue to proliferate. It is best for people to practice good habits and channel the unity, good behavior, and global connectivity media can bring. It is up to each person to use the media in the manner best for their social well-being and their local and global communities.  

 

 

Bibliography:

 

Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (ASPA). (2020, September 15). What is cyberbullying. Retrieved March 22, 2021, fromhttps://www.stopbullying.gov/cyberbullying/what-is-it

Giles, David. Media Psychology. Routledge; 2003, University of Maryland Library, Accessed March 21, 2021. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=81818&site=ehost-live

McNamee, David. (2014, March 11). Cyberbullying 'causes suicidal thoughts in kids more than traditional. Retrieved March 23, 2021, from https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/273788

Meyrowitz, Joshua. No Sense of Place: the Impact of Electronic Media on Social Behavior. Oxford University Press; 1985, University of Maryland Library, Accessed March 21, 2021. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=330576&site=ehost-live 

“The impact of media – good or bad?” Careers in Psychology. (2019, January 03). Retrieved March 21, 2021, from https://careersinpsychology.org/impact-media/

bottom of page