↓ Skip to main content

Media Violence and Other Aggression Risk Factors in Seven Nations

Overview of attention for article published in Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
19 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 tweeters
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Media Violence and Other Aggression Risk Factors in Seven Nations
Published in
Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, April 2017
DOI 10.1177/0146167217703064
Pubmed ID
Authors

Craig A. Anderson, Kanae Suzuki, Edward L. Swing, Christopher L. Groves, Douglas A. Gentile, Sara Prot, Chun Pan Lam, Akira Sakamoto, Yukiko Horiuchi, Barbara Krahé, Margareta Jelic, Wei Liuqing, Roxana Toma, Wayne A. Warburton, Xue-Min Zhang, Sachi Tajima, Feng Qing, Poesis Petrescu

Abstract

Cultural generality versus specificity of media violence effects on aggression was examined in seven countries (Australia, China, Croatia, Germany, Japan, Romania, the United States). Participants reported aggressive behaviors, media use habits, and several other known risk and protective factors for aggression. Across nations, exposure to violent screen media was positively associated with aggression. This effect was partially mediated by aggressive cognitions and empathy. The media violence effect on aggression remained significant even after statistically controlling a number of relevant risk and protective factors (e.g., abusive parenting, peer delinquency), and was similar in magnitude to effects of other risk factors. In support of the cumulative risk model, joint effects of different risk factors on aggressive behavior in each culture were larger than effects of any individual risk factor.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unknown 45 100%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 153. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 June 2018.
All research outputs
#80,523
of 12,396,068 outputs
Outputs from Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin
#80
of 1,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,248
of 262,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin
#2
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,396,068 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,946 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.