This dissertation has been 69-15,957 microfilmed exactly as received

SANDERS, James Taggart, 1935- A DEVELOPMENTAL STUDY OF PREFERENCES FOR TELEVISION CARTOONS.

The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1969 Psychology, general

University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan A DEVELOPMENTAL STUDY OP PBEFEBENCES

FOE TELEVISION CARTOONS

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By

James Taggart Sanders, A.B., M.A.

#*###*

The Ohio State University 1969

Approved by

Adviser Department of Psychology ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I should like to thank my adviser, Dr. John Horrocks, whose patience and support endured the sternest tests that any graduate student could devise. I am very grate­ ful.

I should also like to thank my good friend, Dr.

Steven Buma, who suggested the basic Idea of this study, although he bears no responsibility for any of the de­ fects in its elaboration.

Finally, I wish to acknowledge the very considerable contributions of two of my Canadian colleagues, Drs. S, H.

Irvine and A. G. Slemon. Their continuous encouragement and help are greatly appreciated.

11 VITA

February 12 1935 Born - Canton, Ohio

1957 . . • • III A.B., Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts

1963-196A • t • • Teaching Assistant, Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio I96A . . . M*A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1964-1966 • . . « Assistant Instructor, Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1967-1969 • • , • Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology and Sociology, Althouse College of Education, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada TABLE OP CONTENTS

Chapter Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... 11

VITA ...... Ill

LIST OF T A B L E S ...... V I INTRODUCTION...... 1

II CHILDREN AND TELEVISION...... 7

III M E T H O D ...... 16

IV RESULTS...... 27

V DISCUSSION......

VI SUMMARY...... '...... 5k

APPENDIXES

A CARTOON CARDS...... 57

B PREFERENCE RECORD F O R M ...... 68

C INTERCORRELATION MATRIX . * ...... 70

BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 72

i

lv LIST OF TABLES

Table Page 1 CHRONOLOGICAL-AGE MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS BY GRADE AND S E X ...... 17

2 SATURDAY MORNING TELEVISION L O G ...... 18 3 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE i ALL CARTOONS ...... 27

4 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCEi 9i00 A.M. CARTOONS . . . 29

5 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCEi 9*30 A.M. CARTOONS . . . 29

6 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCEi lOlOO A.M. CARTOONS . . . 30

7 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE! 10*30 A.M. CARTOONS . . . 30

8 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE! 11*00 A.M. CARTOONS . . . 31

9 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE* 11*30 A.M. CARTOONS . . . 31

10 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE* 12*00 P.M. CARTOONS . . . 32

11 MEAN PREFERENCE BANKS BY SEX AND CARTOON . . . 33 12 ^COEFFICIENTS OF CONCORDANCE (W) * MALES .... 35 13 COEFFICIENTS OF CONCORDANCE (W) * FEMALES . . . 36

14 MOST PREFERRED CARTOONS BY SEX AND TIME .... 39 15 INTERCORRELATIONS BETWEEN CARTOONS MOST PREFERRED BY M A L E S ...... 40

16 INTERCORRELATIONS BETWEEN CARTOONS MOST PREFERRED BY FEMALES...... 41

17 CHI-SQUARE ANALYSES OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN IDENTIFICATION CHOICE AND MOST PREFERRED CARTOON • 43

v CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION •••A pause in the day*s occupations That is known as the Children's Hour Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

The broad purpose of the present study was to investi­ gate the viewing preferences of kindergarten and elementary school pupils for a popular variety of children's tele- vision entertainment — the animated cartoon. To this end* an attempt was made to determine age-grade trends and sex differences in children's preferences for a representative sampling of this television program category. A further purpose of this investigation was to explore the children's reasons for their preferences, as well as their expressed perceptions of and attitudes toward selected cartoons and cartoon characters. This was accomplished by means of a semi-structured, free-response interview. In recent years, the animated cartoon has come to rep­ resent the chief staple of American television entertain­ ment programming that is intended more or less exclusively for juvenile consumption. All three of the major, commer­ cial television networks (viz., ABC, CBS, and NBC) currently telecast a large number of animated cartoon series, of which the majority are shown during Saturday morning. For example, at the time the present study was

conducted, the program log for the three, local, network- affiliated television stations Indicated that approximate­

ly five consecutive hours of every Saturday morning (from

?i30 a.m. until 12i30 p.m.) were almost exclusively de­ voted to this type of children's entertainment program.

In addition, It has been recently estimated that these

cartoons regularly attract an audience of approximately 30 million children (Globe and Mall. Nov. 15* 1967). Clear­

ly, a vast number of children spend a considerable amount of time watching a large assortment of cartoons on tele­ vision.

Apart from the fact that "children's television enter­ tainment" has become largely equivalent in meaning to ani­ mated cartoons, an equally Interesting circumstance associ­ ated with this entertainment is that the majority of these cartoon programs are telecast at essentially the same time, i.e.. Saturday morning, by all of the networks and in di­ rect viewer competition with one another. The somewhat pe­ culiar result of these programming and scheduling practices

Is that the child viewer is provided with an unusually con­ centrated surfeit of homogeneous entertainment from which choice on the basis of program category has been virtually

excluded*

Prom the point of view of the present study* these

twin circumstances of (1) en bloc scheduling and (2) pro­

gram uniformity appeared to provide a natural analogue to

the more controlled psychological preference paradigm in­ volving (1) the simultaneous presentation of (2) similar

stimuli or preference objects. As a result, it was large­

ly for these reasons, therefore, that preference was se­

lected as the primary datum of interest in this investi­

gation. In other words, recognizing that this domain of

children's television entertainment imposes somewhat

unique limitations (or controls) upon viewing choice, it

was deemed of first importance to determine simply what

cartoons children choose or prefer to watch.

The general psychological model of preference, which

suggests, for example, that important individual or devel­

opmental differences may be inferred from differential preference behavior, includes implicitly two methodologi­

cal provisions governing the determination of preferences

that may be broadly described as (1) stimulus control and

(2) response autonomy. That is, the psychological mean­

ing or interpretation of preferences is to a large extent

dependent upon (1) a systematic description and presenta­ tion of the class of preference objects (stimulus control), as well as (2) the Identification and elimination of arbi­ trary and irrelevant restrictions upon preferential choice

(response autonomy)*

As suggested, the uninterrupted and competitive pro­ gramming of animated cartoons on Saturday morning simulates to some extent the simultaneous, comparative presentation of a more or less well-defined class of preference objects*

And to this extent, the preference domain under considera­ tion reflects the kind of stimulus control implied by the general model*

Similarly, there are a number of factors associated with this preference behavior that would appear to promote a significant degree of response autonomy. In particular, the television cartoons, as home-based and virtually cost- free mass-media entertainment, are readily available or accessible to children of widely varying ages* In this sense, children's preferences are less apt to be differen­ tially determined by such contingencies as expense, trans­ portation or distribution which very likely affect child­ ren's exposure to and preferences for other popular enter­ tainment media, e.g.. motion pictures, comic books, phono­ graph records, etc*

Furthermore, the concurrent and appositlonal program­ ming of the television cartoons during the Saturday fore­ noon hours indicates that they do not compete with either the preferred viewing hours or the preferred television programs of adults. This time scheduling is also less

likely to conflict with such childhood routines as study hours or bedtime curfews — not to mention the more insti­

tutionalized demands of school and church attendance.

Finally, there is some evidence that the television

cartoons are generally regarded favorably by parents and

considered appropriate Juvenile entertainment (Globe and

Mall. Nov 15, 1967). This would suggest that children's viewing preferences within this program category are less

likely to be subject to the kind of parental censorship

and control, that may be exercised with respect to other

television programming, e.g.. crime drama, television movies, etc.

These combined factors were assumed to permit an im­ portant degree of autonomy or self-determination within

children's choice or preference behavior that greatly en­ hanced the potential psychological projective significance

of this behavior. In other words, given the presence of

these circumstances that tended to Increase a child's

freedom of choice and to decrease possible extraneous

sources of preference variance, it was assumed that there was a greater likelihood that a child's preferences would

be significantly related to his psychological-developmen­

tal status as broadly referenced by his age and sex. One final consideration that prompted and supported the decision to focus attention upon the description and analysis of children’s cartoon preferences relates to the somewhat special characteristics of the animated cartooni

Itself. Specifically, the animated cartoon represents a highly caricatured and stereotyped genre of television or cinematic entertainment that Is clearly identifiable by a technically-produced stylistic consistency. That Is,

In Its stylistic essentials, the animated cartoon might be described as consisting of a rapidly projected series of two-dimensional drawings of low definition that create the illusion of sudden or antic movement. This relative, for­ mal or stylistic homogeneity suggested that children's preferences were more apt to be based upon discrimlnable differences in the content or message of the cartoons. In short, this near stylistic equivalence among cartoons, as well as their generally simplistic levels of plot and

characterization, were felt to support the logical valid­ ity of a content or thematic analysis of the preference CHAPTER II

CHILDREN AND TELEVISION

In relation to the present study, the research litera­ ture dealing with the effects of the mass media, in general, and television, in particular, Is largely peripheral (and perhaps cautionary) in its implications. As a recent review of research (Tannenbaum & Greenberg, 1968) has aptly char­ acterized the field1

It is an ambiguously defined potpourri of prob­ lems and variables which appear to merit inves­ tigation merely because the so-called mass me­ dia (the press, radio, television, movies, etc.) exist as ubiquitous institutions in our society. It is a multi- rather than inter-disciplinary academic area with a relatively undefined sub­ stantive or methodological core.

In this sense, there exists no theoretically-oriented, con­ vergent body of empirical research that served to initiate or guide the present investigation.

In the absence of any clear precedents or criteria for relevant research, the present chapter represents a broad summary and critique of research that shares, at least, certain manifest similarities with the present study. In particular, special attention has been given to large- sample, naturalistic field studies of the effects of com­ mercial television. While perhaps an overly simplistic and exclusive basis for selection It was felt that a more com­ prehensive survey of the mass media literature would con­

tribute little, If any, additional contextual clarity to

the present study. No doubt the primary Impetus that has sustained media

research has been the pervasive and persistent public con­

cern (and occasional alarm) regarding the potentially awe­

some capacity of the mass media to Influence belief and behavior. And perhaps the most recent and intense expres­

sion of this chronic societal anxiety has been the question of the nature and extent of television's effects upon child­ ren. The frequency and regularity with which this issue is passionately debated in magazine articles or in the press bears witness to the enduring vitality of this popular con­

troversy. The somewhat special priority assigned to the question of television's influence upon children is no less apparent in the more dispassionate sociological and psychological

research efforts to describe and evaluate the medium's

effects. For example, what are perhaps the two most ambi­

tious community surveys of television's effects are entit­

led Television and the child (Himmelweit et ai*, 1958) and Television in the lives of our children (Schramm et aj..,

1961). A similar focal concern with the visual mass media's influence upon children's behavior is reflected in a group of related experimental studies dealing with the effects of film-mediated, incidental or observational learn­ ing (Bandura et al*, 19^31 Lovaas, I96I 1 Mussen & Rutherford, 1961). In addition to this child-centered concern Kith the effects of television, many researchers seem to share tacit­ ly a negative, generalized expectancy of outcome. That is, the broad question that prompts this research, namely, MWhat are the effects of television upon children?", is clearly elliptical. The real, implicit question being asked is, "Vhat are the possible or probable detrimental effects of television upon children?"• As a consequence, research tends to be oriented in the direction of identifying and estimating the undesirable effects of television viewing.

In clarifying the purpose of his book, Television and our children. Shayon (1951» P» 18) speaks for a majority of in­ vestigators when he remarks ",..we are not concerned with television's virtues," Bather, by clear implication, the search Is for television's vices. Haccoby (1964*) bas com­ mented upon a similarly censorious trend in mass media re­ search generally1

The findings summarized above have been predomi­ nantly negative in their Implications concerning mass media effects. This has been partly due to the nature of the problems researchers have cho­ sen to study.

As a result, research summaries of the effects of television upon children frequently represent a catalogue of the medium's influences judged to be actually or 10 potentially injurious in some sense* While it can be ar­ gued that the identification of the undesirable effects of television possesses a kind of societal urgency or priority* this nearly exclusive researcher orientation has tended to result in a somewhat biased estimate of television’s ef­ fects*

Apart from this persistent critical orientation, per­ haps a more fundamental theoretical bias of television re­ search has been the tendency to conceptualize the problem of television’s influence as a problem of effects* Tannen- baum and Greenberg (1968) note that "most such efforts are directed almost exclusively at the effects of media,M and that "••• the effects sector continues to be the principal

focus of research." As a number of investigators (Ballyn, 1959l Maccoby,

1964; Hlmmelwelt et al., 1953) have pointed out, this ap­ proach or focus entails the thorny semantic-conceptual problem of what one means by "effects"* For what the pub­

lic’s concern with the effects of television upon children perhaps falls to recognize is that such effects may be variously construed as general or specific, temporary or

enduring, direct or indirect, immediate or delayed, etc*, and not simply desirable or undesirable.

The other half of this "effects" approach in tele­ vision research is the conceptualization of television as 11 a "cause**. In psychological causal terms, this research would seem to assume, at least Implicitly, that television

constitutes a kind of complex, bi-sensory stimulus with a

certain range of demonstrable effects.

Becent and notable opposition to such a discrete

stimulus characterization of television has come from me­

dia expert Marshall McLuhan. McLuhan (1964) argues that

the influence of television has been so totally and subtly pervasive that the medium constitutes essentially a new

environment for which an analysis of its effects would be

both endless and inappropriatei

Television is environmental and imperceptible, like all environments (p. ix).

Elsewhere, McLuhan (1964) contends thati

The effect of TV, as the most recent and spec­ tacular electric extension of our central ner­ vous system, is hard to grasp for various rea­ sons. Since it has affected the totality of our lives, personal and social and political, it would be quite unrealistic to attempt a "systematic" or visual presentation of such influence (p. 276).

It is wise to withhold all value judgments when studying these media matters, since their ef­ fects are not capable of being isolated (p. 274).

In summary, McLuhan's views would suggest that the mode of analysis in mass media research, particularly

television as the cause of certain discrete effects, rep­

resents an unrealistic, or perhaps even impossible, con­

struction of the problem. It is unclear whether McLuhan 12

Is claiming that an effects analysis of television's Influ­ ence Is Impossible, In principle, because of the Intrin­ sically environmental character of the medium, or whether such an analysis is merely difficult because of the enor­ mous range of its effects. Presumably the latter is a much weaker claim and a less damaging criticism of the effects sector of television research.

Whatever the epistemological force of McLuhan*s crit­ icism, it is at least broadly descriptive of what appears to be a manifest limitation upon effects research. In particular, efforts to.describe the influence of televi­ sion, in general, entail an extremely abstract level of causal conceptualization — not unlike the causal usage of the concept of environment. Description or analysis at this molar level of stimulus characterization must per­ force exclude the description of any differential effects perhaps related to differences in the content or message of the medium.

Reflecting this molar approach, the most common, em­ pirical index of television's generalized influence has been simply the estimated time spent watching television.

And the findings and conclusions perhaps most closely as­ sociated with this measure are what have been described as "displacement effects" (Himmelweit e£ a^ , 1958)* Es­ sentially, displacement effects establish that time spent 13 watching television Involves the displacement or reduction of some amount of time spent In other activities. For ex­ ample, a number of studies (Baxter, 1960-1961; Himmelwelt et al.. 1958| Maccoby, 1951) have Indicated that television time may be borrowed from sleep time or from time previous­ ly expended In usage of other mass media.

While displacement effects have perhaps important soc­ iological Implications, they tend to be psychological unin­ teresting. Beyond demonstrating the kind of time displace­ ments and deployments that follow the Introduction of the time-consuming activity of watching television, they shed little or no light on the question of the content- or program-related effects of television exposure. In short, displacement effects would seem to provide only a very in­ direct answer to the question, HWhat are the effects of television?**. Of special relevance, perhaps, to the above question have been the frequent efforts to investigate the effects of television upon children's school achievement. And

Maccoby (196*0 notes that **it is not uncommon to find a negative correlation between the amount of viewing and school grades." The finding, however, again suggests a mediating displacement. That is, time spent viewing tele­ vision is likely to usurp the time spent in academic study or preparation which are instrumental to school success. 14

Regarding this interpretation, however, Maccoby (1964) argues thati

This finding can be an artificial product of intelligence. That is, the children with higher I.Q.'s view less on the average, and, of course, they also obtain higher grades in school. When Intelligence is controlled, the relationship between grades and hours of viewing tends to be small if indeed it does disappear altogether.

Apart from the implication that the amount of television viewing or exposure may be only spuriously or very indi­

rectly related to school achievement, Maccoby's analysis points up one of the more fundamental, inherent difficul­

ties encountered in media research, namely, the inferen­

tial limitations of correlational analysis with respect to

causal relationships.

In summary, the data and conclusions of an important

sector of television research do suggest (as McLuhan seem­

ingly contends) that television, per se, constitutes a

highly synthetic and particularly unwieldy causal abstrac­

tion whose Influence is difficult both to (1) measure or

dimensionalize except in terms of gross estimates of view­

ing time and (2) evaluate or interpret beyond a descrip­

tion of indirect, displacement phenomena.

Somewhat in contrast to this large-scale research,

the present study limited its concern to a single kind or

category of television program. It was not the intent of this limitation, however, to simplify or control the pro­ gram or message component of television as a means of iso­ lating the medium’s more generalized effects. On the con­ trary, the purpose of the present study was a more exclu­ sive concern with a highly unique species of television programming that has come to represent an almost institu­ tionalized form of contemporary Juvenile entertainment. CHAPTER III

METHOD

Subjects The 210 subjects for this study were obtained from the kindergarten and elementary school of a suburban com­ munity near Columbus, Ohio. The sample consisted of 30 children (15 boys and 15 girls) from each of seven, school-grade levels (kindergarten through sixth grade). In general, the children came from families whose socio­ economic status would be described as somewhat above that of the average American family. Intelligence quotients for the elementary school children ranged from 62 to 138 with the median being 114. General intelligence test data was not available for the kindergarten sample. Subjects were selected solely on the basis of grade level and sex. Fifteen boys and 15 girls were randomly selected from each of the seven grades for inclusion in the study# Because participation in the study carried connotations of privileged play, however, abbreviated, sham interviews were conducted with the few remaining children at each of the various grade levels to avoid 16 17 discriminatory implications and allay disappointment* All of the children interviewed came from homes having one or more television sets. Table 1 presents the chronological- age means and standard deviations for the various grade levels included in the study.

TABLE 1 CHBONOLOGICAL-AGE MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS BY GRADE AND SEX

Grade Boys Girls Mean SD (mos.) Mean SD (mos.

Kdg. 5-11 3 6-0 3 1 7-0 3 6-11 3 2 8-1 6 8-0 A 3 9-1 A 9-0 3 A 10-1 A 10-0 A 5 11-1 6 11-1 A 6 12-2 6 12-0 7

Materials At the time the present study was conducted, the greatest concentration of television cartoons occurred on Saturday morning between the hours of 9t00 a.m. and 12t30 p.m. During this three and one-half hour time period, all three stations telecast animated cartoon series that began on the half hour. The single exception was the half-hour time period from lltOO a.m. until Ili30 a.m. when only two of the three television stations telecast cartoons. Each of these half-hour programs features a main car­ toon character or characters whose episodes are presented each week In a continuing series for the duration of the television season, or from approximately mid-September un­ til early June# Table 2 lists the cartoon series by time and affiliated national network as they appeared in the local television log#

TABLE 2

SATURDAY MORNING TELEVISION LOG BY TIME AND NETWORK

Time CBS NBC ABC

9*00 Marine Boy Super Six Magi11a Gorilla 9*30 Underdog Atom Ant Porky Pig IOiOO The Impossibles The Flintstones King Kong 10*30 Space Ghost Space Kidettes The Beatles lliOO Superman Secret Squirrel (No cartoon) 11*30 The Lone Banger The Jetsons Milton Monster 12*00 The Road Runner Cool McCool Bugs Bunny

The preference data obtained in the present study con­ cerned only the twenty (20) cartoon programs listed in

Table 2# These cartoons, however, did represent a large majority of the animated cartoons available to children on television and, as such, were felt to constitute a reason­ ably comprehensive sample of the content of the program category# The material used to obtain the children's cartoon preferences consisted of a set of twenty .4" z 6" cards representing the twenty cartoon programs listed In Table

2. Each card bore (1) the name of one of the cartoon pro­ grams in largei primary type and (2) a pen-and-ink draw­ ing of the main cartoon character or characters featured in the program series. Photocopies of the cards appear in

Appendix A. Each of these program picture cards was laminated with transparent plastic for protective purposes and to facilitate handling. In general, the cards simulated the texture and appearance of conventional playing cards which served to enhance greatly the attractiveness of the pref­ erence-rating task, especially for the younger children.

More importantly, the picture cards tended to eliminate reading ability as a source of preference distortion and seemed to assist the discriminative recall of program con­ tent.

Procedure

Each child was interviewed individually concerning his cartoon preferences. The duration of the interview varied approximately between 1$ and 20 minutes per sub­

ject. Prior to the Interviews, the classroom teachers announced to their classes that in the coming week, a gentleman would be talking with each of them about their 20 favorite television programs and that everyone would have a chance to tell him what shows they liked best.

The first part of the interview was devoted to obtain­ ing each subject's preferential rankings for the twenty

(20) cartoons by means of a modified, forced-choice pro­ cedure. The task was introduced to each child as simply an attempt to find out what children in his school thought were the best cartoons on television. Parenthetically, enthusiasm for the task greatly exceeded the investiga­ tor's expectations and generally made any preliminary, conversational efforts to establish rapport unnecessary.

Beginning with the three cartoons telecast at 9t00 a.m. on Saturday morning (See Table 2), the three corres­ ponding picture cards (See Appendix A) were arrayed before the subject. As the picture cards were dealt, the name of each of the three cartoon programs was pronounced aloud to the subject. Each subject was then asked whether he had ever seen or watched these cartoons. Somewhat unex­ pectedly, all of the children interviewed acknowledged having seen all of the cartoons represented at least once.

With the three picture cards arrayed before him for reference, the subject was asked to choose his favorite cartoon or the cartoon that he liked to watch the most.

Following the child's nomination, the choice was recorded 21 on the Interview form (See Appendix B) and the first- choice card was withdrawn from the array.

The child was then asked to suppose that he could not watch his favorite (first-choice) program and to Indicate which of the two remaining cartoons he would like to watch the most. The child's nomination was recorded as his sec­ ond choice and the remaining cartoon, by elimination, as his third choice within that particular half-hour, program tlme-block.

The foregoing procedure was repeated for each of the succeeding half-hour time periods, I.e.. 9*30 a.m. to

10(00 a.m., lOtOO a.m. to 10i30 a.m., etc. This series of procedures yielded seven (7) sets of preferential rankings

(first, second, and third choices) for each subject. The single exception, which necessitated a modification of this procedure, was the half-hour time period from 11*00 a.m. to 11 a30 a.m. when only two animated cartoons were telecast. In this singular Instance, subjects' prefer­ ences with respect to these two cartoons were recorded and treated as first and third choices for the eventual pur­ pose of determining each subject's overall, I.e.. most and least preferred, cartoon preferences.

As suggested, one result of these Initial across-net- work, but within-time-period preference rankings was a set of seven (7) "more preferred" (I.e.. first-choice) and a set of seven (7) "less preferred" (i.e., third-choice) car­ toons for each subject. Using these two subsets of pref­ erence ranking8 , an attempt was made to determine each sub­ ject's overall or singularly most preferred and his overall or singularly least preferred cartoons. It was assumed that if a subject's previous preferential rankings had been reliable, then his first- and third-choice subsets of pref­ erence rankings should logically contain his overall, most and least preferred cartoons, respectively.

It should be noted that the initial, across-network, within-time-period preference procedure did not permit any additional assumptions regarding the absolute rank order of these first- and third-choice cartoons within the total set of twenty (20) cartoons. In other words, a cartoon that was ranked first in its half-hour time period, e.g.. 9*30 a.m. to XOiOO a.m., could not be confidently assumed to be preferred more than the second- or even third-ranked car­ toons at other times, e.g.. 11i30 a.m. to 12i00 p.m. Con­ versely, a cartoon ranked third in its time period could not be assumed to be preferred less than the second- or first-ranked cartoons at other times. Theoretically, the

'absolute' rank of each cartoon within the total set of

20 cartoons could have been obtained for each subject by a lengthy series of forced-choice, binary comparisons

(viz.. N(N-l)/2 a 20(19)/2 = 190). It was decided, 23 however* that the uncertain gains in psychometric preci­ sion to be derived from such a procedure did not offset the tedium and fatigue that it was likely to produce in child subjects*

To determine each subject’s overall, most preferred cartoon, the subset of the seven (7)» first-choice cartoon picture cards selected by that subject were subsequently arrayed before him* At this time, the subject was remind­ ed that these cards represented the television cartoons that he previously had said he watched or would like to watch the most* Again, the subject was asked to suppose that he could only watch one of these seven, favorite car­ toons, and then to choose which of these he would like to watch most of all*

It should be mentioned that a number of the younger children were initially either unable or unwilling to nom­ inate their singularly, most preferred cartoon, and did so only after some additional explanation and/or urging by the investigator* To this extent at least, there was some evidence that this overall, preference-ranking task may have elicited some mildly conflicting approach tendencies*

Following the child’s selection of his most preferred cartoon, he was then asked to explain briefly why that was his favorite cartoon or to tell some of the things he lik­ ed about that cartoon. Except in the occasional instances of extreme loquacity, the Investigator attempted to keep a near verbatim or "key-phraseM record of each subject's rea­ sons for his overall preference.

A procedure essentially Identical to the foregoing was followed to determine each subject's overall, least pre­ ferred cartoon and the reasons for his selection. In this procedure, however, the subset of the seven (7 ), third- choice cartoon picture cards selected by that subject were arrayed before him. Again the subject was reminded that these cards represented some of those television cartoons that he had Indicated he did not like as well as some of the other cartoons. The subject was then asked to select the cartoon that he thought was the worst. It was occa­ sionally necessary to repeat or rephrase the question in syntax more familiar (if less grammatical!) to the young­ er children to insure that they understood the essential meaning of a negative preference ranking, e.g.. "Which of these cartoons do you think Is the 'baddest', or Isn't as good as the others?"•

Finally, each subject was again requested to explain briefly why he thought his selection was the worst car­ toon or to tell some of the things he disliked about that cartoon. This concluded the preference determination por­ tion of the interview.

For the remainder of the interview, each subject was 25 queried with a series of five (5 ) questions concerning the entire set of twenty (20) animated cartoons. The 20 pic­ tures cards were arranged in 4 rows of 5 cards each before the subject for reference and review. In introducing this portion of the interview, the five questions were describ­ ed as representing a playful, if improbable, imaginative exercise in order to improve their face validity for the older children.

In order of their presentation, the 5 questions and their accompanying, follow-up probes were as follows»

1. Let's pretend Just for fun that you could be any one of these cartoon characters that you wanted. Who would you like to be most of all? Why would you like to be (Name) ?

2. Of all these cartoon characters, who would you like to have as a best friend? Why do you think (Name) would make a good friend?

3. Who do you think is the funniest of all these characters? Who makes you laugh the most? What are some of the funny things that (Name) does?

4. Which one of these characters is the strong­ est? What makes you think that (Name) is the strongest of all?

5 . Who do you think is the smartest of all? What makes you think that (Name) is pretty smart?

Before each question was posed, subjects were urged to consider (look at) all the cartoons before making their selections and were reminded that a cartoon charac­ ter could be chosen more than once. Again, in addition to recording each subject's 5 nominations, an attempt was made to record each subject's reasons for his choices. CHAPTER IV RESULTS

The total set of preferential ranks across all car­ toons and all subjects was analysed by means of the analy­ sis of variance design described by Winer (1962, pp. 337- 34-9)* The summary of this overall analysis of variance is presented in Table 3,

TABLE 3 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY1 ALL CARTOONS

Source SS df MS F

Cartoon 16.675 19 0.877 8.917b Sex x Cartoon 9.796 19 0.515 5.238b Grade x Cartoon 15.788 114 0.138 1.407® Sex x Grade x Cartoon 11.199 114 0.098 0.098 Error 366.533 3724 0.098

fp < *05 op < .001

Since subjects' preferences were expressed as non- independent ranks from 1 to 3 » the total preference

27 28 scores were the same for all subjects, viz.. 1 + 2 + 3 = 6 *

Hence, the mean-squares for variance attributable to Sex,

Grade, Sex x Grade, and Error Between reduce to zero. Con­ sequently, for convenience these between-subjects sources of variation have been omitted In the preceding table

(Table 3) and In the summary tables of analysis of variance that are to follow.

Apart from the significant main effect of the car­ toons, the initial, overall analysis of variance of the preference data (Table 3) indicated that the only strongly significant source of variation In cartoon preferences was sex (F b 5*238, p < .001). The Grade x Cartoon interaction was barely significant at the .05 level and the third-order

Sex x Grade x Cartoon interaction was nonsignificant.

To further clarify the relationship between sex and cartoon preference, the seven (7 ) subsets of across-net- work, within-time-period preferences for all subjects were analysed separately by means of analysis of variance. The summary tables for each of these analyses are presented in

Tables through 10 which follow. TABLE 4

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY« 9*00 A.M. CARTOONS

Source SS df MS F

Cartoon 39.971 2 19.985 23.769

Sex x Cartoon 18.599 2 9.299 11.060'b

Grade x Cartoon 17.1*28 12 1.452 1.727 Sex x Grade x Cartoon llf.l*00 12 1.200 1.42?

Error 329.600 392 0.840

bp < .001

TABLE 5

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY* 9*30 A.M. CARTOONS

Source SS df MS F

Cartoon 11.923 2 5.961 6.764

Sex x Cartoon 32.342 2 16.171 18.349b

Grade x Cartoon 20.809 12 1.734 1.967a

Sex x Grade x Cartoon 9. *57 12 0.788 0.894 Error 345.466 392 0.881 30

TABLE 6

ANALYSIS OP VARIANCE SUMMARYI IOiOO A.M. CARTOONS

Source SS df MS F

Cartoon 12.199 2 6.099 6.726 Sex x Cartoon 26.866 2 13.433 I4.813b Grade x Cartoon 8.399 12 0.699 0.771 Sex x Grade x Cartoon 17.066 12 1.422 1.568

Error 355*^66 392 0.906

*p < .001

TABLE ?

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY» 10i30 A.M. CARTOONS

Source SS df MS F

Cartoon 43 0 466 2 21.733 26.501 Sex x Cartoon 33.980 2 16.990 20.718b

Grade x Cartoon 6.533 12 0.544 0.663 Sex x Grade x Cartoon 14.552 12 1.212 1.478 Error 321.466 392 0.820

hp < .001 TABLE 8

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY I 1 1i00 A.M. CARTOONS

Source SS df MS F

Cartoon 7.466 1 7.466 17.646

Sex x Cartoon 10.371 1 10.371 24.511*

Grade x Cartoon 2.933 6 0.488 1.155

Sex x Grade x Cartoon 1.295 6 0.215 0.510 Error 82.933 196 0.423

*p < .001

TABLE 9

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY* 11*30 A.M. CARTOONS

Source SS df MS F

Cartoon 3.609 2 1.804 2.299

Sex x Cartoon 73.399 2 36.699 46.769*

Grade x Cartoon 25.590 12 2.132 2.717a

Sex x Grade x Cartoon 9.799 12 0.816 1.040

Error 307.600 392 0.784 32

TABLE 10

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARYi 12i00 P.M. CARTOONS

Source SS df MS F

Cartoon 60.256 2 30.128 36.4-66

Sex x Cartoon 6.542 2 3.271 3.959a

Grade x Cartoon 16.142 12 1.3*5 1.628

Sex x Grade x Cartoon 13.190 12 1.099 1.330 Error 323.866 392 0.826

®p < *05

As the foregoing tables (Tables 4 - 10) Indicate, sex proved to be the most significant source of variation in cartoon preferences within each and every program time period. The Grade x Cartoon Interaction was statistically significant in two Instances, namely, the 9*30 a.m. to

IOiOO a.m. cartoon set (Table 5) and the Ili30 a.m. to

12»00 p.m. cartoon set (Table 9). The third-order Sex x

Grade x Cartoon interaction, however, was nonsignificant in all of the seven time-period analyses.

Because grade appeared to be a highly inconsistent source of preference variation, subsequent analyses con­ centrated upon determining more clearly the relationship between the sex variable and cartoon preferences. In par­ ticular, a comparative analysis of the mean preference ranks for males and females within each of the seven time periods suggested what was perhaps an important sex diff­ erence. Table 11 presents a summary of these mean pref­ erence ranks for males and females.

TABLE 11

MEAN PREFERENCE BANKS BY SEX AND CARTOON

Time Male Female

CBS NBC ABC CBS NBC ABC

9i00 a.m. 1.52 1.92 2.55 1.90 2.01 2.10

9 t30 a.m. 1.90 1.61 2.49 2.04 2.09 1.88

IOiOO a.m. 1.75 2.^9 1.76 2.10 1.90 2.00

10*30 a.m. 1.30 2.30 2.39 1.95 2.08 1.97 lliOO a.m. 1.21 1.79 1.52 1.48

11130 a.m. 1.45 2.38 2.17 2.41 1.83 1.76

12tOO a.m. 1.52 2.35 2,12 1.73 2.42 1.85

An inspection of the mean preference ranks presented in Table 11 indicated a consistent sex difference in the variability among the mean ranks within the seven time period. Specifically, the variability among the mean ranks of the males consistently exceeded that of the fe­ males. In every instance, the difference between the mean ranks of the most and least preferred cartoons for males within a given, half-hour time period was greater than the difference between the mean ranks of the most and least preferred cartoons for females within the corres­ ponding time period.

Considering this greater variability of the mean preference ranks for males, in conjunction with the non- independent ranking procedure used to obtain these pref­ erences, it was hypothesized that perhaps males, as a group, were in greater consensus or agreement regarding the "best* and/or "worst" cartoons than were females.

To test this hypothesis, the degree and significance of preferential agreement among males and among females were determined separately by means of Kendall's coeffi­ cient of concordancei W, described by Siegel (1956, pps.

223-238). For both males and females, separate coeffi­ cients of concordance (W's) within each grade level were computed for each of the triads or three-cartoon subsets of preference rankings. The single exception to this analysis involved the two cartoons telecast 35 during the time period from lliOO a.m. to Ili30 a.m. Since

Kendall's W assumes sets of rankings involving at least three objects, coefficients of concordance could not be computed for the rankings of these two cartoons. The sep­ arate coefficients of concordance for males and females are presented in Table 12 and Table 13, respectively.

TABLE 12

COEFFICIENTS OF CONCORDANCE (W) BY GRADE AND CARTOON1 MALES-

Cartoons Grade

Kdg. 1 2 3 4 5 6

9l00 a.m. .4ob • 75b •55b .03 •35b ,22a .23a 0 o\ a.m. .12 •21a o* .09 •28a •34b .19

10(00 a.m. • 35b .23a •33b .14 .16 .00 .28a 0 0 a.m. .16 .84b .46b .06 • 48b •37b • 56b

11130 a.m. •30b .44b .if9b •5ob • 16 •35b .16

12*00 p.m. .11 •35b .12 .08 •4lb •37b .12

fp <■ .05 bP < .01 36

TABLE 13

COEFFICIENTS OF CONCORDANCE (W) BY GRADE AND CARTOONI FEMALES

Cartoons Grade

Kdg. 1 2 3 4 5 6

9i00 a.m. .11 .06 .06 .14 .02 .04 • 05

9 «30 a.m. .40b .09 .00 .0? .05 .01 • 21a

IOiOO a.m. .09 .03 .00 .12 .06 .00 .23a

10i30 a.m. .03 .03 • 00 .08 .05 .03 .01

11)30 a.m. .19 .16 .12 .19 .06 .4lb .16

12i00 p.m. .44b .16 .04- .08 .Jf3b .12 •34b

h> < .05 °p < .01

The much larger number of high and/or significant

V's for male rankings (Table 12) as compared to female rankings (Table 13) strongly indicated that the males, as a group, were in significantly greater accord or agreement concerning their preferences than were females.

In general, the concordance data indicated that males, in ranking television cartoons along a preferential dimension of "liking", tended to apply the same standard or standards with greater frequency than did females. 37

The concordance data, however, did not suggest what these standards of judgment might be, or In what way these stan­ dards perhaps differed from those applied by females.

r*,- In considering these further implications of the con­ cordance data, a thematic or content analysis of (1) the overall, singularly most and least preferred cartoons of males and females, and (2) the reasons given for these selections was attempted. This mode of analysis, however, was subsequently abandoned because of the large number of cartoons selected by both groups. Similarly, the even larger number of "reasons" given by the children in sup­ port of their overall preferences, as well as in support of their five-question selections, proved to be so ambig­ uous or idiosyncratic as to defy meaningful classifica­ tion.

Because the initial sorting of the most and least preferred cartoons into meaningful categories of content or theme proved to be exceptionally difficult, a decision was made to attempt a correlational analysis of the over­ all preference data as a means of investigating the possi­ bility of the generalized patterns or standards of pref­ erence suggested by the concordance data* Specifically, the decision was to intercorrelate each cartoon's overall preference score with the overall preference score of every other cartoon, and with sex. To accomplish this 38 analysis* each subject's overall* most preferred cartoon was assigned a weighted score of 3» and his overall* least preferred cartoon was assigned a score of 1. The remain­ ing eighteen (18) cartoons for each subject (which were neither most or least preferred) were then assigned the intermediate score of 2, The complete twenty-one vari­ able (Sex =s l; Cartoons = 20) intercorrelation matrix appears in Appendix C,

An initial inspection of the matrix (Appendix C) disclosed that the relatively high, negative correla­ tions between cartoons shown at the same time were an ar­ tefact of the non-independent ranking procedure for eli­ citing preferences. Consequently* these correlations were dismissed from further consideration.

To facilitate the analysis of sex differences in patterns of preference, the cartoon having the highest, positive correlation with sex (i.e.. maleness = 2 ) and the cartoon having the highest, negative correlation with sex (i.e.. femaleness » l) were Identified for each of the seven time periods. This yielded a total of seven cartoons most preferred by males, and a total of seven cartoons most preferred by females. A list of these car­ toons is presented in Table 39

TABLE 14

MOST PBEFEEBED CARTOONS BY SEX AND TIME PERIOD

Time Male Female

9*00 a.m. Marine Boy Magi11a Gorilla

9 0 0 a.m. Atoih Ant Porky Pig

IOiOO A.m. The Impossibles The Flintstones

10130 a.m. Space Ghost The Beatles lliOO a.m. Superman Secret Squirrel

11i30 a.m. The Lone Banger The Jetsons

12i00 p.m. The Boad Bunner Bugs Bunny

To facilitate further comparative analyses, separate matrices of the intercorrelations between the cartoons most preferred by males and between those most preferred by females were constructed. Table 15 presents the inter­ correlations between those cartoons most preferred by males•

An analysis of this matrix (Table 15) indicated that among the cartoons most preferred by males, three of these cartoons appeared to constitute a distinct correla­ tional grouping with moderately high and significant cor­ relations with one another, namely, Marine Bo.v. Space 40

Ghost and The Lone Banger. In addition, the cartoon that had the highest loadings with members of this cartoon group was Superman and, indeed, it might be argued that these four cartoons represent a sufficiently distinct cor­ relational group themselves.

TABLE 15 INTERCORRELATIONS BETWEEN CARTOONS HOST PREFERRED BY HALES

S 1 2 3 A 5 6 7

Sex S X .23 .31 • 22 .40 .33 .57 .14 Marine Boy 1 X .13 .07 .44 .15 .3^ .04 o

Notei All correlations above .18 are significant at the .01 level.

Analysis of the cartoons most preferred by females revealed a somewhat different pattern of Intercorrelations (See Table 16). In particular, there appeared to be two 4i more or less separate and distinct correlational groupings within the larger group of most preferred cartoons. One

TABLE 16

INTERCORRELATIONS BETWEEN CARTOONS MOST PREFERRED BY FEMAIES

s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sex S X - 3 2 -.35 -.36 -.25 -.33 -.34 -.19 00 0 Magi11a Gorilla 1 X .31 .30 .24 .11 • .23

Porky Pig 2 X .24 .11 .13 .23 • 36

The Fllntstones 3 X .13 .10 .46 .14 The Beatles 4 X .01 .14 .14

Secret Squirrel 5 X .10 .04

The Jetsons 6 X .08

Bugs Bunny 7 X

Notei All correlations above .18 are significant at the .01 level. group consisted of two cartoons with substantial correla­ tions with sex (I.e.. femaleness) as well as a high* posi­ tive correlation with each otheri The Fllntstones and

The Jetsons. The second manifest correlational group con­ sisted of Magi11a Gorilla. Porky Pig and Bugs Bunny all of which share moderately high and significant correlations kz with one another* The implications of these contrasting correlational patterns of cartoon preference between males and females will be discussed in Chapter V.

A final, somewhat isolated finding that nevertheless appeared to have implications for the above described preference patterns related to the amount of agreement be­ tween child subjects* overall, most preferred cartoons and their selections of the cartoon characters that they would most like to be (See question 1*, Chapter III). Since question 1* was intended as a gross measure of identifi­ cation (Albert, 1957)# It was hypothesized that perhaps children's identification choices were significantly re­ lated to their overall, most preferred cartoons.

To test this hypothesis, separate X2 one-sample tests (Siegel, 1956, pps. ^2-^7) of the frequency with which subjects* cartoon ldentlficands were also charac­ ters in their overall, most preferred cartoons were per­ formed for males and females. The combined results of these separate Chi-square analyses are summarized in Ta­ ble 17* These analyses indicated that there was greater than chance agreement between the choice of cartoon iden- tlficand and the choice of overall, most preferred car­ toon for both males and females. 43

TABLE 17

CHI-SQUARE ANALYSES OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN IDENTIFICATION CHOICE AND MOST PREFERRED CARTOON FOR MALES AND FEMALES

Sex Frequency of Frequency of Chi-Square Agreement Disagreement Values

Males 43 62 X2 a 7.57b (5.25) (99-75)

Females 17 88 X2 « 5.03a

(5.25) (99.75)

Note» Parenthesized numbers =s expected cell frequencies

fp < .05 Dp < .01

The results summarized in Table 17. however, raised the additional question of whether there was greater agreement in this respect (i.e.. between identification and most preferred choices) among males than among fe­ males. Consequently, the X2 test for two Independent samples (Siegel. 1956, pps. 104-111) was computed for both males and females using again the cell frequencies that are reported in Table 17. This analysis indicated also that there was a greater than chance difference between males and females with respect to the frequency with which cartoon identificands were also characters In the most preferred cartoons (X^ =* 1^*58, p < .001). CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION

The initial results of the present study Indicated that the single» most persistent source of variation in children's preferences for a representative sampling of television cartoon entertainment was sex. School grade, as an efficiency index of chronological age, proved to have only a very weak and inconsistent relationship to children's preferences, Subsequent analyses, therefore, attempted to clarify the nature and meaning of the sex difference in preference behavior.

Perhaps the most obvious and striking sex differ­ ence, regardless of age, was the much greater agreement among males, as a group, concerning their preferences than among females. When asked to rank a series of three cartoons from most to least preferred, males con­ sistently demonstrated a significant degree of consen­ sus in their preferential Judgments, By contrast, fe­ males, as a group, displayed remarkably little agree­ ment with respect to their preference rankings.

Presumably, this lack of consistency among females 45 46 may simply have reflected a greater unfamiliarity with the preference domain. That is, if girls simply do not watch cartoons, or watch them much less than boys, then perhaps the absence of sufficient information about the various cartoons did not permit them to make consistent rankings of a preferential sort. This circumstance might further suggest that "preference" is perhaps an inappropriate or a very weak characterization of female viewing behavior within this category of television entertainment. Unfortunately, there is no available data regarding the comparative rates of exposure to television cartoons for males and females. The existing evidence, however, regarding the rates of exposure to television, in general, Indicates that girls do not differ significantly from boys in terms of average hours of viewing (Bailyn, 1959)* In addition, all of the children interviewed in the present study acknowledged having some familiarity with all of the cartoons, that is, having watched all of the cartoons rep­ resented at least once. While a portion of this acknowledged •familiarity* may merely have reflected a general tendency on the part of Juvenile subjects toward acquiescence, it did seem evi­ dent from subjects* prompt recognition of the cartoon pic­ ture cards, as well as from the amount of Incidental Information volunteered about the cartoons, that most of the children were, indeed, unusually familiar with these

cartoons. To this extent then, the relative absence of

agreement among females concerning their cartoon prefer­

ences would not appear to be explained by any obvious un­

familiarity with the set of preference objects.

An alternative interpretation of this sex difference

in preferential consistency, which was suggested by the patterns of intercorrelations between the cartoons most preferred by the sexes, was that perhaps boys shared more

explicit and uniform standards of preference which, in

turn, served to mediate the greater observed consistency

of male rankings across sets of cartoons. And if, on the

other hand, girls shared somewhat less uniform standards,

or perhaps several independent standards, by which they

Judge cartoons, then girls, as a group, might be expect­

ed to manifest more disagreement or a greater lack of

consensus regarding their cartoon preferences.

As indicated, thfe initial evidence for the above

interpretation came from the emergent correlational groupings within the separate sets of seven cartoons most preferred by males and by females. In the set of car­

toons most preferred by males, three, and possibly four,

cartoons emerged which were substantially correlated with one another in terms of the magnitude of their overall preference score. They were Marine Bov. Space Ghost.

The Lone Banger and Superman. The three remaining car­ toons (viz.. Atom Ant. The Impossibles and The Road

Runner) exhibited generally low and nonsignificant cor­ relations with one another, as well as with member car­ toons of the aforementioned correlational group. This singularity of the intercorrelational pattern between the cartoons most preferred by males tended to support the notion that boys shared a singular and relatively uni­ form standard of preference.

An analysis of the set of seven cartoons most pre­ ferred by females, on the other hand, revealed what ap­ peared to be, at least, two, somewhat distinct correla­ tional groupings. The first group consisted of The

Fllntstones and The Jetsons. and the second, of Magilla

Gorilla. Porkv Pig and Bugs Bunny. The emergence of two, separate correlational groups within the set of female overall preferences similarly tended to support the conclusion that girls employ less uniform or more varied, independent preferential criteria in Judging cartoons.

What remains to be discussed is the manifest content of the preference standards of males and females Implied by the thematic communallties among their overall, most preferred cartoons* In general, even the most superficial comparisons suggested sharp contrasts, even consistent polarities, between the sexes in terms of preferred-car­ toon content.

One very fundamental, generic difference between the cartoons most preferred by males versus those preferred by females is reflected in their basic dramatic premises. In particular, all of the cartoons in the male-preferred group (viz.. Marine Bov. Space Ghost. The Lone Banger and

Superman) can be broadly classified as actlon-adventure cartoons. By contrast, all of the cartoons In the two, female-preferred groups (viz.. 1. The Fllntstones and The

Jetsons. and 2. Magilla Gorilla. Porky Pig and Bugs Bunny) represent cartoon comedies. Whereas the dramatic parame­ ters of the male-preferred cartoons provide only for the dangerous and deadly serious adventures of the central hero, the female-preferred cartoons exclusively exploit the humorous or comic misadventures of the central fhero".

This primary difference between cartoon groups In controlling theme, that is, adventure versus comedy, is, of course, matched by a considerable contrast in heroic characterization. The main heroes of the male-preferred cartoons embody the stereotype of the potent, aggressive male who exhibits extraordinary competence in coping with and mastering an essentially hostile environment. This competence typically Includes both (1) unusual strength or physical abilities, and (2) a particularly adaptive, ana­ lytic intelligence. It is also interesting to note that in the primary group of male cartoons (viz., Marine Boy.

Space Ghost and The Lone Banger), the central hero's al­ ready considerable, intrinsic competence is even further augmented by a sizeable repertoire of the most advanced technological gadgetry and weaponry.

In the female-preferred cartoon group consisting of

The Fllntstones and The Jetsons. the male heroes are por­ trayed quite differently. The principal male in these cartoons Is depicted as a somewhat foolish, non-threaten­ ing father-figure who exhibits extraordinary incompetence in coping with an essentially benign, domestic environ­ ment. Interestingly enough, The Fllntstones and The

Jetsons represent the only cartoons in which females play conspicuous roles. In both of these cartoons, the fe­ males, in the traditional roles of wife and mother, tend to dominate the less competent male as husband and father.

The main characters in the second group of female- preferred cartoons (viz.. Magilla Gorilla. Porky Pig and

Bugs Bunny) are anthropomorphized or humanoid animals that manifest essentially masculine attributes and overt 51 behaviors. The comic significance of these cartoon char­ acters and their behavior would also seem to be related to their generally inept and/or self-defeating coping styles.

In this broad sense, both groups of the female-preferred cartoons would appear to trade on the comic theme of male incompetence.

In considering the major cartoon characters that pop­ ulate the cartoons represented in this study, it is clear that characterization of any manifest Importance is vir­ tually exhausted by three heroic types* (1) the highly sex-typed, male super-hero, (2) the weak father-figure, and (3) the masculine, humanoid comic animal. With the notable exceptions mentioned above (i.e.. The Fllntstones and The Jetsons), females are either absent from the tele­ vision cartoons or are assigned singularly inconspicuous supporting roles. In this regard, the finding that girls' cartoon iden- tificands are less related to their overall preferences than are boys' seems consistent with the obvious lack of suitable female-identif1cation figures portrayed in the television cartoons. That is, given the preponderance of male or essentially masculine heroes, one might reasonably expect identification to have a significantly weaker role 52

In either determining or maintaining female preferences.

The highly congruent pattern of male content prefer­ ences marked by a heavy emphasis upon exaggerated, mascu­ line sex-typed attributes and behaviors, such as, large muscle mass, physical prowess, inhibition of fear, capa­ city for retaliatory aggression, analytic intelligence, techno-scientific Interests and expertise, etc., strongly suggests that male cartoon preferences are closely relat­ ed to young boys* needs for sex-role identification. The significant agreement between boys* cartoon preferences and their choice of ldentificands similarly supports this suggestion.

If identification, particularly sex-role identifica­ tion, represents an Important determinant of cartoon preferences (as it appears it does for males), then the existence of female cartoon preferences, within this highly masoullnlzed entertainment genre, suggest the poss­ ibility of somewhat more complex identiflcatory dynamics.

In particular, boys* cartoon preferences would seem to have an essentially adlent, approach significance, rep­ resenting positive attraction toward highly masculine, sex-typed cartoon content. Similarly, girls* preferences for, at least, two of the cartoons (viz.. The Fllntstones and The Jetsons) may also represent simply a liking for 53

cartoons that prominently feature females in the stereo­

typic , but culturally sanctioned, sex-role of wife-mother.

And, Indeed, it was suggested that these cartoons may be especially preferred by girls in that female sex-role per­

formance Is usually invidiously compared to the performance

of the less competent male counterpart of husband-father.

In the female-preferred cartoons that feature comic, humanoid animals, the sex and sex-role behavior of the main characters, while identifiably masculine, are clear­

ly less explicit and may even be dramatically incidental,

if not irrelevant. Insofar as vaguely masculine, comic, humanoid animals would seem to provide somewhat less than adequate possibilities for viewer identification for both

sexes, girls* somewhat exclusive preferences for this con­ tent and characterization may have essentially abient, avoidance significance. That is, girls* cartoon prefer­ ences may indirectly reflect a reluctance to view car­ toons whose content encourages fantasy participation in and identification with archetypal masculinity. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY

The present study investigated the viewing prefer­ ences of kindergarten and elementary school children for an immensely popular variety of children's television en­ tertainment — the animated cartoon. All three of the major national television networks currently telecast a large number of these cartoon programs, of which the majority are shown throughout the viewing hours of every Saturday morning and in direct viewer competition with one another. This unique limitation upon program category, in combination with the competitive programming practices of the major television networks, were felt to provide a naturalistic analogue to the stimulus control factors that govern more controlled preference studies. Similar­ ly, several other circumstances and considerations sug­ gested that children enjoyed somewhat greater autonomy of choice or preference within this category of tele­ vision entertainment programming than within other pro­ gram categories or within related mass media entertain­ ment domains.

54 55 Given the unique programming constraints associated with this entertainment, and in line with a generalized projective model of preference behavior, it was antici­ pated that children's cartoon preferences would be apt to be related to their psychological-developmental status as broadly referenced by age (i.e.. school grade) and sex.

Using a modified, forced-choice procedure intended to simulate existing program competition, cartoon pref­ erences were determined for a sample of 210 boys and girls selected from seven, school-grade levels, viz.. kindergarten through sixth grade. A secondary prefer­ ence procedure yielded what were construed as the child­ ren's singularly, most and least preferred cartoons.

Additional verbatim interview data regarding children's reasons for their preferences for cartoons and cartoon characters was obtained, but proved too difficult to sum­ marize or interpret meaningfully.

A sequential analysis of the preference data indi­ cated that the single, most Important source of cartoon preference variation in the sample studied was sex.

Grade proved to be only inconsistently related to pref­ erence.

Hales were found to be significantly more consistent in Judging cartoons along a preferential dimension than than were females* An intercorrelational analysis de­ scribed what appeared to be a highly congruent pattern of cartoon-content preference for males which generally rep­ resented a conjunction of highly exaggerated, masculine sex-typed heroes and themes* Female patterns of content preference, on the other hand, emerged as somewhat less explicit and less uniform or convergent than those of the males* The Implications of the preference data were discussed primarily within the framework of the psycho- developmental concept of identification, particularly sex-role identification* APPENDIX A

CARTOON CARDS

57 I

Marine Boy Super 6

VJ\ 00 i i Magilla The Gorilla y Underdog i i i Porky Pig Atom Ant The Impossibles The Flintstones Space Ghost

t Space Kidettes The Beatles Superman Secret Squirrel Lone Ranger The Jetsons i tX

) n

Milton The Monster The Road Runner

o\ j o\ Cool McCool Bugs Bunny APPENDIX B PREFERENCE RECORD FORM

68 69

Name i Grade* __

Date i Sex i M

Blrthdate t Age i I.Q.i ___

1 ( ) Marine Boy ( ) Super Six ( ) Magilla

2 ( ) Underdog ( ) Atom Ant ( ) Porky Pig

3 ( ) Impossibles ( ) Fllntstones ( ) King Kong

4 ( ) Space Ghost ( ) Sp. Kidettes ( ) Beatles

5 ( ) Superman ( ) Secret Squirrel

6 ( ) Lone Banger ( ) The Jetsons ( ) Milton Monster

7 ( ) Hoad Runner ( ) Cool McCool ( ) Bugs Bunny

MOST PREFERRED*

BeasonB* _

LEAST PREFERRED*

Reasons* ______APPENDIX C

INTEBCOHBEIATION MATRIX

70 71 pgrs INTERCORRELATION MATRIX OF CARTOON PREFERENCES

W '.i ^ ■' AND SEX ATTRIBUTE

S 1 ' 2 J '4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 . 2(

Sex S X .22 .05 -.32 .09. .31 -.35 .22 - ,36 .14 .40-.1?-.25 .33 -.33 .57 -.34 -, 26 .14 .04 -.15

Marine coy 1 X -.62 -.47 .02 .13 -.14 .07 ■ ■37 .28 .44 -.12 -.33 .14 -.15 .34 -.26 -.10 .04 .01 -.05

Super Six 2 ■ X -.40 .01 .13 -.13 .17 ,12 -.2? • .17 .05 .13 -.06 ,c6 -.12 .20 03 -.03 .16 -.15

Magilla Gorilla 3 X -.04 -.30 .31 -.28 ,30 -.03 • '.32 .09 .24 -.11 .11 -.26 .08 .20 -.02 -.20 .2;

Underdog 4 ■ X-.39 -.56 .09 ■.07 -.01 .09 -.09 -.01 .17 -.17 .18 -.20 01 .01 .06 -.07

Atom Ant 5 X -.55 -09 ■ .19 .10 .16 -.05 -.11 -.03 .03 .24 -.05 - ,21 .15 .18 -.34

Porky Pig 6 X -.17 .24 -.08 •.23 .13 .11 -.13 .13 -.36 .23 ,18 -.14 -.2 1 .36

The Impossibles 7 X .42 -.51 .10 -.09 -.0 2 .06 -.06 .20 -.10 -.12 .07 .06 -.1;

The Flintstones 8 X -.57 -.30 .20 .13 -.10 .10 -.45 .46 .01 -.08 -.06 .14

■ King Kong 9 X .19 -.11 -.10 .04 -.04 .24 -.35 .09 .01 .00 -.0 2

Space Ghost 10 X -.39 -.66 .22 -.22 .39 -.26 - .16 .09 .04 -.13

Space Kidettes 11 X -.44 -.24 .24 -.17 .14 .05 -.07 .08 -.01

The Beatles 12 X-.01 .01-.24 .14 .12 -.03 -.10 .14

Supemar. 13 X -1.0 .34 -.10 - .2? .04 .00 -.04

Secret Squirrel 14 X -.34 .10 .2? -.04 -.00 .04

'■The Lone Ranger 15 X -.55 - .52 .16 .03 -.19

• The Jetsons 16 ■ X - .43 -.11 /. ,03 . 08

Milton'The Monster.17 ' X-.06_-.06 .12 The Road Runner 18 . ; X -.53 -.41

' ..Cool McCool 19 " .X -*56

V - V v: VO*? BIBLIOGRAPHY

Albert, H. S. The role of mass media and the effect of aggressive film content upon children’s aggressive responses and identification choices* Genet. Psychol. Monogr.. 1957» 55* 221-285. Bailyn, L. Hass media and childreni a study of exposure habits and cognitive effects* Psychol. Monogr*. 1959* 21, No. 1 (Whole No. 4-71) • Bandura, A*, Ross, D* & Ross, 3* Imitation of film- mediated aggressive models. J. abnorm. soc* Psychol*. 19^3. 66* 3-11. Baxter, W* The mass media and young people* J* Broadcast.. I96O-I96I, 5* **9-58. Globe and Mall* Associated Press article 1 Pew complain over cartoons. Toronto, Ontario, November 15» 1967* Himmelwelt, H., Oppenheim, A* & Vince, P* Television and the child* New York* Oxford Univ. Press, 1958. Lovaas, 0. I* Effect of exposure to symbolic aggression on aggressive behavior. Child Develonm.. 1961, 32. 37-44. Maccoby, E. E. Television* its impact on school children. Publ. Opln. Quart.. 1951. 15, 421-444. Maccoby, E. E. Effects of the mass media. In M. Hoffman & L. Hoffman (Eds.), Review of child development research. New Yorki Russell Sage Foundation, 1964, 323-3457 McLuhan, M. Understanding media * the extensions of man. New York* McGraw-Hill, 196k, Mussen, P. & Rutherford, E. Effects of aggressive car­ toons on children’s aggressive play. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., I96I, 62, 461-464.

72 73 Schramm, W., Iyle, J. & Parker, E, Television In the lives of our children. Stanford, Calif.i Stanford Univ. Press, 1961. Shayon, E. L. Television and our children. New York* Longmans, Green & Co., Inc., 1951* Siegel, S. Nonnarametrlc statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York* McGraw-Hill, 1956. Tannenbaum, P. & Greenberg, B. S. Mass communication. Ann. Eev. Psychol.. 1968, 1£, 351-386.

Winer. B. J. Statistical principles in experimental design. New York* McGraw-Hill, 1962.