from scooby to spongebob

COMM 802MAJOR RESEARCH PAPERCONTENT ANALYSISLAURIE A. MOODY

From Scooby-Doo to SpongeBob: The Evolution of Cartoon Violence

INTRODUCTION

The study of television violence is as old as the medium itself. Cartoons are often considered childs entertainment; an escape of innocent hilarity. But could there be something more sinister lurking in the daily fare of our youth? There were nineteen million television sets in the United States as early as 1952 (Hoerrner, 1999). By 2001, there were 248 million sets, with an average of 2.4 TVs per home (U.S. Census Bureau, 2004). As the number of television sets increased, so has the sheer volume of programming and the hours spent viewing it. The average television set is turned on for more than seven hours a day (Cefrey, 2001). Literally thousands of reports have already been compiled to determine what, if any, unfavorable behavior is caused by the continued viewing of violence. Most suggest there is a direct link between viewing violence and increased aggression, desensitization and fearfulness in the future. In fact, a research study done by the U.S. Senate reports that television is directly responsible for ten percent of youth violence.

Understanding the effects of television violence on children is especially important because it has an enormous impact on the future of the children involved, as well as society as a whole. Children are especially susceptible to the adverse effects of viewing television violence because their brains are still developing. Youngsters do not have the brain capacity yet for analysis, evaluation and moral judgment, and they are unable to discern the difference between fantasy and reality. A content analysis of 20 cartoons from 1978 and 2007 was conducted to look for any differences in frequency and/or types of violence. Violence in cartoons, of course, is nothing new. What has changed is that the violence is ubiquitous, often sinister, and in many cases, frighteningly realistic (Fyfe, 2006). From Scooby-Doo and Superfriends, to Pokmon and SpongeBob; has violence in cartoons increased or evolved over the past thirty years and how might it negatively affect our youth?

RESEARCH REVIEWBy the time a typical American child reaches the age of 18, he or she will have seen 200,000 acts of violence and 40,000 dramatized murders (Grossman & DeGaetano, 1999). To understand this phenomenon, one must first define violence. Violence in the context of this research can be either physical or verbal. Physical manifestations of violence are acts causing pain or death, such as hitting, stabbing, shooting, kicking, blowing up or vehicular assault. Verbal violence can be yelling, belittling, teasing or threatening. For example, some research suggests there are good and bad usages of violence in media. Dr. Jean Killbourne, media analyst, states that usage of violence is appropriate when it is shown as being bad and harmful. If violence is used to teach the message that aggression does not solve problems, it is considered acceptable. Dr. Killbournes research shows that the consequences of violence are far more important than showing the act of violence itself. And further, if viewers are aware of consequences, they are less likely to behave in a violent manner (Cefrey, 2001). Cultivation theorists believe it is the cumulative effects of repeated exposure to violence that will adversely affect children.

Violent behavior is nurtured over time. We attest that, due to overexposure to gratuitous violent imagery, our children undergo a systematic conditioning process that alters their cognitive, emotional, and social development in such ways as to embed in them a desire and/or conditioned response to act out violently without remorse (Grossman & DeGaetano, 1999, p. 48).

Other scholars who are also concerned about childrens values argue that knowledge and behavior is developed and molded, at least in part, by observational learning. Professor Albert Bandura, of Stanford University, pioneered the research on imitation of televised behavior by children. He concluded children who view television are involved in three processes: exposure to new behavior and characters, learning to do or acquire those behaviors, and acceptance of the behaviors as their own. He also concluded children are just as happy to imitate villains as they are heroes. They will copy verbal assault as well as physical aggression, and will imitate both live action figures and cartoon characters (Moody, 1980). This social modeling effect can very often be seen in playacting by children.

Lyle and Hoffman in 1971, asked first graders whether they had ever copied what they had seen on television. Sixty percent said they had. When asked what program they imitated in play acting, the greatest response was Batman (Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior, 1972).

Another researcher, Kate Moody argues that a young brain is extremely vulnerable to stimulus from its environment. Because very young children cannot directly distinguish between reality and fantasy, when they see someone being shot, stabbed or murdered on television, it is as though it actually happened to them. For those aged six and under, dreams are real and television is real (Moody, 1980).

An Indiana school board had to issue an emergency advisory stating that the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles did not exist, because too many children had been crawling down storm drains looking for them. The popular show Power Rangers contains about 200 acts of violence per hour (Grossman & DeGaetano, 1999). Furthermore, cartoons are among the most violent television today. Violence is actually more prevalent in childrens programming than adult prime-time. Sixty-nine percent of childrens programming contains violent images and themes, whereas every other genre of programming contains 59%. This added to the amount of time our children are spending in front of the television elicits even more cause for alarm. U.S. children ages 2-17 watch an average of 25 hours of television a week. One in five watches more than 35 hours a week. Twenty percent of children aged 2-7 have televisions in their room, whereas 46% of 8-10 year olds and 56% of 13-17 year olds do (The Effect of Television Violence on Children: What Policymakers Need to Know, 2004).

A twenty-two year longitudinal study by Professors Leonard Eron and Roswell Huesmann, showed that the amount of television children watched at age eight, directly predicted the seriousness of criminal acts for which they were convicted by at age thirty (Grossman & DeGaetano, 1999). Since 1982, television violence has increased 780%. During the same period, teachers have reported an eight 800% increase in aggressive acts on the playground (Grossman & DeGaetano, 1999). Kicking, hitting, shoving are used more often as a reaction to conflict. The population of the United States increased 40% from 1960 to 1991. In that time, violent crime has increased 500%. This research hopes to deduce if there is any correlation between the increase in violence in cartoons and the increase in violence among our youth.

THE AGGRESSION EFFECTAll babies are born with aggression. They will either turn it into useful assertiveness or aggressiveness of a destructive and violent kind (Moody, 1980). Children harness native aggression to use it to play, to learn and to compete. As a song from South Pacific states, a child has to be taught at an early age to love and to hate. TV violence makes children more willing to harm others, more aggressive in their play and more likely to use aggression as the preferred response to conflict situations. Dr. Aimee Dorr of the University of Southern California investigated the responses to TV of children under six and reported:

Young children are apparently learning from television that aggression is a good strategy or at least an exceedingly common one. They are not learning the contextual message that crime doesnt pay or that alternatives to aggression are desirable. When children are given a mixed message about the context for aggression on television, they come away believing simply that more aggression they see, the more they should aggress. This is especially true for young children (Moody, 1980, p. 90).

The amount of viewing also had an impact on aggressiveness. Heavy viewers, those who watched more than 4 hours a day, had much more aggression than light viewers, or those who viewed less than three hours a day. Fifty-nine percent of heavy viewers were found to be involved in more than the average number of aggressive incidents later in their life, as compared to the light viewers. A study released in 1996 by NCTA concluded that psychologically harmful violence is pervasive in TV programs. If children are not shown the negative effects of violence, their young brains can be conditioned to correlate violent entertainment with fun (Grossman & DeGaetano, 1999).

DESENSITIZATIONAnother alarming effect of television violence is desensitization. The TV Child, or youngster who views an excessive amount of television, can develop a thick-skinned detachment from the world. The effect is essentially emotional Novocain (Moody, 1980). Kids are naturally attracted to violent programming, with its loud sounds and exciting action, but they can very quickly and easily become numbed to its consequences. They become desensitized toward their own violent acts and those of others. This increases the chances that they are capable of committing similar violent acts themselves. Repeated viewing of violent imagery and themes results in children with less empathy, compassion and understanding of human suffering. They are also less likely to help those in need. Cultural insensitivity is another term used to describe increased ability to tolerate more and more displays of violence in the media.

FEARFULNESSAnother effect of viewing violence is an increase in fearfulness. Research suggests that prolonged exposure to nonstop television violence elicits immediate and severe effects. Long term effects are difficulty sleeping, fearfulness, concern about being hurt or killed, and even aversion to common animals. Both children and adults can see the world as a much more dangerous place than it really is. This phenomenon is called Mean World Syndrome. Those who watch more than five hours of TV a day are much more fearful than those who watch three or less (Grossman & DeGaetano, 1999). Dr. George Gerbner states, There is a consistent relationship between fear and the amount of television watched. The heavy watchers do perceive the world as much more violent, and they are much more fearful (Moody, 1980, p. 91). METHODOLOGYAfter researching the possible effects of violence, it was time to analyze cartoon content to see if a link between violence portrayal and increased aggression, desensitization and fearfulness truly exists. I chose four cartoons, 2 from the year 1978, and 2 from 2007. For each year I chose one cartoon that was rated TV Y7, and one that was rated TV Y7 FV1. TV Y7 is appropriate for children ages 7 and older, while TV Y7 FV is for children 7 and over and contains fantasy violence. I then analyzed 5 chronological episodes from each cartoon for a total of 20 episodes. Challenge of the Superfriends, season one from 1978, was chosen for its TV Y7 FV rating. Scooby Doo, Where are you, season 3, was chosen from 1978 for its TV Y7 rating. For 2007, I chose five consecutive episodes of Pokmon: Diamond and Pearl, rated TV Y7 FV, and five episodes of SpongeBob Squarepants, rated TV Y7. The ratings ensured the desired and equitable demographics for both selected time periods were reached.

The cartoons themselves were picked for their popularity among their demographics. A codebook2 was then created to gather data from each episode. The codebook was tested and revised to formulate the final version as seen in appendix 2. The following categories were decided upon for coding: type of violent act, realism in portrayal, realism in setting, characters names and descriptions, goodness of character, intelligence levels, importance in role, social age, socioeconomic, gender and consequences of violent acts. These categories were chosen based upon the nine deciding factors of how harmful violence is to the viewer (Cefrey, 2001):1. Violent Agent - The person or thing committing the violent act. If the agent is likeable, children have greater risk to imitate. 2. Receiver or Victim If the receiver is portrayed as a negative character or deserving of punishment, the viewer may believe violence is a justified reaction to conflict. 3. Motivation - Often shown as motivated by need for person gain, protection of life, or expression of anger. If violence is viewed as unjustified, aggression will be reduced. 4. Weapon The visual effect of weapons can evoke aggressive thoughts and behaviors in viewers. More than of violent images and themes include the use of a gun. 5. Overexposure Creates a numbing effect due to desensitization and may lead to acceptance of violence as a problem-solving alternative.6. Realism- The more realistic the violent image or theme is, the more likely the viewer will have aggressive thoughts. More than of all violent images and themes take place in real world settings such as schools, workplaces and homes. 7. Reward or Punishment Viewers are less likely to become aggressive if the agent is punished. If the agent is rewarded for violence, the viewer is more likely to become aggressive. 8. Realistic Consequences- if images of pain and suffering accompany violence, viewers are less likely to become aggressive. Aggressive tendencies increased when no consequences were show. 9. Humor- When violence is combined with humor, viewers understanding of real consequences is minimized (Cefrey, 2001).Content analysis was the desired methodology because of the ability to analyze a large amount of data and systematically identify themes for further categorization. A total of 10 hours of television were analyzed.FINDINGSOf the 20 cartoons analyzed, the first 30 seconds of each were excluded from coding. The first 30 seconds were consistently an edited montage, title sequence, full of high impact , attention getting action. Although these title montages contained a high amount of violence, I chose not to code them because the action sequences often were simply the violent act, and did not show the character committing and/or receiving the violent act. The first cartoon to be coded, Challenge of the Superfriends contained 37 total acts of violence. Scooby-Doo Where are You contained a mere 10. Pokmon: Diamond and Pearl contained 29 acts of violence, while SpongeBob Squarepants contained 24 total. The totals were similar enough to not cause alarm at the increase. However, when broken down further, the types of violence and other deciding elements show significant change. Superfriends contained 30 physically violent acts, and 7 verbally violent acts. Scooby-Doo contained 9 physically violent acts, and one verbal act. In the case of Superfriends, every act of violence was perpetrated by a character deemed as bad.

In one-third of the cases, the perpetrator was a fantasy creature, or non-humanoid and non-animal. In one-half of the cases, the perpetrator was punished for their actions. Each of the five episodes followed a general pattern. The Legion of Doom, a group of bad characters, some fantasy and some humanoid, devised a plan to sabotage the Superfriends. They carried out their plan, usually capturing 2 or 3 of the Superfriends. The Superfriends were then rescued by their counterparts in several mild battles. The Legion of Doom is captured and looks as though they will be punished, but always escapes to fight another day. Gender did not seem to play a role, although when fighting occurred, Wonder Woman almost always fought the female Legion of Doom character Cheetah instead of the male characters. Only one of the settings was realistic, most took place in space, in the past or in strange surroundings. The depictions of violence also were very mild. Examples of violence in Superfriends include: Wonder Woman lassoing Cheetah, Lex Luthor threatening to destroy the Superfriends, and characters throwing logs at each other. The only gun appearing weapons were non-realistic ray guns that turned the Superfriends to stone and mind controlling beams weapons.Scooby Doo had very few incidents of violence. However, two of the violent acts were perpetrated by good characters. These acts involved an amusing predicament where Daphne, Fred and Velma accidentally capture Scooby and Shaggy. Only one of the violent acts had immediate punishment, but in the end, the gang always gets their guy and punishment appears in the form of local law enforcement. Half of the settings were realistic, while the other half, such as deserted islands in the Bermuda triangle, were not. Almost all of the characters were humans, except Scooby Doo and the robotic machines they fought.

Violent acts in the 2007 cartoons were committed nearly half of the time by the good characters. In Pokmon: Diamond and Pearl, the violence often occurs in the form of Pokmon battles. Both Pokmon are considered good, but fight because their masters tell them to. When the violent acts were broken down, 28 out of the 29 were physical manifestations. Two-thirds of the characters are fantasy based, although team rocket appears in every episode to cause mayhem. These two human characters and talking cat Pokmon are always looking for trouble. They never succeed in their plots to steal or use the Pokmon for an evil plan, but also are never fully punished for their actions. They are always shown blasting off into the unknown and are assumed unharmed after their altercation. The main characters of this show are adolescents, who are travelling on their own along with their fantasy based Pokmon characters. The settings were moderately realistic, although the violence was not. SpongeBob Squarepants is targeted at younger children, but the incidents of verbal violence are much higher than other cartoons I coded. Thirteen of the 24 acts of violence are considered verbal, either by yelling angrily, threatening or belittling. All characters are fantasy based animals that live under the sea in a place called Bikini Bottom. Squidward, a know-it-all squid, makes fun of SpongeBob and his starfish friend Patrick numerous times. Mr. Krabs, a rich but greedy business owner, yells at his employee SpongeBob. In another episode SpongeBob yells angrily at Patrick. Most occurrences of verbal violence feature more intelligent animals yelling at less intelligent animals. One example is Squidward telling Patrick and SpongeBob they look more idiotic than usual. Plankton, the enemy of Mr. Krabs, also commits verbal violence by calling Mr. Krabs a big fat gorilla. A full 1/2 of the characters committing violent acts are considered good and major characters. In only one occurrence was the violent agent retaliated upon. Sandy the squirrel, a good character, is body slammed after she karate chops SpongeBob. The settings were moderately realistic. There was also a great deal of adult themed language in SpongeBob that was not coded, but merits further research. It was also noted that the TV Y7 FV cartoons were primarily dramatic cartoons, while the TV Y7 rated shows were humorous.

CONCLUSIONViewing violence in too great of quantity is not healthy for anyone. Researchers believe it is especially dangerous for the very young who are still developing their reasoning skills. This report set out to find if there was a correlation between the increasing amount of youth violence and an increasing occurrence of violence in youth programming, particularly cartoons. The content analysis did not find an alarming increase in occurrence of violent material, but the types violence have evolved enough to merit cause for concern. Both 2007 cartoon series featured more verbal violence and more violence committed by good characters that the previous cartoons. There also was rarely retribution or punishment for violent acts. The more likeable the violent agent is, such as SpongeBob, the more likely children will imitate them in playacting. SpongeBob also depicts violence in a humorous manner which as Cefrey noted, minimizes the viewers understanding of the real consequences (Cefrey, 2001).

Conversely, episodes of cartoons in 1978 featured almost exclusively bad characters committing violent acts and being punished for them. This is a much healthier depiction of violence and one young children can easily understand. The setting of Superfriends was rarely realistic, therefore minimizing the possible negative effects of viewing. The realistic consequences at the end of every Scooby-Doo episode, ensures that every young viewer understands that crime should not go unpunished.

WHAT NEXT?Further analysis of a wider variety of cartoons over a longer period of time using the nine categories of harmfulness factors is warranted to ensure a proper generalization is achieved. Focus groups of youth viewing different types of cartoon violence could also be studied. My hypothesis that increased violence in cartoons is linked to the increase in youth violence was not conclusively proved. Research analyzed for this study shows violence as a whole can lead to an increase in aggression, desensitization and fearfulness after prolonged viewing. Copycat violence from social-modeling is another possible effect. The actions of Team Rocket in Pokmon: Diamond and Pearl is especially concerning because their thieving and vandalism by somewhat realistic characters is rarely punished. The violence in Superfriends was far less realistic and was usually punished, leading to less chance of copycat aggression. The violence in SpongeBob Squarepants is significantly less threatening, but its humorous depiction could potentially increase the harmfulness among its viewers. Scooby-Doo was an excellent example of limited violence and proper punishment that should be emulated in cartoons today. This report did not find a substantial increase in the occurrence of violence, but the relevance of the types of violence and the violent agents committing the violence, may have a bigger impact on the effect of cartoons today.

Appendix 1UNDERSTANDING THE TV RATINGSAll Children

This program is designed to be appropriate for all children. Whether animated or live-action, the themes and elements in this program are specifically designed for a very young audience, including children from ages 2 - 6. This program is not expected to frighten younger children.

Directed to Older Children

This program is designed for children age 7 and above. It may be more appropriate for children who have acquired the developmental skills needed to distinguish between make-believe and reality. Themes and elements in this program may include mild fantasy violence or comedic violence, or may frighten children under the age of 7. Therefore, parents may wish to consider the suitability of this program for their very young children.

Directed to Older Children - Fantasy Violence

For those programs where fantasy violence may be more intense or more combative than other programs in this category, such programs will be designated TV-Y7-FV.

General Audience

Most parents would find this program suitable for all ages. Although this rating does not signify a program designed specifically for children, most parents may let younger children watch this program unattended. It contains little or no violence, no strong language and little or no sexual dialogue or situations.

Parental Guidance Suggested

This program contains material that parents may find unsuitable for younger children. Many parents may want to watch it with their younger children. The theme itself may call for parental guidance and/or the program contains one or more of the following: moderate violence (V), some sexual situations (S), infrequent coarse language (L), or some suggestive dialogue (D).

Parents Strongly Cautioned

This program contains some material that many parents would find unsuitable for children under 14 years of age. Parents are strongly urged to exercise greater care in monitoring this program and are cautioned against letting children under the age of 14 watch unattended. This program contains one or more of the following: intense violence (V), intense sexual situations (S), strong coarse language (L), or intensely suggestive dialogue (D).

Mature Audience Only

This program is specifically designed to be viewed by adults and therefore may be unsuitable for children under 17. This program contains one or more of the following: graphic violence (V), explicit sexual activity (S), or crude indecent language (L).

Appendix 2Cartoon Violence CodebookUnit of Data Collection: Every act of violence, physical or verbal in each 30 minute cartoon episode.Coder ID- Fill in the coders ID Episode ID- Fill in the episodes title and date of productionRating of Cartoon- This rating will appear in first few seconds of cartoon1. TV Y2. TV Y 73. TV Y7 FV4. TV G5. TV PG6. TV 14

Type of Violent Act: Indicate whether act committed is verbal or physical, then include letter of type of act (example: if the violence is verbal teasing, the code would be 1-c).1. Verbala. Yelling- yelling at victim in angerb. Belittling- to make to seem unimportantc. Teasing- to make fun ofd. Threatening- a declaration of an intention or determination to inflict injury

2. Physicala. Slapping/hitting/punchingb. Shootingc. Stabbingd. Kickinge. Pushing/shovingf. Vandalismg. Vehicularh. Blowing up with explosivesi. Other dangerous activity

Realism/Portrayal- How realistic was the portrayal of violence, could it happen in real life?1. Realistic2. Moderately Realistic3. Not realistic

Realism/Setting- Did the violence take place in a realistic setting, such as a school, home or restaurant?1. Realistic2. Moderately Realistic3. Not realistic

Character Committing the Violent Act:Name and Description of the Character Committing the Violent Act: Give a brief description of the character and name of perpetrator (if name is not known, do your best to describe physical attributes).Character of the Character- is the character committing the violent act considered:1. Good2. Bad3. Unknown

Type of Cartoon Character:1. Humanoid2. Animal3. Fantasy Creature4. Inanimate

Intelligence Level of the Character Committing the Violent Act: Indicate level of intelligence of character.1. Unintelligent2. Moderately Intelligent3. Intelligent4. Intellect Unknown

Role: Indicate whether the character plays a minor, medium or major role in the episode.1. Minor- Character is not one of the main characters and has fewer than 2 lines.2. Medium- Character has more than two lines, but less than 103. Major- Character has more than ten lines.

Social Age: Life stage the character committing the violent act appears to be1. Child- Character appearing to be under the age of 14 years2. Adolescent- Character appearing to be in teens- 14 19 years3. Adult- Character between the ages of 20 60 years4. Elderly- Character appearing to be over the age of 605. Social Age unknown

Socioeconomic Status: Give your best estimate on characters relative wealth.1. Wealthy- character has an endless supply of money, or owns a business that is profitable.2. Upper Class- Character has a high level job or doesnt appear to have to work for a living.3. Middle- Character must work for a living but doesnt want for anything4. Lower Class- Character appears impoverished and lacks basic necessities5. Unknown

Gender: Report the Gender of the Character committing the violent act1. Male2. Female3. Unknown

Character Receiving Violent Act:Name and Description Character Receiving the Violent Act: Give a brief description of the character and name of victim. (if name is not known, do your best to describe physical attributes)Character of the Character- is the character committing the violent act considered:1. Good2. Bad3. Unknown

Type of Cartoon Character:1. Humanoid2. Animal3. Fantasy Creature4. Inanimate

Intelligence Level of the Character Receiving the Violent Act: Indicate level of intelligence1. Unintelligent2. Moderately Intelligent3. Intelligent4. Intellect Unknown

Role: Indicate whether the character plays a minor, medium or major role in the episode.1. Minor- Character is not one of the main characters and has fewer than 4 lines.2. Medium- Character has more than four lines, but less than 103. Major- Character has more than ten lines.

Social Age: Life stage the victim appears to be1. Child- Character appearing to be under the age of 14 years2. Adolescent- Character appearing to be in teens- 14 19 years3. Adult- Character between the ages of 20 60 years4. Elderly- Character appearing to be over the age of 605. Social Age unknown

Socioeconomic Status: Give your best estimate on characters relative wealth.1. Wealthy- character has an endless supply of money, or owns a business that is profitable.2. Upper Class- Character has a high level job or doesnt appear to have to work for a living.3. Middle- Character must work for a living but doesnt want for anything4. Lower Class- Character appears impoverished and lacks basic necessities5. Unknown

Gender: Report the Gender of the victim1. Male2. Female3. Unknown

Consequences: What were the consequences of the act of violence? 1. Perpetrator was punished2. Perpetrator received no punishment3. Perpetrator was rewarded4. Victim was punished5. Victim was rewarded6. Victim retaliated7. Victim received aid from others8. UnknownAppendix 3- resultsChallenge of the SuperfriendsSuperfriends Episode 1- Wanted: The SuperfriendsAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5Act 6

Type Violent Act2-i Superman wraps bar around villains2-e Batman pushes two guards1-d Bizarro traps Superfriends2-i Alfred traps Batman/Robin2-i Grog throws object1-d Lex Luthor threatens

Realism/Portrayed333333

Realism/Setting333333

Perp: Name & DescriptionSuperman under spellBatman/Robin under spellBizarroAlfred under spellGrogLex Luthor

Victim: Character222

Perp: Type111131

Perp: Intelligence332423

Perp: Role333123

Perp: Social Age333333

Perp: Socioeconomic555355

Perp: Gender111111

Victim: Name & Description2 guards2 guardsSuperfriendsBatman/RobinGreen LanternSuperfriends


Victim: Type111/3111/3

Victim: Intelligence443333

Victim: Role112/3322/3

Victim: Social Age333333

Victim: Socioeconomic555555

Victim: Gender1111

Consequences222211

Superfriends Episode 2- Invasion of the FeariansAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5Act 6Act 7Act 8

Type Violent Act1-b2-b freeze ray2-g2-b ray gun2-b ray gun2-e2-i animal attack2-b freeze ray



Perp: Name & DescriptionLex LuthorCapt. ColdManta RaySedestroFearianGrandeDinosaurCapt. Cold


Perp: Type11313331


Perp: Role33333213



Perp: Gender11111131

Victim: Name & DescriptionGrogFlashAquamanGreen LanternSuperfriendsSupermanWonderwoman Flash


Victim: Type31111111


Victim: Role23333333



Victim: Gender1111121

Consequences22221111

Superfriends Episode 3- Worlds DeadliestAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5Act 6

Type Violent Act2-b2-i hit with flipper2-h2-i attempted drowning1-d2-i captured to stone



Perp: Name & DescriptionToy ManToy ManLegion of DoomLegion of DoomToy ManEmpress


Perp: Type111/31/311


Perp: Role333333



Perp: Gender111112

Victim: Name & Description3 Superfriends2 SuperfriendsSuperfriendsSuperfriendsWonderwomanSuperfriends


Victim: Type111111


Victim: Role333333



Victim: Gender1,21,11,2121

Consequences222222

Superfriends Episode 4- The Time TrapAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5Act 6Act 7Act 8

Type Violent Act2-i dinosaur2-i pushed rocks on2-g threw police car2-i joust1-a Caesar yelling2-i Dino attack2-b ice ray2-i throw logs



Perp: Name & DescriptionDinosaurGigantaSolomon GrandeSedestroCaesarDinosaurCapt. ColdGiganta


Perp: Type21311211


Perp: Role13221133




Victim: Name & DescriptionAquamanChiefPoliceGreen LanternBatman/RobinAquamanAquamanGreen Lantern








Consequences2222226/16/1

Superfriends Episode 5- Trial of the SuperfriendsAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5Act 6Act 7Act 8Act 9

Type Violent Act2-i blast2-g2-i crows attack2-b2-i lasso2-i web2-b ray gun2-b atom smasher2-i attack



Perp: Name & DescriptionCheetahBraniacCrowsGreen Lantern AndroidWonder Woman AndroidBatman/Robin AndroidsGreen Lantern AndroidCreature of DoomGrod


Perp: Type332111133


Perp: Role331111113




Victim: Name & DescriptionWonder WomanGreen LanternBatman RobinGreen LanternWonder WomanBatman RobinGreen LanternFlash Batman Robin








Consequences26226,16,16,16,16,1

Scooby-Doo Where Are You?Scooby Episode 1- Watch out- The Willamaw!Act 1Act 2Act 3Act 4

Type Violent Act2-i Owl attack2-i caught in net2-i caught in rope2-i kidnapped


Realism/Setting1 boat on lake2 cave1 forest1 home

Perp: Name & DescriptionWillawaVelma, Fred, DaphneVelma, Fred, DaphnePeople in Owl costumes


Perp: Type3113


Perp: Role2332



Perp: Gender31,2,21,2,23,3

Victim: Name & DescriptionScooby and ShaggyScooby and ShaggyScoobyUncle Tom


Victim: Type1, 21, 221


Victim: Role3331



Victim: Gender1111

Consequences2221

Scooby Episode 2- A Creepy Tangle in the Bermuda TriangleAct 1Act 2

Type Violent Act2-g kidnap1-d scary guy yelling

Realism/Portrayed33

Realism/Setting22

Perp: Name & DescriptionUFOScary Old Guy

Victim: Character22

Perp: Type41


Perp: Role11

Perp: Social Age54


Perp: Gender31

Victim: Name & Description2 pilotsScooby

Victim: Character11

Victim: Type12


Victim: Role13



Victim: Gender11

Consequences22

Scooby Episode 3- A Scary Night With a Beast of FrightAct 1Act 2

Type Violent Act2-i grabbed by snow beast2-i snow beast stomps on shaggy

Realism/Portrayed33

Realism/Setting22

Perp: Name & DescriptionSnow BeastSnow Beast

Victim: Character22

Perp: Type33


Perp: Role33

Perp: Social Age55


Perp: Gender33

Victim: Name & DescriptionProfessor KrugerScooby

Victim: Character11

Victim: Type12


Victim: Role23



Victim: Gender11

Consequences22

Scooby Episode 4- To Switch a WitchAct 1Act 2

Type Violent Act2-i kidnap2-i dunk

Realism/Portrayed33

Realism/Setting22

Perp: Name & DescriptionUnknown CitizenAngry Mob

Victim: Character22

Perp: Type11


Perp: Role12

Perp: Social Age33


Perp: Gender11

Victim: Name & DescriptionShaggy Scooby

Victim: Character11

Victim: Type12


Victim: Role33



Victim: Gender11

Consequences22

Scooby Episode 5- The Tar Monster- NO VIOLENCEPokmon: Diamond and PearlPokmon Episode 1- Steamboat WilliesAct 1Act 2

Type Violent Act2-i lock in cage2-d

Realism/Portrayed33

Realism/Setting32

Perp: Name & DescriptionTeam RocketGograt

Victim: Character22

Perp: Type1,1,33


Perp: Role32

Perp: Social Age24


Perp: Gender1,1,21

Victim: Name & DescriptionGroup PokmonBroc

Victim: Character31

Victim: Type31


Victim: Role23



Victim: Gender1,2,31

Consequences6,12

Pokmon Episode 2- One Big Happiny FamilyAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5Act 6Act 7Act 8

Type Violent Act2-d2-i kidnap2-b shooting with web2-i1-d threaten2-a2-i2-i



Perp: Name & DescriptionCrogratTeam RocketNeedle OxSandstormJessieBad PokmonSviperCaener


Perp: Type31,1,3331333


Perp: Role23113222



Perp: Gender11,1,2332313

Victim: Name & DescriptionBrocHappinyAsh, Broc, Nurse JoyAsh, Brock, Nurse JoyHappinyGood PokmonGood groupPikachu


Victim: Type1311331,33



Victim: Social Age212,32,31525



Consequences22222276,1

Pokmon: Episode 3- Setting the World on its BunearyAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5Act 6

Type Violent Act2-d2-a Pokmon fight2-i freeze2-i kidnap2-i shock freeze2-i



Perp: Name & DescriptionCrogratPiplutBunearyTeam RocketPikachu and BunearyPiplut


Perp: Type3331,1,333


Perp: Role222333



Perp: Gender1321,1,21,23

Victim: Name & DescriptionBrocBunearyAsh, DawnBunearyTeam RocketBuneary


Victim: Type13131,33


Victim: Role333333




Consequences262233

Pokmon: Episode 4- Ya See We Want an EvolutionAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5

Type Violent Act2-a2-i fight2-i battle2-a2-a



Perp: Name & DescriptionCrogruntPiplutPikachuCrogruntMagic Carp


Perp: Type33333


Perp: Role23322



Perp: Gender11113

Victim: Name & DescriptionBrocMagic CarpMagic CarpBrocTeam Rocket


Victim: Type13311,3


Victim: Role32233




Consequences22224

Pokmon Episode 5- GymbalierAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5Act 6Act 7Act 8

Type Violent Act2-a2-a2-a battle2-a battle2-a battle2-i kidnap2-a battle2-a



Perp: Name & DescriptionDustoxCrogunkCrogunkCrogunkCrogunkTeam RocketDustoxCrogunk


Perp: Type333331,333


Perp: Role23333323



Perp: Gender333331,1,233

Victim: Name & DescriptionMirawaxJamesSand SlashScissorMonkey ApalumPikachuPikachuBroc








Consequences22222218

SpongeBob SquarepantsSpongeBob Episode 1- Born to be Wild & Best FrenemiesAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5Act 6Act 7

Type Violent Act2-d kicking2-g mowed over1-c 1-c1-b2-b laser1-a


33333333

Perp: Name & DescriptionSquidwardMowerGuys on StreetSquidwardKrabsKelpsahakePlankton


Perp: Type2222242


Perp: Role3113313



Perp: Gender1111131

Victim: Name & DescriptionSpongeBobSpongeBob & PatrickSpongeBob & PatrickSpongeBob & PatrickSpongeBob & PatrickPlanktonKrabs


Victim: Type2222222

Victim: Intelligence21,21,21,21,233

Victim: Role3333333




Consequences2222222

SpongeBob Episode 2- The Pink Purloiner & SquidwardAct 1Act 2Act 3

Type Violent Act2-i sting1-a1-b


Realism/Setting333

Perp: Name & DescriptionJellyfishSquidwardCrowd at Krusty Krab


Perp: Type222


Perp: Role131

Perp: Social Age535


Perp: Gender311,2

Victim: Name & DescriptionPatrickSpongeBobSquidward


Victim: Type222


Victim: Role333



Victim: Gender111

Consequences222

SpongeBob Episode 3- The Best Day Ever & The Gift of GumAct 1Act 2

Type Violent Act2-a2-a slap

Realism/Portrayed22

Realism/Setting33

Perp: Name & DescriptionSandySpongeBob

Victim: Character11

Perp: Type22


Perp: Role33

Perp: Social Age32


Perp: Gender21

Victim: Name & DescriptionSpongeBobSquidward

Victim: Character11

Victim: Type22


Victim: Role33



Victim: Gender11

Consequences22

SpongeBob Episode 4- Friend or FoeAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5Act 6Act 7

Type Violent Act2-i Spit wad1-b1-d1-d2-i2-i 1-a


Realism/Setting2-school222222

Perp: Name & DescriptionClassmateStinkyPlanktonPlanktonPlanktonKrabsKrabs


Perp: Type2222222


Perp: Role1133333



Perp: Gender1,2111111

Victim: Name & DescriptionPlanktonKrabsClassmatesClassmatesKrabsPlanktonPlankton


Victim: Type2222222


Victim: Role3333333




Consequences2222222

SpongeBob: Episode 5- Rise & Shine & Waiting and Fungus among UsAct 1Act 2Act 3Act 4Act 5

Type Violent Act1-a2-a2-a1-a1-d



Perp: Name & DescriptionPatrickSandySpongeBobSpongeBobAngry Crowd


Perp: Type22222


Perp: Role33333



Perp: Gender12111,2

Victim: Name & DescriptionLampSpongeBobSandyPatrickSpongeBob


Victim: Type42222


Victim: Role13333



Victim: Gender31211

Consequences26222

BibliographyCefrey, H. (2001). Coping with Media Violence. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group, Inc.Fyfe, K. (2006). Wolves in Sheep's Clothing: A Content Analysis of Children's Television. Los Angeles: Parents Television Council.Grossman, L. C., & DeGaetano, G. (1999). Stop Teaching Our Kids To Kill. New York: Crown Publishers.Hoerrner, K. L. (1999). Forgotten Battles: Congressional Hearings on Television Violence in the 1950s. The Web Journal of Mass Communication Research .Moody, K. (1980). Growing Up On Television. New York: Times Books.Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior. (1972). Television and Social Behavior (Vol. II). (J. P. Murray, E. A. Rubinstein, & G. A. Comstock, Eds.) Rockville, Maryland: U.S. Government Printing Office.The Effect of Television Violence on Children: What Policymakers Need to Know. (2004). Hearing before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications. Chicago: U.S. Government Printing Office.U.S. Census Bureau. (2004, March 11). 50th Anniversary of Wonderful World of Color TV. Retrieved October 21, 2007, from U.S. Census Bureau: http://www.census.gov

8