Final Paper Information Sheet
Final Paper Information Sheet
The assignment:
Write a 10-15-page (2,500 - 4,000 words) position paper based on a media and behavior issue. Any topic discussed in class is fair game.
You are allowed to have a co-author if you so choose.
If you are the type of person who works better with a partner, try to find someone to work with you. If you are the type of person who works better alone, then go that route.
Requirements:
1. 10-page minimum (2,500 words)
2. Minimum of 10 sources (5 of which much be peer-reviewed/academic)
3. APA style is preferred; MLA style is acceptable provided you're consistent.
4. A completed bibliography/reference list is required (not included in overall page total).
5. Title pages are unnecessary.
6. Submit via email as a Word Document or a PDF.
7. In addition to writing the paper, all students must present during the final exam time slot.
The format:
Your paper should have three sections-
I. The PROBLEM (1 - 3 pages; 250 - 750 words)
This is where you describe your issue. Indicate why you are interested in this topic. Provide a brief overview. Feel free to cite statistics. You should start with some kind of story to attract the reader. It can be based on your personal experience (anecdotal), a typical/hypothetical circumstance, a true story that happened to someone else, etc. The goal is to inform the reader in a way that illuminates the problem.
Here's an example:
A wild-eyed old inventor stumbles in from the cold to a hunting shack full of inebriated villagers. He spins an outlandish tale of a castle in the woods, and monster that has kidnapped his only daughter. Turning to the strongest man in the room, he pleads for aid in rescuing her. “Sure, old man, we’ll help you out,” the virile hulk intimates, before bodily hurling the old man out the door, into a snowbank.
“Crazy old Maurice,” Gaston, the antagonist of the Disney film “Beauty and the Beast,” chuckles to the crowd. “He’s always good for a laugh.”
After reviewing several studies published in the United States over the last decade, it is clear that fictional screen media in America present a stigmatized representation of mental illness. An overwhelming trend shows the mentally impaired as violent and detrimental to society. Children are especially vulnerable to this representation, as they are more prone to repeat viewings and have less contact with the mentally ill outside of screen media.
The intention of this paper is to focus on three primary areas of study. First, in order to understand the number and quality of onscreen characterizations, I will review studies concerning the qualitative and quantitative portrayals of the mentally ill in American screen media. I will also explore how children may be especially vulnerable to social conditioning by media depictions, and uncover how skewed portrayals of the mentally ill may have a negative impact on society as a whole. I will present several courses for action, including a need for increased awareness on behalf of parents and media producers, and more research by media scholars to explore this issue in greater depth.
II. WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE PROBLEM (5-6 pages; 1,250 - 1,500 words)
In this section of the paper, you provide an overview of what we already know about the issue. Say, for example, your topic deals with the effects of media on sexual expectations. You could begin by summarizing the articles that we've read and discussed in class about this topic. In general, it's fair to say that you can summarize an article in 150 - 300 words to get the gist of that article. If it helps, you might want to consider this portion of the paper where you find a minimum of 5 academic articles on your subject and summarize each article in a page. Obviously, you'll want to tie them together, show where the results are consistent, and where others are contradictory. You're allowed to have more than 7 pages here.
Here's an example:
The “Rebellious Free Spirit” and “the Simpleton” tend to appear in children’s media. Examples of the former include “Crazy Old Maurice”, the eccentric inventor from “Beauty and the Beast”, and Belle, the film’s main character. These characters are viewed by their communities as being “insane” and a detriment to society. To the audience, however, they are portrayed as sympathetic, ill-treated, and misunderstood. In the end these types of characters are often vindicated: “He or she is welcomed back into the community, sending a message that characters who are ‘nice’ cannot be mentally ill, and vice versa” (Pirkis 2006: 529-530). The “Simpleton” is also a frequent character type in children’s media, fulfilling the role of sidekick to the hero or villain: Ed the hyena from “The Lion King” and Pinky of “Pinky and the Brain” are two such examples. The Simpletons provide comic relief but are also irrational and out of touch with reality, making them difficult to reason with.
There is also stereotyping in the way mentally ill characters are framed onscreen. According to a study by Pirkis in 2006, characters with mental illnesses are set apart from the general population with high-contrast lighting, dissonant music cues, and extreme close-ups. These filmic techniques encourage the audience to make assumptions (often unconsciously) about the character onscreen, even before the character has a pronounced a line of dialogue.
In 1989, Signorelli presented a study based on samples of prime-time television programs from 1969 to 1985, collected in 17 week-long sets. His findings showed a trend of overt violence in mentally ill characters: “72.1% of prime-time dramatic adult characters portrayed as mentally ill hurt or killed others...the mentally ill also were the characters most likely to be rated as a “bad” character type and the least likely to be rated as a “good” character type” (Diefenbach 2007: 182). Among this data set, only 2.7% of mentally ill characters appeared in comedic roles, which could have endeared them to the audience.
III. WHAT SHOULD WE DO ABOUT IT? (3 - 5 pages; 750 - 1,250 words)
This is the part of the paper where you provide concrete recommendations for what we, as a society, should/can do to help ameliorate the problem. Be specific. Use your own critical thinking abilities to develop steps that we should take. What should policymakers do? How about parents? Teachers? Doctors? Any/all appropriate groups for your subject area?
Here's an example from one of the position papers posted on the blog:
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Pediatricians should ask parents and patients 2 key questions about media use: (1) How much time per day does the child or teenager spend with screen media? and (2) Is there a TV set or unrestricted, unmonitored Internet connection throughout the house, including in the child’s bedroom?109 This recommendation should be incorporated into every well-child visit, as outlined in Bright Futures. 110
2. Pediatricians should encourage parents to discuss food advertising with their children as they monitor children’s TV-viewing and teach their children about appropriate nutrition.111–113
3. Pediatricians should continue to counsel parents to limit total noneducational screen time to no more than 2 hours/day, to avoid putting TV sets and Internet connections in children’s bedrooms, to coview with their children, to limit nighttime screen media use to improve children’s sleep, and to try strongly to avoid screen exposure for infants under the age of 2 years. In a recent study of 709 7- to 12-yearolds, children who did not adhere to the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines of less than 2 hours/ day of screen time114 and 11 000 to 13 000 pedometer steps per day were 3 to 4 times more likely to be overweight.115 Conversely, preschoolaged children who ate dinner with their parents, got adequate sleep, and had limited screen-time hours had a 40% lower prevalence of obesity than those exposed to none of these routines.116
4. Pediatricians should work with community groups and schools to implement media education programs in child care centers, schools, and community-based programs such as the YMCA. Such programs that teach children how to understand and interpret advertisements may have the potential to immunize young people against harmful media effects.117 In addition, programs that educate parents about limiting media use in general have already been shown to be highly effective.8,38,39,118,119 Pediatricians should work with their state chapters, the AAP, parent and public health groups, and the White House120 to do the following:
● Ask Congress, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Federal Communications Commission to implement a ban on junk-food advertising during programming that is viewed predominantly by young children.84,121,122 Currently, several European countries restrict food advertising aimed at young children.123 Several food manufacturers have already indicated a willingness to implement such a ban voluntarily,124,125 but it remains to be seen whether they will follow through.126–128 For example, children’s cereals remain considerably unhealthier than adult cereals; they contain 85% more sugar, 65% less fiber, and 60% more sodium.129 One-quarter of all food and beverage advertising originates from companies that do not participate in the initiative, and two-thirds of all advertising by companies that do participate is still for food and beverages of low nutritional value.85 In addition, the food and beverage industry remains steadfastly opposed to any regulation. For example, in 2007, 1 soft drink company spent more than $1.7 million to lobby against marketing restrictions and school nutrition legislation.130 Two recent studies showed that a ban on fast-food ads would reduce the number of overweight children and adolescents in the United States by an estimated 14% to 18%.131,132 Just eliminating federal tax deductions for fast-food ads that target children would reduce childhood obesity by 5% to 7%.131 On the other hand, advertisements and public service announcements for health foods and healthy nutritional practices should be encouraged. One recent experiment showed that children exposed to attractive advertisements for healthy foods develop significantly more positive attitudes than children shown junk-food ads.133
● Ask Congress and the Federal Communications Commission to prohibit interactive advertising involving junk food or fast food to children via digital TV, cell phones, and other media79–81,121 and to ban payments for product placement in movies. Restoring power to the Federal Trade Commission to more tightly regulate children’s advertising could be another way of accomplishing this goal.84,134,135
● Ask Congress to fund media research (eg, the Children Media Research and Advancement Act [CAMRA]). More research is specifically needed to determine
(1) how heavy media use in children reflects or contributes to psychosocial elements of the child’s life, such as stress in the home,
(2) how new media technologies may be playing a role in exacerbating exposure to ads or encouraging more sedentary behavior, and
(3) which of the above-mentioned mechanisms is most responsible for contributing to obesity and how such mechanisms can be ameliorated.83,134
● Encourage the production of more counteradvertising and more prosocial video games136,137 and Web sites that encourage 204 children to choose healthy foods.82
5. Pediatricians should be aware that children with high levels of screen time have higher levels of childhood stress, which puts them at risk not only for obesity but also for a number of stress-associated morbidities (eg, mood disorders, substance abuse, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, asthma).138 Consequently, displacing screen time with more prosocial or resilience-building activities (eg, exercise, imaginative or social play) is an important approach to addressing a wide array of societal ills including obesity.139
IV. CONCLUSION (1 - 2 pages; 250 - 500 words)
Finally, your paper should have a "conclusion" section-- 1 page or so (250 words+). This section should provide closure for the overall paper.
The finished paper should be 10 - 15+ pages:
1-3 pages (Intro)
5-6 pages (What we know)
3-5 pages (What we should do about it)
1- page (Wrapping it up)
-----------
10-15 pages
Here's a sample conclusion:
Conclusion
This paper sought to uncover the number and quality of roles given to mentally disabled characters in American screen media, and the social perceptions cultivated within the context of such programming. Studies of screen media produced for adults and children show mental illness in the media is characterized by a common group of characteristics, resulting in a set of negative stereotypes.
While mental illness is often a theme used in dramatic media, actual occurrences of mentally disabled characters are in the small minority, presenting only a slim opportunity for comparison. In screen media intended for adults, mentally ill characters are depicted as unkempt, unpredictable, anti-social, and violent, and are more likely to be present in crime dramas than situational comedies. Among children’s media, these characters are portrayed predominantly as white males, whom other characters respond to with terror or amusement. They are the villains or buffoons, but seldom receive treatment or learn to live successful, pro-social lives.
Children who are limited by experiential contact with mentally ill people tend to place more emphasis on the opinions they see portrayed in the media. This, coupled with Mick 18 the tendency toward repeat viewing (encouraged by their parents) and continued repetition of stereotypes into adulthood, perpetuates negative opinions of the mentally ill. It has reached the point that even positive media interventions are not causing test subjects to respond favorably toward social interactions with the mentally disabled. The subgroup most overtly affected by the stigmatized portrayals of mental illness is those with mental handicaps themselves.
A half-century of negatively-portrayed mental health clinicians and treatments has served to deter people with mental illnesses from seeking out therapy. Much work needs to be done in the areas of research and social awareness. Mental illnesses have a long history of social stigmatization, and this has become branded onto the American screen.
The assignment:
Write a 10-15-page (2,500 - 4,000 words) position paper based on a media and behavior issue. Any topic discussed in class is fair game.
You are allowed to have a co-author if you so choose.
If you are the type of person who works better with a partner, try to find someone to work with you. If you are the type of person who works better alone, then go that route.
Requirements:
1. 10-page minimum (2,500 words)
2. Minimum of 10 sources (5 of which much be peer-reviewed/academic)
3. APA style is preferred; MLA style is acceptable provided you're consistent.
4. A completed bibliography/reference list is required (not included in overall page total).
5. Title pages are unnecessary.
6. Submit via email as a Word Document or a PDF.
7. In addition to writing the paper, all students must present during the final exam time slot.
The format:
Your paper should have three sections-
I. The PROBLEM (1 - 3 pages; 250 - 750 words)
This is where you describe your issue. Indicate why you are interested in this topic. Provide a brief overview. Feel free to cite statistics. You should start with some kind of story to attract the reader. It can be based on your personal experience (anecdotal), a typical/hypothetical circumstance, a true story that happened to someone else, etc. The goal is to inform the reader in a way that illuminates the problem.
Here's an example:
A wild-eyed old inventor stumbles in from the cold to a hunting shack full of inebriated villagers. He spins an outlandish tale of a castle in the woods, and monster that has kidnapped his only daughter. Turning to the strongest man in the room, he pleads for aid in rescuing her. “Sure, old man, we’ll help you out,” the virile hulk intimates, before bodily hurling the old man out the door, into a snowbank.
“Crazy old Maurice,” Gaston, the antagonist of the Disney film “Beauty and the Beast,” chuckles to the crowd. “He’s always good for a laugh.”
After reviewing several studies published in the United States over the last decade, it is clear that fictional screen media in America present a stigmatized representation of mental illness. An overwhelming trend shows the mentally impaired as violent and detrimental to society. Children are especially vulnerable to this representation, as they are more prone to repeat viewings and have less contact with the mentally ill outside of screen media.
The intention of this paper is to focus on three primary areas of study. First, in order to understand the number and quality of onscreen characterizations, I will review studies concerning the qualitative and quantitative portrayals of the mentally ill in American screen media. I will also explore how children may be especially vulnerable to social conditioning by media depictions, and uncover how skewed portrayals of the mentally ill may have a negative impact on society as a whole. I will present several courses for action, including a need for increased awareness on behalf of parents and media producers, and more research by media scholars to explore this issue in greater depth.
II. WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE PROBLEM (5-6 pages; 1,250 - 1,500 words)
In this section of the paper, you provide an overview of what we already know about the issue. Say, for example, your topic deals with the effects of media on sexual expectations. You could begin by summarizing the articles that we've read and discussed in class about this topic. In general, it's fair to say that you can summarize an article in 150 - 300 words to get the gist of that article. If it helps, you might want to consider this portion of the paper where you find a minimum of 5 academic articles on your subject and summarize each article in a page. Obviously, you'll want to tie them together, show where the results are consistent, and where others are contradictory. You're allowed to have more than 7 pages here.
Here's an example:
Portrayals of Mental Illness in Adult Media
In 1992, a study by Wahl revealed that 10-20% of prime time television programs and six percent of films from the 1950s to 1991 involved characters who were identified – within the context of the programs and films – as having a mental disability. Children are known to turn to mature programming in their early teens. Therefore, in order to understand the impact that representations of mental illness have on children, it is important to first look at the types of characters that proliferate mainstream, adult media.
The majority of American studies on this subject focus on screen media, with the primary emphasis on television and, to a lesser extent, film. There has been a recent increase in the areas of print news and popular magazines; very little has been explored about mental illness in the internet or in video games.
In television, a 1982 study by Wahl and Roth found a third of prime-time shows involved themes of mental illness. In 1998 March reported 50 programs concerned themselves with mental health issues over a period of two weeks. Cassata, Skill, and Boadu (1979)1 named mental impairment as the number one health issue to afflict characters in daytime soap operas. With what appears to be the proliferation of mental illness as a major plot point in TV media, it is important to note that in 1997, Diefenbach reported that mentally ill characters comprised only 2.2% of the speaking population on prime-time TV (Pirkis 2006: 528).
In 1992, a study by Wahl revealed that 10-20% of prime time television programs and six percent of films from the 1950s to 1991 involved characters who were identified – within the context of the programs and films – as having a mental disability. Children are known to turn to mature programming in their early teens. Therefore, in order to understand the impact that representations of mental illness have on children, it is important to first look at the types of characters that proliferate mainstream, adult media.
The majority of American studies on this subject focus on screen media, with the primary emphasis on television and, to a lesser extent, film. There has been a recent increase in the areas of print news and popular magazines; very little has been explored about mental illness in the internet or in video games.
In television, a 1982 study by Wahl and Roth found a third of prime-time shows involved themes of mental illness. In 1998 March reported 50 programs concerned themselves with mental health issues over a period of two weeks. Cassata, Skill, and Boadu (1979)1 named mental impairment as the number one health issue to afflict characters in daytime soap operas. With what appears to be the proliferation of mental illness as a major plot point in TV media, it is important to note that in 1997, Diefenbach reported that mentally ill characters comprised only 2.2% of the speaking population on prime-time TV (Pirkis 2006: 528).
The mentally disabled who are disenfranchised by not having a voice in screen media are also subject to a number of commonly-occurring stereotypes. Studies across all the aforementioned platforms show a consistent approach to characterizing and portraying people with mental illnesses: antisocial, ineffectual, and, in an overwhelming number of cases, violent.
Depictions of the Mentally Ill
Studies by Stout2, Wahl3, Livingston4, and Diefenbach5 show a regular set of characteristics are applied to mentally ill characters in adult screen media, combining to form a negative stereotype overall. “Characters with mental illness were portrayed as unemployable—they were less likely to be employed outside the home and more likely to be seen as failures when employed.” (Stout 2004: 551) Mentally disabled characters tend to be shown as “dangerous, unpredictable, unlikable, and incurable,” (Wahl 2007: 122), with abnormal appearances and childlike or unstable demeanors that prevent other characters from taking them seriously (Livingston 2004: 119).
A study conducted by Hyler et al. in 1991 generated a categorization system for the negative stereotypes of mentally disabled characters in adult screen media (Pirkis 2006: 529-530). The most common, the “Homicidal Maniac” is aggressive to the point that he is a danger to himself and to others. This character provides an inordinate amount of dramatic tension and is often the villain or antagonist. Others include the “Female Patient as Seductress,” the hyper-sexualized patient in a mental hospital afflicted with nymphomania, who ought to be punished because she eschews treatment. The “Zoo Specimen” is also a character type set in mental institutions, portrayed as more animal than human and used for blatant scientific observation. The “Failure” or victim is a stereotype that pervades most screen media involving mentally disabled figures: this character is wholly unable to contribute to society, failing to respond to treatments and incapable of supporting himself.
Depictions of the Mentally Ill
Studies by Stout2, Wahl3, Livingston4, and Diefenbach5 show a regular set of characteristics are applied to mentally ill characters in adult screen media, combining to form a negative stereotype overall. “Characters with mental illness were portrayed as unemployable—they were less likely to be employed outside the home and more likely to be seen as failures when employed.” (Stout 2004: 551) Mentally disabled characters tend to be shown as “dangerous, unpredictable, unlikable, and incurable,” (Wahl 2007: 122), with abnormal appearances and childlike or unstable demeanors that prevent other characters from taking them seriously (Livingston 2004: 119).
A study conducted by Hyler et al. in 1991 generated a categorization system for the negative stereotypes of mentally disabled characters in adult screen media (Pirkis 2006: 529-530). The most common, the “Homicidal Maniac” is aggressive to the point that he is a danger to himself and to others. This character provides an inordinate amount of dramatic tension and is often the villain or antagonist. Others include the “Female Patient as Seductress,” the hyper-sexualized patient in a mental hospital afflicted with nymphomania, who ought to be punished because she eschews treatment. The “Zoo Specimen” is also a character type set in mental institutions, portrayed as more animal than human and used for blatant scientific observation. The “Failure” or victim is a stereotype that pervades most screen media involving mentally disabled figures: this character is wholly unable to contribute to society, failing to respond to treatments and incapable of supporting himself.
The “Rebellious Free Spirit” and “the Simpleton” tend to appear in children’s media. Examples of the former include “Crazy Old Maurice”, the eccentric inventor from “Beauty and the Beast”, and Belle, the film’s main character. These characters are viewed by their communities as being “insane” and a detriment to society. To the audience, however, they are portrayed as sympathetic, ill-treated, and misunderstood. In the end these types of characters are often vindicated: “He or she is welcomed back into the community, sending a message that characters who are ‘nice’ cannot be mentally ill, and vice versa” (Pirkis 2006: 529-530). The “Simpleton” is also a frequent character type in children’s media, fulfilling the role of sidekick to the hero or villain: Ed the hyena from “The Lion King” and Pinky of “Pinky and the Brain” are two such examples. The Simpletons provide comic relief but are also irrational and out of touch with reality, making them difficult to reason with.
There is also stereotyping in the way mentally ill characters are framed onscreen. According to a study by Pirkis in 2006, characters with mental illnesses are set apart from the general population with high-contrast lighting, dissonant music cues, and extreme close-ups. These filmic techniques encourage the audience to make assumptions (often unconsciously) about the character onscreen, even before the character has a pronounced a line of dialogue.
In 1989, Signorelli presented a study based on samples of prime-time television programs from 1969 to 1985, collected in 17 week-long sets. His findings showed a trend of overt violence in mentally ill characters: “72.1% of prime-time dramatic adult characters portrayed as mentally ill hurt or killed others...the mentally ill also were the characters most likely to be rated as a “bad” character type and the least likely to be rated as a “good” character type” (Diefenbach 2007: 182). Among this data set, only 2.7% of mentally ill characters appeared in comedic roles, which could have endeared them to the audience.
Diefenbach performed a similar study using a two-week sample of prime-time shows in 1994, looking at 184 programs. Of the 32% which contained characters with mental illness, the mentally ill were ten times more likely than the general population of characters to commit violent crimes6. Over 50% of crime dramas used mentally ill characters as violent offenders and, like Signorelli, Diefenbach found that characters with mental illnesses did not appear in situation comedies. A further study done by Diefenbach in 2003, sampling 84 hours of television on NBC, ABC, CBS, and Fox, found 11 mentally ill characters were portrayed as violent offenders, with “38 violent offenses, including 13 murders, 11 rapes, 2 robberies, 2 aggravated assaults, 9 cases of abuse, and 1 case of reckless endangerment” (Diefenbach 2007: 187). Adding up the math, each mentally ill character would have performed an average of three violent acts.
Comparing these statistics to US crime reports among the mentally disabled, “the persons with mental illness portrayed on television were 10 to 20 times more violent than those with mental illness in the U.S. population.” (Stout 2004: 552)
Just as medical dramas choose physical illnesses that are the most dramatic or photogenic, regardless of their prevalence among actual patients, media producers tend to over-emphasize the pervasiveness of certain mental illnesses. These include identity disorders such as multiple personality disorder, gender identity disorder, and the standby of many soap operas, amnesia. (Pirkis 2006: 530).
Comparing these statistics to US crime reports among the mentally disabled, “the persons with mental illness portrayed on television were 10 to 20 times more violent than those with mental illness in the U.S. population.” (Stout 2004: 552)
Just as medical dramas choose physical illnesses that are the most dramatic or photogenic, regardless of their prevalence among actual patients, media producers tend to over-emphasize the pervasiveness of certain mental illnesses. These include identity disorders such as multiple personality disorder, gender identity disorder, and the standby of many soap operas, amnesia. (Pirkis 2006: 530).
Certainly some films, such as “I am Sam” and “Awakenings,” employ mentally ill characters as their dramatic protagonists. However, there is a great deal of dispute among commentators on the medium over how positive these depictions may actually be. Using the example of John Nash in “A Beautiful Mind,” and David Helfgott in “Shine,” Sieff (2003), Tam (2002), Byrne (2000), and Flory and Darton (2004)7 argue both are inspirational characters living with mental disabilities who went on to become virtuosos in the fields of mathematics and piano. Conversely, Greenberg (2003b), Anderson (2003), Wedding and Niemiec (2003), Hyler (1988), and Rosen and Walter (2000a; 2000b)8 contest that Nash and Helfgott set the unreasonable standard that one must be a genius to be successful and live with a mental disorder.
Depictions of Mental Healthcare Providers
It has already been shown that mental illness is a common theme: it stands to reason that mental health clinicians would make a common appearance in screen media. In studies published in 1999 and 2001, Gabbard and Gabbard9 found 400 instances of psychotherapists being featured across 300 films, over a period of approximately 85 years. Just as victims of mental illness enjoy stereotyping in their onscreen portrayals, so too are mental health professionals stereotyped. These portrayals tend to present healthcare givers as out of touch with the needs of their patients, or as unskilled in their profession.
A ten-year content analysis by Bischoff and Reiter (1999) looked at 61 films involving mental health clinicians, with a total of 99 characters. “Female clinicians were more likely to be portrayed as sexualized and male clinicians were more likely to be portrayed as incompetent. Males were gender-stereotyped as ill-equipped to address the emotional problems of others” (Stout 2004: 553). Pirkis labels these stereotypes as the “Dr. Dippys, Dr. Evils, and Dr. Sexys,” and states that such characters are used dramatically as rationalist foils who are ultimately contemptible (Pirkis 2006: 532).
Depictions of Mental Healthcare Providers
It has already been shown that mental illness is a common theme: it stands to reason that mental health clinicians would make a common appearance in screen media. In studies published in 1999 and 2001, Gabbard and Gabbard9 found 400 instances of psychotherapists being featured across 300 films, over a period of approximately 85 years. Just as victims of mental illness enjoy stereotyping in their onscreen portrayals, so too are mental health professionals stereotyped. These portrayals tend to present healthcare givers as out of touch with the needs of their patients, or as unskilled in their profession.
A ten-year content analysis by Bischoff and Reiter (1999) looked at 61 films involving mental health clinicians, with a total of 99 characters. “Female clinicians were more likely to be portrayed as sexualized and male clinicians were more likely to be portrayed as incompetent. Males were gender-stereotyped as ill-equipped to address the emotional problems of others” (Stout 2004: 553). Pirkis labels these stereotypes as the “Dr. Dippys, Dr. Evils, and Dr. Sexys,” and states that such characters are used dramatically as rationalist foils who are ultimately contemptible (Pirkis 2006: 532).
However, this is a trend that television is starting to relieve10, presenting more tempered, well-rounded portrayals of mental health clinicians. As serial television offers a format to develop characters over the long-term, health care professionals are not so often pigeonholed into two-dimensional representations.
Depictions of Treatments for Mental Disabilities
In screen media, treatments for mental illness appear only if they serve the greater dramatic purpose of the story – not if it is in the best interests of the character. Thus, the most prevalent treatments are the ones that are either physically or psychologically theatrical. This leads to an unbalanced portrayal of the types of medical treatments available for mental illnesses, as well as their methods of application. “Psychotherapy is common...it provides opportunities for the audience to learn what is going on inside the head of the character undergoing treatment. Likewise, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is common because of its melodramatic potential.” (Pirkis 2006: 532) Gabbard and Gabbard’s previously mentioned study of films involving psychotherapists showed no characters whatsoever prescribing medication, though in reality this is the most common and up-to-date treatment.
This imbalance in the quality of mental health professionals and treatments presents a skewed set of information for viewers of fictional screen media who suffer from mental illness. When presented with depictions of overly invasive and melodramatic treatments, mentally impaired viewers may be prevented from seeking treatments for themselves. This is a phenomenon that will be discussed later in this paper.
Depictions of Treatments for Mental Disabilities
In screen media, treatments for mental illness appear only if they serve the greater dramatic purpose of the story – not if it is in the best interests of the character. Thus, the most prevalent treatments are the ones that are either physically or psychologically theatrical. This leads to an unbalanced portrayal of the types of medical treatments available for mental illnesses, as well as their methods of application. “Psychotherapy is common...it provides opportunities for the audience to learn what is going on inside the head of the character undergoing treatment. Likewise, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is common because of its melodramatic potential.” (Pirkis 2006: 532) Gabbard and Gabbard’s previously mentioned study of films involving psychotherapists showed no characters whatsoever prescribing medication, though in reality this is the most common and up-to-date treatment.
This imbalance in the quality of mental health professionals and treatments presents a skewed set of information for viewers of fictional screen media who suffer from mental illness. When presented with depictions of overly invasive and melodramatic treatments, mentally impaired viewers may be prevented from seeking treatments for themselves. This is a phenomenon that will be discussed later in this paper.
Portrayals of Mental Illness in Media for Children
As was discussed in the above section, stereotypes are highly prevalent in the portrayal of mental illnesses in fictional screen media. This occurs to an even greater extent in media developed for children, where characters are often simplified down to a set of essential qualities. This section will explore the studies conducted on the themes of mental illness in children’s media.
Depictions of Mental Illness in Television Programming For Children 14-and-Under
Wahl presents what is considered the definitive study on mental illness in children’s television. His 2007 study sampled 527 children’s programs on ABC, NBC, CBS, WB, Fox, PBS, Cartoon Network, Nickelodeon, and the Disney Channel. Many children’s shows feature characters who are “zany” or who do not act according to real world norms, but nevertheless may not be considered mentally ill. Wahl therefore based his identification of characters with mental illnesses on the standard that other characters within the program recognized the person as mentally disabled. While he took note of labels such as “You’re crazy [to try something like that]”, this was not a sufficient level of identification. (Wahl 2007: 124)
Wahl found only 21 characters out of the 527 programs classified as mentally ill; furthermore, these characters were grouped into 14 programs, with some shows containing more than one mentally disabled figure. This brings the total percentage of children’s programs portraying mental illness to 3%. Mentally ill characters tended to be Caucasian, male, single or without known family, and jobless, continuing the stereotype in adult media of social incompatibility.
As was discussed in the above section, stereotypes are highly prevalent in the portrayal of mental illnesses in fictional screen media. This occurs to an even greater extent in media developed for children, where characters are often simplified down to a set of essential qualities. This section will explore the studies conducted on the themes of mental illness in children’s media.
Depictions of Mental Illness in Television Programming For Children 14-and-Under
Wahl presents what is considered the definitive study on mental illness in children’s television. His 2007 study sampled 527 children’s programs on ABC, NBC, CBS, WB, Fox, PBS, Cartoon Network, Nickelodeon, and the Disney Channel. Many children’s shows feature characters who are “zany” or who do not act according to real world norms, but nevertheless may not be considered mentally ill. Wahl therefore based his identification of characters with mental illnesses on the standard that other characters within the program recognized the person as mentally disabled. While he took note of labels such as “You’re crazy [to try something like that]”, this was not a sufficient level of identification. (Wahl 2007: 124)
Wahl found only 21 characters out of the 527 programs classified as mentally ill; furthermore, these characters were grouped into 14 programs, with some shows containing more than one mentally disabled figure. This brings the total percentage of children’s programs portraying mental illness to 3%. Mentally ill characters tended to be Caucasian, male, single or without known family, and jobless, continuing the stereotype in adult media of social incompatibility.
Furthermore, two-thirds of the identified characters behaved aggressively, attacking other characters or breaking out of prison. Motives for such violent behavior were “purely malicious (7) or retaliatory (5)” [rather] than as self-protective (0) or self- injurious (0)” (Wahl 2007: 127), and none of the characters showed remorse for their actions.
Positive traits such as high intelligence and good personal hygiene were present in one-third to one-half of the characters, respectively. Overall, however, characters with mental illnesses were depicted as the program’s villain and were treated poorly within the context of the show, excluded by the other characters and shown a lack of respect. Very few received treatment (8 out of 21), and only one was shown benefiting from it; two were explicitly not helped.
It is surprising with the strides made by programs such as Sesame Street that there is not a broader and more positive range of characters with mental disabilities in children’s television. The characters identified in Wahl’s study present an unsympathetic and stereotyped view of how the mentally ill look and act. Furthermore, they mimic and support the stereotypes seen in adult screen media, which children will grow up to consume.
Depictions of Mental Illness in Children’s Films
A study published by Wahl, Wood, Zaveri, Drapalski, & Mann (2003)11, rated 49 G- and PG-rated films from 2000-2001 for their depictions of mental illness (again, classified by an in-program identification of mental disability). They found 24% of the films contained characters with mental disabilities, presenting 14 characters total. Like Wahl’s 2007 study of mental illness in children’s television, these characters were primarily Caucasian, male, and single. Many of the mentally ill figures in this study were shown to have altruistic qualities, helping the main character or behaving in a trustworthy manner. However, the same statistic of violence appears: two-thirds behaved aggressively and received fear from other characters more often than sympathy.
Positive traits such as high intelligence and good personal hygiene were present in one-third to one-half of the characters, respectively. Overall, however, characters with mental illnesses were depicted as the program’s villain and were treated poorly within the context of the show, excluded by the other characters and shown a lack of respect. Very few received treatment (8 out of 21), and only one was shown benefiting from it; two were explicitly not helped.
It is surprising with the strides made by programs such as Sesame Street that there is not a broader and more positive range of characters with mental disabilities in children’s television. The characters identified in Wahl’s study present an unsympathetic and stereotyped view of how the mentally ill look and act. Furthermore, they mimic and support the stereotypes seen in adult screen media, which children will grow up to consume.
Depictions of Mental Illness in Children’s Films
A study published by Wahl, Wood, Zaveri, Drapalski, & Mann (2003)11, rated 49 G- and PG-rated films from 2000-2001 for their depictions of mental illness (again, classified by an in-program identification of mental disability). They found 24% of the films contained characters with mental disabilities, presenting 14 characters total. Like Wahl’s 2007 study of mental illness in children’s television, these characters were primarily Caucasian, male, and single. Many of the mentally ill figures in this study were shown to have altruistic qualities, helping the main character or behaving in a trustworthy manner. However, the same statistic of violence appears: two-thirds behaved aggressively and received fear from other characters more often than sympathy.
Wahl et. al. also tracked the terminology used to refer to mentally disabled characters:
“Characters were seldom identified through medical or professional labels; rather they were usually referred to by slang terms such as crazy, psycho, and lunatic. In addition, 21 other films contained references to mental illnesses, and those references tended to involve use of psychiatric terminology to disparage the views or behaviors of others (e.g., “You’re certifiable.” “He’s not as crazy as he looks.” “Have you lost your mind?”).” (Wahl 2007: 123)
Beveridge (1996), and Lawson and Fouts (2004)12 take a more narrow look at films for children, focusing on feature-length Disney animations. Disney films are an appropriate and popular subject of study due to their longevity on the market (they can be tracked across multiple generations), and the tendency of children to view them multiple times over.
Lawson and Fouts coded 34 Disney animations and found an overwhelming 85% referenced mental illness, with such references actually exceeding the number of cases of mental illness worldwide (Lawson 2004: 311). Characters labeled as mentally disabled within the films were identified as objects of either fear or entertainment, and generally inferior to the general population. In reference to Bell and her father in “Beauty and the Beast”, “the children watching could associate mental illness labels with people who are so frightening and dangerous that they must be chained and locked away from the rest of society.” (Lawson 2004: 313)
“Characters were seldom identified through medical or professional labels; rather they were usually referred to by slang terms such as crazy, psycho, and lunatic. In addition, 21 other films contained references to mental illnesses, and those references tended to involve use of psychiatric terminology to disparage the views or behaviors of others (e.g., “You’re certifiable.” “He’s not as crazy as he looks.” “Have you lost your mind?”).” (Wahl 2007: 123)
Beveridge (1996), and Lawson and Fouts (2004)12 take a more narrow look at films for children, focusing on feature-length Disney animations. Disney films are an appropriate and popular subject of study due to their longevity on the market (they can be tracked across multiple generations), and the tendency of children to view them multiple times over.
Lawson and Fouts coded 34 Disney animations and found an overwhelming 85% referenced mental illness, with such references actually exceeding the number of cases of mental illness worldwide (Lawson 2004: 311). Characters labeled as mentally disabled within the films were identified as objects of either fear or entertainment, and generally inferior to the general population. In reference to Bell and her father in “Beauty and the Beast”, “the children watching could associate mental illness labels with people who are so frightening and dangerous that they must be chained and locked away from the rest of society.” (Lawson 2004: 313)
The trends in children’s screen media tend to reflect those seen in media for adults, but on a more overt scale. While a wide range of mentally ill characters is lacking, those existing are primarily violent and irrational. Based on the way healthy characters interact with mentally ill ones, children are being presented the options of either fear or derision.
Impact of the Media on Societal Perceptions of Mental Illness
According to the Cultivation Theory, repetitive and consistent exposure to messages in the media can cause viewers to change their perceptions of social values and norms, and assimilate those values they consume from the media. This theory presents a basis for understanding how consistently negative portrayals of mental illness, spanning media for both children and adults, may effect American society.
Effect of Media Stereotypes on Community Perceptions of Mental Illness
In 2007, Diefenbach conducted a study testing the “cultivation of television viewers’ attitudes toward mental health issues [along with] the third-person effect” (Diefenbach 2007: 181). He sampled 84 hours of television programming in 2003 from NBC, ABC, CBS, and Fox, and supplemented this data with phone surveys to 419 subjects. The resulting data showed that respondents who had a higher education and read the newspaper more often had a higher opinion of people with mental illnesses. Conversely, those with a higher income, older age, or lower education were more likely to mind living next door to a mentally ill person. Those who watched television news more often were less likely to agree to live next door to someone with a mental disability, and believed a mental health service in the neighborhood would “endanger the residents.”13 Diefenbach’s test of the third-person effect was proved positive: “Sixty-five percent of respondents disagreed with the statement that, ‘Watching television affects my attitudes about mental illness.’ Fifty-eight percent, however, agreed with the statement that, ‘Watching television affects the attitudes of people in general about mental illness.’” (Diefenbach 2007: 193)
Impact of the Media on Societal Perceptions of Mental Illness
According to the Cultivation Theory, repetitive and consistent exposure to messages in the media can cause viewers to change their perceptions of social values and norms, and assimilate those values they consume from the media. This theory presents a basis for understanding how consistently negative portrayals of mental illness, spanning media for both children and adults, may effect American society.
Effect of Media Stereotypes on Community Perceptions of Mental Illness
In 2007, Diefenbach conducted a study testing the “cultivation of television viewers’ attitudes toward mental health issues [along with] the third-person effect” (Diefenbach 2007: 181). He sampled 84 hours of television programming in 2003 from NBC, ABC, CBS, and Fox, and supplemented this data with phone surveys to 419 subjects. The resulting data showed that respondents who had a higher education and read the newspaper more often had a higher opinion of people with mental illnesses. Conversely, those with a higher income, older age, or lower education were more likely to mind living next door to a mentally ill person. Those who watched television news more often were less likely to agree to live next door to someone with a mental disability, and believed a mental health service in the neighborhood would “endanger the residents.”13 Diefenbach’s test of the third-person effect was proved positive: “Sixty-five percent of respondents disagreed with the statement that, ‘Watching television affects my attitudes about mental illness.’ Fifty-eight percent, however, agreed with the statement that, ‘Watching television affects the attitudes of people in general about mental illness.’” (Diefenbach 2007: 193)
Thornton and Wahl (1996)14 tested the attitudes of subjects toward mentally ill people using an article on a violently criminal mental patient. Those who were shown the article responded with significantly more negative opinions of the mentally ill than those who did not see the article. Domino (1983)15 administered questionnaires to a group of subjects both before and after the film “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” was released; again, attitudes turned for the worse. (It should be noted here that the scholars did not look into the personal history of their test subjects, and whether or not they had prior contact with the mentally disabled.)
It is apparent, then, that the media has an impact on public responses to mental illness, be it an immediate reaction to a violent character in a film or after years of television viewing. Several studies have tested whether media may then be used to temper media: whether factual, positive portrayals of psychiatric illness may prevent negative reactions toward people with mental disabilities. Wahl and Lefkowits (1989)16 attempted to temper a film depicting a mentally ill killer with a short film trailer that “explained the nonviolent nature of mental illness” (Stout 2004: 555). The students who viewed a control film that didn’t involve mental illness reported significantly higher opinions of mental illness and community care: the film trailer had no effect on responses at all. Similarly, a study conducted by Penn et al. (2003)17 showed 163 participants documentaries on obesity, polar bears, and schizophrenia. “Viewing the documentary about schizophrenia resulted in less likelihood to blame persons with schizophrenia for the disorder but had no impact on general attitudes about the disorder (e.g., perceived dangerousness) or on participants' intentions to interact with persons with schizophrenia” (Stout 2004: 555).
It is apparent, then, that the media has an impact on public responses to mental illness, be it an immediate reaction to a violent character in a film or after years of television viewing. Several studies have tested whether media may then be used to temper media: whether factual, positive portrayals of psychiatric illness may prevent negative reactions toward people with mental disabilities. Wahl and Lefkowits (1989)16 attempted to temper a film depicting a mentally ill killer with a short film trailer that “explained the nonviolent nature of mental illness” (Stout 2004: 555). The students who viewed a control film that didn’t involve mental illness reported significantly higher opinions of mental illness and community care: the film trailer had no effect on responses at all. Similarly, a study conducted by Penn et al. (2003)17 showed 163 participants documentaries on obesity, polar bears, and schizophrenia. “Viewing the documentary about schizophrenia resulted in less likelihood to blame persons with schizophrenia for the disorder but had no impact on general attitudes about the disorder (e.g., perceived dangerousness) or on participants' intentions to interact with persons with schizophrenia” (Stout 2004: 555).
Effect of Media Stereotypes on Children’s Perceptions of Mental Illness
Children become fully socialized adults based on a multiplicity of factors, from peers to parents and mentors and more. This paper does not seek to imply the media is the only source of information children receive when forming opinions about mental illness. However, children are limited in experiential contact with the mentally ill in ways that adults are not. Unless a child has a family member or classmate who suffers from a mental disability, the closest connection they are most likely to have with such afflictions comes from the media. “Children, whose opportunities to encounter and learn about mental illness from other sources (higher education, job experience, etc.) are far more limited than adults, may be even more reliant than adults on mass media, and thus more susceptible to their influence.” (Wahl 2007: 122)
Lopez (1991)18 asked teens 14 to 18 years old what their sources of information on mental illness were; they responded that besides their parents, mass media was the primary source. Granello and Pauley (2000)19 surveyed 154 college undergraduates, monitoring the amount of time spent watching television and asking the same question. A third of the students said television was their primary source of information. “[The] amount of time spent watching television was significantly and positively related to intolerance toward mental illness, was associated with authoritarian views toward people with mental illness, and was associated with less positive attitudes of benevolence” (Stout 2004: 554).
Children become fully socialized adults based on a multiplicity of factors, from peers to parents and mentors and more. This paper does not seek to imply the media is the only source of information children receive when forming opinions about mental illness. However, children are limited in experiential contact with the mentally ill in ways that adults are not. Unless a child has a family member or classmate who suffers from a mental disability, the closest connection they are most likely to have with such afflictions comes from the media. “Children, whose opportunities to encounter and learn about mental illness from other sources (higher education, job experience, etc.) are far more limited than adults, may be even more reliant than adults on mass media, and thus more susceptible to their influence.” (Wahl 2007: 122)
Lopez (1991)18 asked teens 14 to 18 years old what their sources of information on mental illness were; they responded that besides their parents, mass media was the primary source. Granello and Pauley (2000)19 surveyed 154 college undergraduates, monitoring the amount of time spent watching television and asking the same question. A third of the students said television was their primary source of information. “[The] amount of time spent watching television was significantly and positively related to intolerance toward mental illness, was associated with authoritarian views toward people with mental illness, and was associated with less positive attitudes of benevolence” (Stout 2004: 554).
In light of such responses, the fact that children’s media provide a very narrow depiction of mental illnesses and the people who suffer from them indicates the media may be influencing public opinions from a very young age. Furthermore, the Cultivation Theory must be taken into account. As noted with Disney animated films, children have a tendency to watch favorite movies and television shows repeatedly, especially when such programming is condoned by their parents. Repetitive presentations of negative stereotypes are more likely to cause pervasive negative opinions of mental illness later in life, which is then supported by the stereotypes emblazoned across adult media.
Children’s media also lacks portrayals of appropriate responses toward the mentally disabled. Psychiatric terminology is eschewed in favor of terms such as “wacko” or “crazy,” which are used in a negative context even toward healthy characters. Mentally ill characters are portrayed as social outcasts, and other characters express fear and derision toward them. If the media is a primary source of social conditioning for children (even in addition to other factors), it is critically important to present realistic and socially appropriate ways of interacting with the mentally ill.
Effect of Media Stereotypes on the Mentally Ill
This final area of study focuses on the most socially vulnerable: those who suffer from mental disabilities themselves. Facing of a wealth of negative stereotypes (or well- meaning but misinformed positive ones), it is essential to uncover how the mentally ill react to portrayals of social interaction and clinical treatment.
Children’s media also lacks portrayals of appropriate responses toward the mentally disabled. Psychiatric terminology is eschewed in favor of terms such as “wacko” or “crazy,” which are used in a negative context even toward healthy characters. Mentally ill characters are portrayed as social outcasts, and other characters express fear and derision toward them. If the media is a primary source of social conditioning for children (even in addition to other factors), it is critically important to present realistic and socially appropriate ways of interacting with the mentally ill.
Effect of Media Stereotypes on the Mentally Ill
This final area of study focuses on the most socially vulnerable: those who suffer from mental disabilities themselves. Facing of a wealth of negative stereotypes (or well- meaning but misinformed positive ones), it is essential to uncover how the mentally ill react to portrayals of social interaction and clinical treatment.
According to the Surgeon General’s 1999 report on mental health, the stigma associated with mental illness was a “major barrier deterring people with mental illness from acknowledging their mental health problems and seeking treatment” (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 1999). The perpetuated negative imaging of mental illness, alongside the electroshock treatments and “Dr. Sexys” in screen media, can only add to this hesitancy to seek out help.
In consistently identifying the “differences” of the mentally disabled through filmic techniques or ethno-gendered stereotypes, a further internalized level of stigmatization is also occurring. “By symbolically marking the mentally ill as different, images of madness are internalized by many individuals labeled ‘mad.’...Visual representations of insanity by mad artists reveal a borrowed “structure of expression” in which dominant icons of madness as difference shape their own perceptions of their “difference” (Cross 2004: 200).
This, then, is the message American screen media sends to the mentally ill: You are white. You are male. You are unpredictable, illogical, and violent. You are incapable of making lifelong social attachments, or functioning as a productive member of society. You cannot be cured.
In consistently identifying the “differences” of the mentally disabled through filmic techniques or ethno-gendered stereotypes, a further internalized level of stigmatization is also occurring. “By symbolically marking the mentally ill as different, images of madness are internalized by many individuals labeled ‘mad.’...Visual representations of insanity by mad artists reveal a borrowed “structure of expression” in which dominant icons of madness as difference shape their own perceptions of their “difference” (Cross 2004: 200).
This, then, is the message American screen media sends to the mentally ill: You are white. You are male. You are unpredictable, illogical, and violent. You are incapable of making lifelong social attachments, or functioning as a productive member of society. You cannot be cured.
III. WHAT SHOULD WE DO ABOUT IT? (3 - 5 pages; 750 - 1,250 words)
This is the part of the paper where you provide concrete recommendations for what we, as a society, should/can do to help ameliorate the problem. Be specific. Use your own critical thinking abilities to develop steps that we should take. What should policymakers do? How about parents? Teachers? Doctors? Any/all appropriate groups for your subject area?
Here's an example from one of the position papers posted on the blog:
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Pediatricians should ask parents and patients 2 key questions about media use: (1) How much time per day does the child or teenager spend with screen media? and (2) Is there a TV set or unrestricted, unmonitored Internet connection throughout the house, including in the child’s bedroom?109 This recommendation should be incorporated into every well-child visit, as outlined in Bright Futures. 110
2. Pediatricians should encourage parents to discuss food advertising with their children as they monitor children’s TV-viewing and teach their children about appropriate nutrition.111–113
3. Pediatricians should continue to counsel parents to limit total noneducational screen time to no more than 2 hours/day, to avoid putting TV sets and Internet connections in children’s bedrooms, to coview with their children, to limit nighttime screen media use to improve children’s sleep, and to try strongly to avoid screen exposure for infants under the age of 2 years. In a recent study of 709 7- to 12-yearolds, children who did not adhere to the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines of less than 2 hours/ day of screen time114 and 11 000 to 13 000 pedometer steps per day were 3 to 4 times more likely to be overweight.115 Conversely, preschoolaged children who ate dinner with their parents, got adequate sleep, and had limited screen-time hours had a 40% lower prevalence of obesity than those exposed to none of these routines.116
4. Pediatricians should work with community groups and schools to implement media education programs in child care centers, schools, and community-based programs such as the YMCA. Such programs that teach children how to understand and interpret advertisements may have the potential to immunize young people against harmful media effects.117 In addition, programs that educate parents about limiting media use in general have already been shown to be highly effective.8,38,39,118,119 Pediatricians should work with their state chapters, the AAP, parent and public health groups, and the White House120 to do the following:
● Ask Congress, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Federal Communications Commission to implement a ban on junk-food advertising during programming that is viewed predominantly by young children.84,121,122 Currently, several European countries restrict food advertising aimed at young children.123 Several food manufacturers have already indicated a willingness to implement such a ban voluntarily,124,125 but it remains to be seen whether they will follow through.126–128 For example, children’s cereals remain considerably unhealthier than adult cereals; they contain 85% more sugar, 65% less fiber, and 60% more sodium.129 One-quarter of all food and beverage advertising originates from companies that do not participate in the initiative, and two-thirds of all advertising by companies that do participate is still for food and beverages of low nutritional value.85 In addition, the food and beverage industry remains steadfastly opposed to any regulation. For example, in 2007, 1 soft drink company spent more than $1.7 million to lobby against marketing restrictions and school nutrition legislation.130 Two recent studies showed that a ban on fast-food ads would reduce the number of overweight children and adolescents in the United States by an estimated 14% to 18%.131,132 Just eliminating federal tax deductions for fast-food ads that target children would reduce childhood obesity by 5% to 7%.131 On the other hand, advertisements and public service announcements for health foods and healthy nutritional practices should be encouraged. One recent experiment showed that children exposed to attractive advertisements for healthy foods develop significantly more positive attitudes than children shown junk-food ads.133
● Ask Congress and the Federal Communications Commission to prohibit interactive advertising involving junk food or fast food to children via digital TV, cell phones, and other media79–81,121 and to ban payments for product placement in movies. Restoring power to the Federal Trade Commission to more tightly regulate children’s advertising could be another way of accomplishing this goal.84,134,135
● Ask Congress to fund media research (eg, the Children Media Research and Advancement Act [CAMRA]). More research is specifically needed to determine
(1) how heavy media use in children reflects or contributes to psychosocial elements of the child’s life, such as stress in the home,
(2) how new media technologies may be playing a role in exacerbating exposure to ads or encouraging more sedentary behavior, and
(3) which of the above-mentioned mechanisms is most responsible for contributing to obesity and how such mechanisms can be ameliorated.83,134
● Encourage the production of more counteradvertising and more prosocial video games136,137 and Web sites that encourage 204 children to choose healthy foods.82
5. Pediatricians should be aware that children with high levels of screen time have higher levels of childhood stress, which puts them at risk not only for obesity but also for a number of stress-associated morbidities (eg, mood disorders, substance abuse, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, asthma).138 Consequently, displacing screen time with more prosocial or resilience-building activities (eg, exercise, imaginative or social play) is an important approach to addressing a wide array of societal ills including obesity.139
IV. CONCLUSION (1 - 2 pages; 250 - 500 words)
Finally, your paper should have a "conclusion" section-- 1 page or so (250 words+). This section should provide closure for the overall paper.
The finished paper should be 10 - 15+ pages:
1-3 pages (Intro)
5-6 pages (What we know)
3-5 pages (What we should do about it)
1- page (Wrapping it up)
-----------
10-15 pages
Here's a sample conclusion:
Conclusion
This paper sought to uncover the number and quality of roles given to mentally disabled characters in American screen media, and the social perceptions cultivated within the context of such programming. Studies of screen media produced for adults and children show mental illness in the media is characterized by a common group of characteristics, resulting in a set of negative stereotypes.
While mental illness is often a theme used in dramatic media, actual occurrences of mentally disabled characters are in the small minority, presenting only a slim opportunity for comparison. In screen media intended for adults, mentally ill characters are depicted as unkempt, unpredictable, anti-social, and violent, and are more likely to be present in crime dramas than situational comedies. Among children’s media, these characters are portrayed predominantly as white males, whom other characters respond to with terror or amusement. They are the villains or buffoons, but seldom receive treatment or learn to live successful, pro-social lives.
Children who are limited by experiential contact with mentally ill people tend to place more emphasis on the opinions they see portrayed in the media. This, coupled with Mick 18 the tendency toward repeat viewing (encouraged by their parents) and continued repetition of stereotypes into adulthood, perpetuates negative opinions of the mentally ill. It has reached the point that even positive media interventions are not causing test subjects to respond favorably toward social interactions with the mentally disabled. The subgroup most overtly affected by the stigmatized portrayals of mental illness is those with mental handicaps themselves.
A half-century of negatively-portrayed mental health clinicians and treatments has served to deter people with mental illnesses from seeking out therapy. Much work needs to be done in the areas of research and social awareness. Mental illnesses have a long history of social stigmatization, and this has become branded onto the American screen.
Comments
Post a Comment