Itis that: The only thing that is constant is change.Somechanges are intentional, whereas some are a result of experiences and influence.Weare all on different levels we choose to better ourselves at things that haveour interest and are passionate about, not everyone can read us as and whenthey want to mystery, we are.Influenceis a big word and surrounds life, influence means several factors that areprimarily behavior based that affect a person’s emotions, behaviors, opinions,and decision-making process. These factors are learning, perception,self-concept, attitudes, personality, and life styles .

through a combination ofthese various factors a consumer displays certain tendencies toward products,services, actions, and mentalities.Thereare three broad verities of social influence identified by Harvard psychologistHerbert Kelman: 1.     Compliance is whenpeople appear to agree with others but actually keep their dissenting opinionsprivate (The act ofresponding favorably to an explicit or implicit request offered by others.Technically, compliance is a change in behavior but not necessarily in attitude,one can comply due to mere obedience orby otherwise opting to withhold private thoughts due to social pressures. Thesatisfaction derived from compliance is due to the social effect of theaccepting influence.2.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

     Identification is whenpeople are influenced by someone who is liked and respected, such as a famouscelebrity (The changing ofattitudes or behaviors due to the influence of someone who is admired.Advertisements that rely upon celebrity endorsements to market their productsare taking advantage of this phenomenon. Yhe desired relationship that theidentifier relates to the behavior or attitude change. 3.     Internalization is whenpeople accept a belief or behavior and agree both publicly and privately (The process of acceptance ofa set of norms established by people or groups that are influential to theindividual.

The individual accepts the influence because the content of theinfluence accepted is intrinsically rewarding. It is congruent with theindividual’s value system; the “reward” of internalization is”the content of the new behavior”.Most of the people use these factors to pushagainst as they struggle to establish their own independent identities Whenindividuals try to control over their lives is something everyone wants. However,in a universe in which everything is mutually interdependent, none of them hasabsolute control over anything including, much of the time, themselves.Rather, what they all have in abundance is influence, the power of whichseems to function linearly: the closer personally and physically others are tothe individual, the greater the individual’s influence over them, and viceversa.

Even more interestingly, unlike their attempts to control, theirattempts to influence do not require their conscious intent. Which iswhy their ability to influence others is so much more important than theindividual’s ability to control them; always-exerting influence simply by beingwho they are, saying what they say, and doing what they do. The only realchoice they have in the matter is whether, or not the influence they exert isgood or bad.Everyone’slife-condition tends towards the average of those around him or her. If someoneis up and another one is down, he or she will each tend to pull one anothertoward his/her own inner states, usually both moving toward the mean betweenthem. Some people have exceptionally resilient life-conditions that are like rigidmagnets, pulling others up or down powerfully without tending to move muchthemselves under the influence of the life-conditions of others.

While most ofthe people may aspire to possess that strength, most of them have not achievedit.Childrenmay pull out wise protectors or fed-up disciplinarians.Co-workers may pull out inspiring leaders or complaining gossips. Some peopleare simply toxic, complaining constantly, gossiping mercilessly, and evenpurposely sabotaging others.Thefactors that help influence to spread among the world are many, one of them isMass Media the creation of a new channel to influence people, especially thosewho are young, children and youth are the most affected people regarding theirunstable, changeable and forming characters.

Thereforwhat is Mass media: mass media can be described as written, spoken or broadcastcommunication? Some of the popular forms of mass media are newspapers,magazines, radio, advertisements, social media, television, Internet; musicvideos, videogames, and films/movies .Mass communication refers to thetechnology that is used to communicate to a large group, or groups of people ina short time frame. There are four major functions of mass media. The first isfor surveillance. This is to provide information about issues, events anddevelopments in society.

The second is correlation. Media must interpret eventsand issues and ascribe meaning so that individuals understand their roles insociety. A term that best fits with correlation is agenda setting, which meansthe media does not tell you what to think, but what to think about. Media tellsyou what is and is not important and to what degree. The third is culturaltransmission. This is where the media aids the transference of dominantcultures and subcultures from one generation to the next or to immigrants. Thelast function of mass media is to simply entertain. Media today is forever changing.

The fact that technologyevolves and changes “drives the development of media, because we as a societyare always using mass media there are consequences and effects that have beenlaid on the forefront of mass media. Certain scholars, scientist andresearchers “believe that the mass media shape the way people view the world,especially when people have little direct experience; others point to the mediaas providing role models positive and negative imitated by members of theaudience” . The portrayal of violence in the media seems to be the most talkedabout issue, but other “behavioral areas are of concern”. These arguments tendto be based on “the supposition that the experience of the content presented bycontemporary mass media differs in some qualitative way from other materialthat people have been exposed to since the beginning of social communication”.Attempts to “hold mass-media corporations legally responsible for the criminalacts of the consumers of their products have failed, and a general consensushas been reached that people will have to continue to be responsible for theirown behaviors in the age of mass media”.Mass media is one of the great factors nowadays ininfluencing youth in a negative way with violence materials exposed to them. A research on violent television and films, video games, andmusic reveals unequivocal evidence that media violence increases the likelihoodof aggressive and violent behavior in both immediate and long- term context.Well-supported theory delineates why and when exposure tomedia violence increases aggression and violence.

Media violence producesshort-term increases by priming existing aggressive scripts and cognitions, increasingpsychological arousal, and triggering an automatic tendency to imitate observedbehaviors. Media violence produces long-term effects via several types of learningprocesses leading to acquisition of lasting and automatically accessibleaggressive scripts, interpretational schemas, and aggression supporting beliefsabout social behavior and by reducing individuals normal negative emotionalresponses to violence. So when it comes to violence we can extend to some forms ofviolence just to clarify how some people apply this kind of violence influencedby mass media: 1-   Physical violence: physical violence is any intentional act causing injury or trauma to another person or animal by way of bodily contact. 2-   Psychological violence: Psychological violence, though can be just asdevastating as physical violence. Psychological violence can affect the innerthoughts and feelings as well as exert control over life, it leaves a feelingof uncertain of the world around and unsafe .psychological violence can destroyintimate relationships, friendships and even the one’s relationship with him orherself. when psychological violence is applied to children impair theirdevelopment into a healthy adult 3-   Verbal violence: a negative defining statement told to the victim orabout the victim, or by withholding any response, thereby defining the targetas non-existent. If the abuser does not immediately apologize and retract thedefining statement, the relationship may be a verbally abusive one.

 Anger underlies, motivates andperpetuates verbally abusive behavior.4-   Sexualviolence: is a sexual act committed againstsomeone without that person’s freely given consent and will, Sexual violence isa serious public health problem and has a profound short or long-term impact onphysical and mental health.5-   Cultureviolence: is any aspect of a culture that can beused to legitimize violence in its direct or structural form, when a person is harmedas a result of practices that are part of his or her culture, religion ortradition. Going back to the influence of violence media we have to putevidences of experiments and reports. In 1958,   Bjorkqvistexposed 5 to 6 year old Finnish children to either violent or nonviolent films.Two raters who did not know which type of films the youngsters had seen thenobserved the children playing together in a room , compared with the childrenwho had viewed the nonviolent film , those who had just watched the violentfilm were rated much higher on physical assault , hitting other children ,wresting , etc . As well as other types of aggression.

The results for physicalassault were highly significant and the effect size was substantial. Moreover, in 1987 Josephson randomly assigned 396 seven tonine year old boys to watch either a violent or a nonviolent film before theyplayed a game of floor hockey in school. Observers who did not know what movieany boy had seen recorded the number of times each boy physically attackedanother boy during the game. Physical attack was defined to include hitting,elbowing or shoving another player to the floor, as well as tripping, kneeing,pilling hair, and other assaultive behaviors that would be penalized in hockey(the only verbal act included in the measure was insulting another player withabusive name) . One added element in this study was that a specific cue thathad appeared in the violent film (a walki-talki) was carried by the hockeyreferees in some conditions.

This particular cue presumably reminded the boysof the movie they had seen earlier. Josephson found that for aggressive boys(those who scored above average on a measure of aggressiveness). Thecombination of seeing a violent film and seeing the movie associated cuestimulated significantly more assaultive behavior than any other combination offilm and cue .

the effect size was moderate. The exposure to media violence increases the physical assault.Although witnessed violence can evoke aggression in peoplewho are not highly emotionally aroused at the time , several experiments haveshown that emotionally or physically excited viewers are especially apt to beaggressively stimulated by violent scenes , In 1969 Geen and O’Neal made anexperiment , college men who had been provoked by another student and who werealso exposed to loud noise shocked their provocateur significantly moreintensely after they had watched a film of prizefight than after they had seena movie of a track meet. The effect size was quite large and seemed to beaccentuated by the viewers’ noise generated excitement. This study has beenreplicated with variations of film content and provocation with essentiallyidentical results. Exposure to media violence can cause immediate increases inaggressive thoughts and tolerance for aggression in both children and olderyouth.

In 1975 Thomas and Drabman in a study with young children,youngsters shown a brief violent film clip were slower to call an adult tointervene when theysaw two younger children fighting than were peers who had watched a neutralfilm. The single violent clip appeared to make the children more tolerant ofaggression. At least temporarily. Theamount of television and films violence young people regularly watch affectsthe physical aggression, verbal aggression, and aggressive thoughts of them . In1972 Mcleod , Atkins and Chaffe studied the correlations between ” aggressivebehavioral delinquency ” and viewing of Television violence in samples of Wisconsinand Maryland high school and junior high school students.

They foundsignificant correlations ranging from 17 to 28 for both males and females.Frequentviewing of violence in the media is associated with comparatively high levelsof aggressive behavior. Inlate 1970s,  Huesmann and his colleaguesbegan a longitudinal study of the effect of Television violence in fivecountries. Representative samples of middle class youth in each country wereexamined at three times as they grew from 6 to 8 or from 8 to 11 years of age.Aggression was assessed by peer nominations in response to questions aboutphysical and verbal behaviors, among other things.

The cross sectionalcorrelations between aggression and overall exposure to TV violence werepositive and small to moderate in all countries, with significant correlationsbeing obtained for both boys and girls in the United States. However, theextent to which earlier viewing of television violence predicted lateraggression varied substantially between genders and among countries. In theUnited States, girls’ viewing of television violence had a significant effectequals 17, on their later aggression even after taking into account their earlylevel of aggression. The boys samples in the United States Television violencealone did not predict later aggression, but those who had watched violentprogramming frequently in their early childhood and who also reported a strongidentification with aggressive TV characters were generally regarded by theirpeers as the most aggressive. Fifteen years after the study started, more than300 participants in the US sample were reinterviewed when they were in theirearly 20s; results from this 15-year follow up suggest a delayed effect ofmedia violence on serious physical aggression.

The researchers foundsignificant correlations between television violence viewing during childhoodand a composite measure of aggression (physical, verbal and indirect) duringyoung adulthood for both men and women. Turningto the violence influence of music videos in 1995 Baron Gan and Hall reported astudy suggesting that antisocial lyrics without videos can affect behavior, butthe assessed behavior was not clearly aggressive. Male college studentslistened to misogynous or neutral rap music , viewed three vignettes (neutral,sexual and violent, assaultive) and then chose ones of the three vignettes tobe shown to an unknown female (who was actually a member of the research team)those who had listened to the misogynous music were significantly more likelythan those in the neutral music condition to select the assaultive vignette. Anotherstudy examined how music videos affect adolescents’ aggressive thinking andattitudes, American African adolescents were randomly assigned to anexperimental condition in which they viewed nonviolent rap music videoscontaining sexually subordinate images of women or to a no music videos controlcondition.

When queried about their attitudes, the young women who saw thedemeaning videos indicated greater acceptance of teen dating violence that didcomparable women in the control condition. Oneof the most played games around the world are video games, when it comes tovideo games that does not include children only also youth and adult areaddicted to video games, which opens another gate of the violence influencethrough another channel of Media and technology in our life. Severalrandomized experiments have tested the effects of video famed specificallyselected to differ in violent content but no in arousal or effectiveproperties. Anderson al tested the effects of ten video games on physiologicalarousal and several affect-relevant dimensions, including frustration,difficulty, and enjoyment, and then selected two games that were similar onthese measures but different in violent content. In two subsequent experiments,the violent game significantly increased aggressive behavior relative to thenonviolent video games on aggression are independent of the games’ effects onarousal or affect.Studyingthe correlation between time spent playing violent video games and aggressionis a must just to determine whether the frequency or the content that affectsthe behavior.Andersonand Dill in 2000 created a composite measure of recent exposure to violentvideo games, and correlated it with college students’ self-reported acts ofaggressive delinquent behavior in the past year (hitting or threatening otherstudents, attacking someone with the idea of seriously hurting or killing himor her, participating in gangs fights, throwing  objects at other people) the overallcorrelation between exposure to violent video games and violent behavior wassignificant.

The magnitude of the association decreased but remainedsignificant when analyses controlled for antisocial personality, gender, andtotal time spent playing any type of video games. Observationaffects the behavior cause according to observational learning theory, thelikelihood that an individual will acquire an observed behavior is increasedwhen the model performing the behavior is similar to or attractive to theviewer, the viewer identifies with the model, the context is realistic, and theviewed behavior is followed by rewarding consequences. A child immediateimitation of observed behaviors would probably be the simplest example ofobservational learning though some scholars would suggest that there should bea lag before the imitation occurs for it to be called learning. Theinfluence of violence mass media nowadays is a big problem that concerns notonly the scientist but also the public as a fear of what is coming andaffecting generations, how this world wide important point turn the future morethan it is turning the present , because of the great opened gate to media andthe acceptance of its good and its bad we are more in danger , the negativitykeeps on getting bigger and bigger every day due to the lack of control . Weintroduced some of the meanings of psychological influence, media successinvading and changing life, violence and its effects then studies with provedexperiments as an evidence of the influence of media violence on youth and lifein general. Welive in a generation of not being in love, and not being together, but we suremake it feel like we are together.