An Alphabet Soup of Violence in Media; MRI and MPAA
I have mixed feelings about these two studies. It’s good that the science is being done, but how ought this to relate to the real world? Cambridge Journals seems to be asking the same question in “Policy Implications of the New Neuroscience“, which discusses how various MRI and CT findings are being used for overtly political reasons. I suspect that this paper was written in response to things like the NYT op-ed about MRI and politics (which was written by someone flogging fMRI and is not peer reviewed) rather than those like “Us versus them: Political attitudes and party affiliation influence neural response to faces of presidential candidates“, which claims far less for fMRI and its usefulness
A more useful way to think about the impact of media violence might be to look at MPAA ratings in terms of how violence in films is treated. “Violent Entertainment Pitched to Adolescents: An Analysis of PG-13 Films“ actually does that, with an eye to what kinds of films are likely to ‘teach’ violent behaviors, and how well the MPAA does at warning parents about it.
This is an excellent paper. It’s a very accessible paper (even if you’re ‘afraid’ of reading journals), it does an excellent job of defining all the jargon used and the subject matter is one which is familiar and relevant. Even if you’re not too concerned about the effects of violence on youth the article might be of interest for its observations on the relationship of the MPAA to the movie industry (a subject which was also discussed in a recent episode of the Secret Frequency (28.4 Mb .mp3) as well.
For more on the MPAA and its (unethical) methods, watch the film This Film Is Not Yet Rated, by Kirby Dick.