Re: CRASH CONTAGION

From: Paul Marsden (paulsmarsden@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Jan 11 2002 - 17:15:30 GMT

  • Next message: Joachim Maier: "RE: Knowledge, Memes and Sensory Perception"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id RAA10946 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 11 Jan 2002 17:20:16 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: [217.34.78.250]
    From: "Paul Marsden" <paulsmarsden@hotmail.com>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: Re: CRASH CONTAGION
    Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 17:15:30 -0000
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
    Message-ID: <LAW2-OE550Ne0PaLI9m00007e1b@hotmail.com>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jan 2002 17:15:46.0715 (UTC) FILETIME=[9BDA26B0:01C19AC3]
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Vincent, hi

    >"so the notion of people seeing acts as more legitimate because
    >others are seen to perform them is problematised."

    yes it is problematised - and as with anything in a complex multifaceted
    social world in which one or many events can have one or many outcomes,
    there can be no irrefutable evidence - the best we can do is produced
    narratives with internal and external consistency.

    TO this end there IS a wealth of laboratory experimental evidence that
    demonstrates disinhibition via media. You can dismiss such laboratory
    experiments of course because they are conducted in artificial conditions

    There IS also a wealth of natural experimental evidence that demonstrates
    effects expected by disinhibition - which you can also dismiss because not
    all variables are controlled for - precisely because they are conducted in
    the real world.

    So Heads I lose, Tails I lose - You can dismiss natural experiments for not
    isolating Ind Variable and Dep Variable, and you can dismiss laboratory
    experiments becasue they do the opposite. But on the balance of imprecise
    evidence available - media contagion is the best explanation I have come
    accross for unexpected rises in events following mediate exposure to similar
    events.

    >You only have to look at
    >the complex range of suggested effects of violence in the theoretical
    >literature, as witnessed in media, from catharsis to desensitisation, to
    >disinhibition (not unlike the social facilitation idea).

    Disinhibition differs, by the way, according to standard teminology in soc
    pys from social facilitation by the presence a prior approach-avoidance
    conflict.

            Hi Robin,

            <You might try looking up "social facilitation".>

            There's a difference between observing people directly and observing
    them through media, which the psychology discipline rountinely forgets or
    ignores, so the notion of people seeing acts as more legitimate because
    others are seen to perform them is problematised. You only have to look at
    the complex range of suggested effects of violence in the theoretical
    literature, as witnessed in media, from catharsis to desensitisation, to
    disinhibition (not unlike the social facilitation idea).

            Vincent

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 11 2002 - 17:27:00 GMT