Content uploaded by Rebecca de Leeuw
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rebecca de Leeuw on Jan 21, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rchm20
Download by: [213.93.181.165] Date: 28 September 2015, At: 22:46
Journal of Children and Media
ISSN: 1748-2798 (Print) 1748-2801 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rchm20
The Impact of Prosocial Television News on
Children’s Prosocial Behavior: An Experimental
Study in the Netherlands
Rebecca N.H. de Leeuw, Mariska Kleemans, Esther Rozendaal, Doeschka J.
Anschütz & Moniek Buijzen
To cite this article: Rebecca N.H. de Leeuw, Mariska Kleemans, Esther Rozendaal, Doeschka
J. Anschütz & Moniek Buijzen (2015): The Impact of Prosocial Television News on Children’s
Prosocial Behavior: An Experimental Study in the Netherlands, Journal of Children and Media,
DOI: 10.1080/17482798.2015.1089297
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2015.1089297
Published online: 25 Sep 2015.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 2
View related articles
View Crossmark data
THE IMPACT OF PROSOCIAL TELEVISION
NEWS ON CHILDREN’S PROSOCIAL
BEHAVIOR: AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY IN
THE NETHERLANDS
Rebecca N.H. de Leeuw, Mariska Kleemans,
Esther Rozendaal, Doeschka J. Anschu¨tz and Moniek Buijzen
The aim of this experimental study was to examine whether prosocial behavior in television
news affects children’s prosocial intentions and behaviors. In this study, 372 Dutch children
(9–13 years old) participated. Children in the experimental condition were exposed to prosocial
news showing children organizing a fundraising action for UNICEF. In the control condition,
children were exposed to news about UNICEF in which no prosocial behavior was included.
Afterwards, children were given the opportunity to donate to UNICEF, which served as an
index of prosocial behavior. Prosocial intentions were captured using paper-and-pencil
questionnaires. Regression analysis demonstrated that, while controlling for important
confounders, children exposed to prosocial news were significantly more willing to help with
setting up a project for UNICEF and donated more to UNICEF compared to children who did
not watch prosocial news. These findings highlight that prosocial television can function as a
tool for positive social change among children.
KEYWORDS positive media psychology; prosocial behavior; television news
1. Introduction
There is growing academic interest in examining avenues that allow individuals,
communities, and societies not just to endure and survive, but also to flourish
(Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). One human quality related to flourishing is proso-
cial behavior (Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005; Peterson & Seligman, 2004)—that is,
voluntary behavior intended to benefit another (Eisenberg, Fabes, & Spinrad, 2007;
Padilla-Walker, Coyne, Fraser, & Stockdale, 2013). Already in childhood prosocial behav-
ior helps to thrive. Previous findings have indicated that prosocial children are liked
more, have more close friends, and are happier than children who are less prosocial
(Cillessen & Rose, 2005; Clark & Ladd, 2000; Hastings, Utendale, & Sullivan, 2007; Holder &
Coleman, 2008;O
¨stberg, 2003). Moreover, prosocial behavior is a precursor of later
academic achievement (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Pastorelli, Bandura, & Zimbardo, 2000;
Ó2015 Taylor & Francis
Journal of Children and Media, 2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2015.1089297
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
Moore & Allen, 1996; Raver, 2002). Recent findings have also revealed that encourage-
ment to be prosocial can even boost peer acceptance and happiness in children (Aknin,
Hamlin, & Dunn, 2012; Layous, Nelson, Oberle, Schonert-Reichl, & Lyubomirsky, 2012).
Hence, examining ways that could encourage prosocial behavior is essential when it
comes to improving children’s well-being.
Children’s media provide an excellent avenue to encourage prosocial behavior.
While watching television, children are exposed to a relatively large number of proso-
cial behaviors. The most recent content analysis on the prevalence of prosocial behav-
iors on television revealed that 73% of all television shows on broadcast and cable
channels feature at least one instance of helping and/or sharing at a rate of almost
three occurrences per hour (Smith et al., 2006). Despite this high rate of prosocial
occurrences on television, only a limited number of studies have focused on the effec-
tiveness of television as a tool for positive social change (Mares & Woodard, 2005,
2012). Instead, an abundant number of studies examined negative effects of television
on children. To illustrate, Paik and Comstock (1994) reviewed 217 studies on the link
between watching violent programming and aggression, while Mares and Woodard
(2005) could include only 34 studies in their meta-analysis on the positive effects of
television on children’s social interactions. Mares and Woodard (2005) indeed showed
that television could increase children’s prosocial behaviors. The majority of the studies
included in their analysis focused on prosocial messages in entertaining television pro-
grams. However, other television genres offer great potential to positively affect chil-
dren’s prosocial behaviors as well, of which one of the most important is television
news. In the United States, there are some weekly news programs aiming at children
(Smith, Pieper, & Moyer-Guse, 2011; Van Der Molen & De Vries, 2003). In several
European countries, there are even daily newscasts televised at children in late child-
hood and preadolescence. In the Netherlands, the Dutch Children’s News is broadcasted
daily for children aged around 10–12 years old (Jeugdjournaal, 2014). The current study
aims to add to the small number of existing studies on television and children’s proso-
cial behavior by examining the effectiveness of prosocial messages in children’s news.
There are two reasons why focusing on television news is highly relevant when it
comes to examining the impact of prosocial media. First, the reach of television news
as a medium to spread prosocial messages among children in late childhood is high,
given the substantial number of children in this age range watching television news
several times a week, especially television news for children (Carter & Allan, 2005;De
Cock & Hautekiet, 2012). According to statistics from the Dutch Broadcasting Corpora-
tion (NOS, 2014), a sizable number of the children watch the evening bulletin of the
Dutch Children’s news at home—with 280,000 viewers, which involves a reach of about
50% in the target group (CBS, 2014). Moreover, a substantial number of children (also)
watch the morning bulletin at home or in the classroom at school.
Second, the strategies that are applied by the producers of news programs for
children make this program type very suitable for the purpose of the current study,
namely whether prosocial news content can lead to positive social change. For
instance, a regularly applied strategy is that each newscast has a steady pattern of
alternating light and heavy stories (the so-called “sandwich formula”). Reporting about
prosocial content is shown to be one of the ways to enter positive events in the news.
For instance, the Dutch Children’s News included stories about children being rescued
or with friends providing help (Van Der Molen & De Vries, 2003). Interview studies have
2REBECCA N.H. DE LEEUW ET AL.
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
indicated that children also recognize prosocial content in children’s news and perceive
encouragement to engage in prosocial activities as an important function of news
programs (Alon-Tirosh & Lemish, 2014; Lemish, 1998). Moreover, showing personal
accounts of children is very common in children’s news programs, making news more
compelling for the young audience (Carter & Allan, 2005; Zillmann & Brosius, 2000).
In sum, because of its high reach and the suitability of the strategies that are
typically used in children’s television news, prosocial news items may be a promising
way to encourage prosocial behavior in children. Based on assumptions from social
cognitive theory (Bandura, 2004) and exemplification theory (Zillmann & Brosius, 2000),
this study investigates whether children’s television news can actually increase
children’s prosocial intentions and behaviors. In line with previous experimental studies
on television and prosocial behavior, we focus on altruistic prosocial behavior, that is:
sharing, donating, and offering help (Mares & Woodard, 2005). Specifically, using an
experimental design, including 372 children in late childhood and preadolescence
(9–13 years old), this study examined whether a news item in which children
demonstrate altruistic prosocial behavior leads to comparable intentions and behaviors
among children who watch this news item.
2. Theoretical Background
A valuable theory for explaining the impact of prosocial television on children’s
prosocial behavior is Bandura’s social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2004). Generally, this
theory states that individuals not only learn directly by experience, but also from
observing models. These models, which can also be depicted on television, “serve as
transmitters of knowledge, values, cognitive skills, and new styles of behavior”
(Bandura, 2004, p. 78). Especially models that are rewarded for their behavior and who
are attractive and/or similar can positively motivate the behavior of the viewers. Based
on this idea, social cognitive theory has been one of the most frequently applied
theories in the area of media effects research, for instance, in the field of entertain-
ment-education (Bandura, 2004; Moyer-Guse
´,2008). Entertainment-education is a strat-
egy by which messages are embedded into popular entertainment media with the
expectation of fostering involvement with the narrative and characters which reduces
resistance to the embedded messages and increases the probability of message-
consistent motivations and behaviors (Moyer-Guse
´,2008).
Even though news programs differ from entertainment programs in many ways, it is
conceivable that the same mechanisms apply. After all, involvement with storylines and
characters is applicable to news items as well (Walma van der Molen, Valkenburg, &
Peeters, 2002). In television news, base-rate information is often accompanied by personal
accounts that give more vivid and concrete information. According to exemplification the-
ory (Zillmann & Brosius, 2000), the use of such concrete, imaginary-provoking examples in
news may increase the salience of the story and influence responses such as judgments
and decisions. In case of children’s television news, it is common practice to include chil-
dren as exemplars in news (Carter & Allan, 2005; Matthews, 2005; Van Der Molen & De
Vries, 2003). Compared to news covered from an adult perspective, the use of child voices
in children’s news induces young viewers to identify with these children, strengthening
their involvement with the characters in the news (Walma van der Molen et al., 2002). In
PROSOCIAL NEWS AND CHILDREN’S PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR 3
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
line with these ideas, there is thus reason to expect that child exemplars in children’s
news can model prosocial behaviors to the viewing children.
Although there is empirical evidence to support the idea that watching prosocial
television content is related to higher levels of prosocial behavior (Mares & Woodard,
2005), the great majority of these studies involved young children. Only a handful
specifically examined the possibility of prosocial effects on older children (Mares &
Woodard, 2005; Strasburger, Wilson, & Jordan, 2009). The current study contributes to
this small number of studies by examining the impact of prosocial television on chil-
dren in late childhood and preadolescence. Although fairly rapid increases occur in the
maturity and frequency of prosocial behavior in the toddler and preschool years, levels
of prosocial behavior appear to continue increasing in subsequent years (Hastings
et al., 2007), and prosocial television continues to have an impact during these years
(Mares & Woodard, 2005).
In the current study, we examined experimentally whether prosocial behavior in a
television news program related to children’s actual prosocial behaviors. Prosocial inten-
tions were also included, as intentions can be important predictors of future behaviors
(Ajzen & Fishbein, 2005). Children in the experimental condition were exposed to a
prosocial news item in which children organized a fundraising action for UNICEF.
Children in the control condition watched the program without the prosocial content.
It was hypothesized that (H1) children exposed to prosocial news would be more likely
to express their willingness to help in setting up a project for UNICEF at their schools
and (H2) they would be more generous and donate more money to UNICEF
(Dlugokinski & Firestone, 1974; Krevans & Gibbs, 1996). Both outcome measures were
equivalent to the depicted specific prosocial behaviors in the news item (Mares &
Woodard, 2005, 2012; Strasburger et al., 2009). In the analyses, children’s sex, apprecia-
tion of the news program (Clifford & Gunter, 1995), general levels of prosocial behavior,
and engagement in prosocial acts for charity by parents were included as covariates
(Hastings et al., 2007).
3. Method
3.1. Sample Characteristics
The study was conducted at eight primary schools in the southeastern region of
the Netherlands. The sample consisted of 372 children between 9 and 13 years of age
(M= 10.94; SD = .76), of whom 44.1% were boys. The majority of the children were
born in the Netherlands (96.0%).
3.2. Design and Procedure
After gaining consent to participate from the headmasters of the schools, a letter
was distributed among the parents of the children (N= 404) in the last two classes of
each primary school. This letter included a description of the study along with the
request to give passive consent for their children to participate or otherwise return the
attached form. Parents were given the opportunity to return the forms within two
weeks. It was emphasized that all information would be treated as confidential. Almost
4REBECCA N.H. DE LEEUW ET AL.
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
all parents (98%) gave (passive) consent. In the end, 24 children were not able to
participate because they were not present.
Data collection took place between December 2012 and February 2013. Children
were tested at their schools during school hours. As a cover story, children were told
that the study sought to understand their opinions about a new news program for chil-
dren, NewzKids. Children were randomly assigned to either the experimental or control
condition. Before starting the study, children were asked for active consent. After filling
out the first questionnaire individually, capturing children’s (demographic) characteris-
tics and their general levels of prosocial behavior, children watched NewzKids.
Children in both the experimental and control condition were exposed to news
items that were neutral with respect to the target topic: one about Hurricane Sandy
and one about an athletic accomplishment by an Olympic gold medalist. Both items
were based on real-life events that occurred on 31 October 2012, which was the pre-
tended date of the broadcast of NewzKids. Between the two items, the program
reported an item about UNICEF. UNICEF was chosen as charity organization because a
pre-study demonstrated that UNICEF was the most favorite charity organization in this
age group.
In the experimental condition, this item was about children organizing a fundrais-
ing action for UNICEF at their school—a realistic story related to children’s own lives
(Mares & Woodard, 2005, 2012; Strasburger et al., 2009). The story included child exem-
plars: personal accounts of children that actively participated in the project. In the con-
trol condition, the item was about UNICEF visiting a school to provide information. In
this item, only neutral information about UNICEF, such as its history, was provided.
Moreover, instead of acting prosocially, children featuring in the control item were
telling about what they learned from the visit. Aside from the omissions of prosocial
content, the item in the control condition was identical to that of the experimental
condition, in that the same presenter, the same school, and the same children were
depicted. Moreover, in both conditions, the UNICEF items were two minutes of length,
and the full broadcast with the three items five minutes of length. Thus, in both condi-
tions, children were primed with UNICEF, but only the experimental condition included
actual prosocial behavior.
When the program ended, children were invited one by one to leave the class-
room with one of the experimenters. Until they were invited to come along, children
were not allowed to talk with each other. After leaving the classroom, children were
given 1.00 in coins of 10 cents as a reward for their participation and were then given
the opportunity to donate (part of) this reward to UNICEF. To diminish extrinsic motives
for donating, children were left alone to make their decision and were asked to put a
sealed donation envelope in a collection box whether or not they actually made a
contribution.
Children were subsequently asked to fill out the last questionnaire in the
classroom. Again they were not allowed to talk to each other. In line with the cover
story, this questionnaire contained questions capturing, for instance, their appraisal of
NewzKids as well as questions capturing their opinions about a UNICEF project at their
schools and a manipulation check to observe whether both news items actually dif-
fered in depictions of fundraising. In addition, children were asked to give a description
of the aim of the study. Most children wrote down an aim in line with or related to the
cover story. One-third of the children suspected that the study was about UNICEF.
PROSOCIAL NEWS AND CHILDREN’S PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR 5
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
None of the children indicated that the study was about the relationship between the
actions for UNICEF in the program and their behaviors afterwards. After the data collec-
tion and analyses were complete, children and parents were informed—through the
schools—of the results of the study. The study was approved by the ethical committee
of the Faculty of Social Sciences, Radboud University.
3.3. Measures
3.3.1. Prosocial outcomes. Children’s prosocial intentions—that is, willingness to
help in starting up a project for UNICEF at their schools—was assessed with a paper-
and-pencil questionnaire. After the question: “Members from UNICEF appreciate it if
schools start up projects to collect money. Would you like your school to participate?”
(with response options “no” and “yes”), children were asked: “Would you like to help
starting up such a project?” Children responding “yes” to this last question were consid-
ered to be willing to help in setting up a project for UNICEF at their schools. Prosocial
behavior was measured as the size of their donation for UNICEF (Dlugokinski & Fire-
stone, 1974; Krevans & Gibbs, 1996).
3.3.2. Covariates. In the analyses, children’s general levels of prosocial behavior,
sex, appreciation of the program, and the extent to which children’s parents were com-
mitted to charity (Eisenberg et al., 2007; Grusec, Davidov, & Lundell, 2002) were included
as control variables. Children’s general levels of prosocial behavior were assessed with
mean scores on the prosocial scale of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire
(Goodman, Meltzer, & Bailey, 1998). This scale consists of five questions, such as “I am
helpful if someone is hurt, upset or feeling ill,” which could be marked with “not true,”
“somewhat true,” or “certainly true.” Cronbach’s alpha was .69. Appreciation of the pro-
gram was captured by asking children: “What score would you give to this program?”,
with response options from 1 to 10 (a higher score indicated higher appreciation). Charity
by parents was assessed by asking the children five questions, such as “My parents think
it is important to support charities”; response options were “never,” “almost never,”
“sometimes,” “very often,” and “always.” Cronbach’s alpha was .70.
3.4. Strategy of Analyses
After calculating descriptive statistics, t-tests and tests were conducted to
examine whether randomization resulted in a balanced distribution of important
characteristics across conditions. The effect of prosocial television on the discrete vari-
able willingness to help in starting up a project for UNICEF was investigated through
logistic regression analysis. The effect of prosocial television on children’s prosocial
behavior was examined using linear regression analysis. In the analyses, children’s sex,
appreciation of the program, general levels of prosocial behavior, and charity by par-
ents were included as covariates. In the analyses on the relation between the condition
and children’s willingness to start up a project for UNICEF, the size of the children’s
donations was also included as a covariate as this initial action might have affected
children’s willingness to help. Finally, both regression analyses were repeated with an
6REBECCA N.H. DE LEEUW ET AL.
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
included dummy variable representing each participating school in contrast to the
others to examine possible confounding effects by school.
4. Results
4.1. Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics showed that 63.2% of the children watched the Dutch Chil-
dren’s program multiple times per week or even every day. Of the children, 44.1%
reported to watch this most of the time with their parents, 43.8% with their sibling(s),
and 57.0% with their classmates at school. Most of the children appreciated the (fic-
tional) program NewzKids (M= 7.39; SD = 1.55). Compared to the Dutch Children’s
News, 47.1% considered NewzKids just as good or even better. Children donated on
average 62.16 cents, and most of them indicated that they would like a project for
UNICEF at their schools (93.7%). Of all children, 80.8% were willing to help in setting up
such a project. No differences were found between children in the experimental versus
the control condition in terms of sex ( [df = 1, n= 372] = .02, p= .89) or age
(t[df = 370, n= 372] = .09, p= .93). However, a t-test demonstrated a marginally
significant difference between children in the experimental condition and children in
the control condition on their general (pre-experimental) levels of prosocial behavior
(t[df = 369, n= 365] = −1.94, p= .05), indicating that children in the experimental
condition scored slightly higher on their initial levels of prosocial behaviors. Descriptive
TABLE 1
Descriptive statistics for children’s characteristics and outcome variables by condition
Total
(N= 372)
Experimental condition
(n= 183)
Control condition
(n= 189)
Prevalence
Being a girl 55.9% 56.3% 55.6%
Likes a project for UNICEF at school 93.7% 93.3% 94.1%
Willing to help in starting up a
project for UNICEF
a
80.8% 84.8% 76.9%
Mean (Standard Deviation)
Child’s age 10.94 (.76) 10.94 (.76) 10.95 (.75)
Appreciation of NewzKids 7.39 (1.55) 7.36 (1.53) 7.43 (1.57)
Children’s levels of prosocial behavior
b
2.63 (.34) 2.66 (.32) 2.60 (.36)
Charity by parents 3.57 (.63) 3.55 (.65) 3.59 (.61)
Donation for UNICEF
c
62.16 (30.58) 64.98 (31.50) 59.41 (29.49)
a
A chi-square test indicated that children in the experimental condition were significantly more
willing to help to start up a project for UNICEF at their schools compared to children in the
control condition ( [df = 1, n= 364] = 3.70, p= .02, one-tailed).
b
At-test demonstrated a marginally significant difference between children in the experimental
condition and children in the control condition on their initial levels of prosocial behavior
(t[df = 369, n= 365] = −1.94, p= .05).
c
At-test demonstrated a significant difference between children in the experimental condition
and children in the control condition on the size of their donation to UNICEF (t[df = 369,
n= 371] = −1.76, p= .04, one-tailed). Further, no significant differences were found between
conditions.
PROSOCIAL NEWS AND CHILDREN’S PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR 7
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
TABLE 2
Correlations between the model variables
1- Being a girl
2- Appreciation
of NewzKids
3- Children’s initial
prosocial behavior
4- Charity
by parents 5- Condition
1
6- Donation
for UNICEF
1- Being a girl
2- Appreciation of NewzKids .27**
3- Children’s initial prosocial behavior .28** .24**
4- Charity by parents .22** .17** .38**
5- Condition
a
.01 −.02 .10
†
−.03
6- Donation for UNICEF .06 .03 .13* .19** .09†
7- Willing to help in starting up a project for UNICEF .32** .23** .31** .20** .10† .06
a
0 = control condition; 1 = experimental condition.
*p< .05; **p< .01;
†
p< .10.
8REBECCA N.H. DE LEEUW ET AL.
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
statistics for all model variables are presented in Table 1; correlations are presented in
Table 2.
4.2. Manipulation Check
To check whether both versions of NewzKids differed in depictions of actions for
charity, children were asked whether or not money was given to others in the program.
A crosstab analysis demonstrated that children in the experimental condition were
more likely to indicate that they observed that money was raised for UNICEF in the pro-
gram, as compared to children in the control condition (v2[df = 1, n= 363] = 56.95,
p= .001).
4.3. The Impact of Prosocial Television and Children’s Prosocial
Intentions and Behaviors
Findings from logistic regression analyses demonstrated that—while controlling
for possible confounders—children in the experimental condition were significantly
more willing to help in setting up a project for UNICEF at their schools than children in
the control condition (OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.00–3.49, p= .03, one-tailed). Moreover, a
significant association was found between the condition and the size of children’s
donation to UNICEF (b= .09, p= .04, one-tailed), indicating that children in the experi-
mental condition donated more money. Findings from both models are presented in
Table 3. In addition to the impact of condition, being a girl, higher appreciation of
NewzKids, higher initial levels of prosocial behavior, and higher generosity of parents
towards charity explained children’s prosocial willingness and behavior after watching.
Table 3also presents the unadjusted associations, enabling comparison of the impact
of all predictors on the outcomes with and without the (potential) impact of the others.
Effect sizes were d= .29 and d= .18 for prosocial intentions and behaviors, respectively.
Because children in the experimental condition scored slightly higher on their initial
levels of prosocial behaviors, we entered an interaction term of initial prosocial behav-
iors and condition to the model. Findings showed no moderating effect of initial proso-
cial behavior on the relation between exposure to prosocial news and prosocial
intentions (p= .143) and behaviors (p= .732) afterwards. Finally, the model analyses
were repeated including the dummy variable for school, which resulted in comparable
results—school did not affect the impact of prosocial television news on prosocial
intentions and behaviors.
5. Discussion
The present study is the first to investigate whether exposure to prosocial
behavior in television news is related to prosocial intentions and behaviors in chil-
dren in late childhood and preadolescence. The findings revealed that—after control-
ling for children’s sex, initial levels of prosocial behavior, appreciation of the news
program, and engagement in prosocial acts for charity by their parents—exposure
PROSOCIAL NEWS AND CHILDREN’S PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR 9
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
to prosocial behaviors in a news program increased children’s prosocial intentions
and behaviors compared to exposure to a more or less neutral news program.
Specifically, in support of both hypotheses, children exposed to actual prosocial
behaviors were significantly more motivated to help in setting up a project for
UNICEF at their schools (H1) and donated more to UNICEF than children who were
not exposed to prosocial behaviors (H2).
These findings extend upon previous work by demonstrating that, in addition
to exposure to prosocial entertainment television programming (Mares & Woodard,
2005, 2012), watching prosocial behaviors in television news also predicts prosociality
in children—at least in children during late childhood and preadolescence. The
moderate effect size found for prosocial intentions was comparable with the mean
effect size that was found in the meta-analysis from Mares and Woodard (2005).
However, the effect size for prosocial behaviors was less strong. An explanation for
why the impact of the prosocial news item was less strong on the behavioral than
the intentional outcome is that it is more difficult to change behaviors compared to
intentions (Ajzen & Fishbein, 2005). It is important to note that children were only
exposed to two minutes of prosocial behavior that was embedded within other
news items. Moreover, they were exposed to prosocial content just once; effects
might be stronger when exposed to such content for a longer time or repeatedly
(Mares, 2013; Mares & Woodard, 2012).
TABLE 3
Findings from the regression analyses on the relation between prosocial behavior in
NewzKids and children’s prosocial intentions and behaviors
Logistic regression
analyses
Linear regression
analyses
Willing to help in starting
up a project for UNICEF
Donation for
UNICEF
OR 95% CI bSE
Unadjusted (N= 372)
Being a girl 5.90*** 3.22–10.82 .06 .05
Appreciation of NewzKids 1.76*** 1.35–2.28 .03 .05
Children’s initial prosocial behavior 2.12*** 1.62–2.79 .13** .05
Charity by parents 1.68*** 1.28–2.19 .19*** .05
Donation for UNICEF 1.16 .89–1.51 – –
Condition
a
1.68* .99–2.87 .09* .05
Full model (N= 372)
Being a girl 3.83*** 1.97–7.44 .03 .06
Appreciation of NewzKids 1.42** 1.06–1.89 −.01 .06
Children’s initial prosocial behavior 1.57** 1.14–2.16 .03 .06
Charity by parents 1.27 .93–1.73 .17** .06
Donation for UNICEF .92 .68–1.24 – –
Condition
a
1.87* 1.00–3.49 .09* .05
Note: b= regression coefficient; SE = standard error; OR = odds ratio; 95% CI = 95% confi-
dence interval.
a
0 = control condition; 1 = experimental condition.
***p< .001; **p< .01; *p< .05, one-tailed.
10 REBECCA N.H. DE LEEUW ET AL.
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
Another explanation is that children became more willing to volunteer,
compared to their willingness to donate, due to the nature of the UNICEF news
item. There is some evidence to suggest that charity advertising evoking feelings of
guilt and pity is more likely to result in donating money, whereas positive features
in charity advertising are more likely to increase willingness to become actively
involved in, and devote time to, charity activities (Eayrs & Ellis, 1990). In the news
item in this study, no children in need were depicted; instead, children were actively
involved in collecting money for UNICEF, and they were all excited about and
happy to be doing so. Perhaps this positive portrayal resulted in children becoming
more willing to volunteer for UNICEF, while their willingness to donate was less
strongly affected. Finally, it is important to keep in mind that child characteristics,
such as initial levels of prosocial behavior, and charity by parents play a crucial role
in explaining children’s prosocial intentions and behaviors (Hastings et al., 2007).
Nevertheless, it is promising that exposure to a short news item with prosocial
content can already result in children having higher intentions to help.
5.1. Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research
As with any study, there are some limitations. First, despite its multidimensional
character, prosocial behavior was examined as acts of helping and sharing (Eisenberg
et al., 2007; Mares & Woodard, 2005). Future research should also capture other forms
of prosocial behavior to provide a more nuanced picture on the impact of children’s
programming on children’s prosocial motivations and behavior (Padilla-Walker et al.,
2013). For instance, verbal prosocial behaviors such as complimenting and encouraging
others are largely neglected, despite their prevalence in children’s programming. Also,
initial prosocial behavior could be measured more specified, considering the relatively
low alpha value observed in this study.
Second, participating in an experiment is obviously different from children’s real-
life situations, which might have affected their intentions and behaviors. Longitudinal
studies are warranted to examine how (self-selected) exposure to prosocial television
and children’s prosocial behavior unfold, which has rarely been examined yet
(Greitemeyer, 2011; Mares, 2013; Mares & Woodard, 2005, 2012). Third, although the
role of parental socialization was taken into account, the question remains whether
family social economic status did not play a role in children’s prosocial behavior. This is
an interesting question, given previous findings that lower class individuals are more
generous, charitable, trusting, and helpful compared with their upper class counterparts
(Piff, Kraus, Co
ˆte
´, Cheng, & Keltner, 2010).
Third, the role of peers was not acknowledged. Previous findings have indi-
cated that peers—friends in particular—play an important role in children’s prosocial
behavior (Hastings et al., 2007). In our study, we observed many children immedi-
ately start comparing the size of their donations after the study ended. After that,
some children even asked whether they could donate additional money. It would
be fascinating for future research to determine whether peers or friends can
enhance the impact of prosocial television programming, which is all the more rele-
vant, given that Dutch Children’s News is often watched in the classroom (NOS,
2014). Finally, in the current study, no condition without any media exposure was
PROSOCIAL NEWS AND CHILDREN’S PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR 11
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
included. Future research could include this additional condition to gain insight into
the relative direction of effect of prosocial television news on children’s prosocial
intentions and behaviors compared to no media exposure.
Now that the direct effect of prosocial news content on prosocial behaviors has
been established, another direction for future research is to shed light on the mecha-
nisms explaining this effect (Gerrig, 1993; Green & Brock, 2000). Social cognitive theory
could be used as a starting point for this (Bandura, 2004; Moyer-Guse
´,2008) by examin-
ing whether, indeed, identification with the child exemplars leads to adopting prosocial
behaviors and intentions in children. In addition, theories on positive emotions
(Fredrickson, 1998; Haidt, 2003) could be used to examine, for example, whether wit-
nessing acts of kindness results in elevated positive emotions that, in turn, increase the
likelihood of subsequent prosocial behavior. Related to that, the effects of child exem-
plars in news deserve further attention. It would be interesting to examine in what way
children’s voices can be used most optimally (Zillmann & Brosius, 2000). Based on social
cognitive theory, one might expect that child exemplars who are rewarded for their
behaviors and who are attractive and/or similar to the viewers are most successful
(Bandura, 2004). Moreover, drawing on theory of planned behavior, it would be of
interest to examine whether attitudes and perceived norms mediate the relation
between exposure to prosocial television news and children’s prosocial behavior
(Ajzen & Fishbein, 2005). Finally, from a positive psychology perspective, it would be
fascinating to examine whether prosocial media content indirectly increases happiness
in children, via increased prosocial behavior (Aknin et al., 2012; Dunn, Aknin, & Norton,
2008; Weinstein & Ryan, 2010).
5.2. Practical Implications
In addition to highlighting the relevance of examining the impact of prosocial
media on children’s prosocial behavior (Mares & Woodard, 2005, 2012), this study can
help parents to carefully monitor their children’s exposure to television programming.
Recent findings revealed that, when parents were assisted in substituting high-quality
prosocial and educational programming for aggression-laden programming, their chil-
dren’s observed behavior could be improved (Christakis et al., 2013). Parents could also
be supported in monitoring their children’s television exposure with a content-based
rating system that includes not only warnings, but also information about positive con-
tent like prosocial behavior (Strasburger et al., 2009). Nevertheless, it is important to
note that previous findings indicated that total time of viewing is negatively related to
prosocial behavior (Mares & Woodard, 2012), implying that parents should still be
advised to limit their children’s total amount of television viewing. In sum, television is
often designated as a source of many problems in children, but the present findings
highlight that it should be viewed as a source with possibilities for growth as well.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank Arieke van Dorst, Rene
´e Tijdink, Noortje Lenders, Fleur
Termeer, Annemiek van Kessel, Nikie Lauvenberg, Eva Gruntjes, Fieke Geurts,
12 REBECCA N.H. DE LEEUW ET AL.
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
Marlies Smits, Crystal Smit, Rhianne Hoek, and Jean-Paul Robbertz for their indispens-
able help during the setup of the study and the data collection. Finally, we would like
to thank Geert van der Heijden for directing and producing NewzKids.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
FUNDING
No funding was secured for this study.
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarracı
´n, B. T.
Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 173–221). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Aknin, L. B., Hamlin, J. K., & Dunn, E. W. (2012). Giving leads to happiness in young children.
PLoS ONE, 7, e39211. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0039211
Alon-Tirosh, M., & Lemish, D. (2014). “If I was making the news”: What do children want from
news? Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 11, 108–129.
Bandura, A. (2004). Social cognitive theory for personal and social change by enabling
media. In A. Singhal, M. J. Cody, E. M. Rogers, & M. Sabido (Eds.), Entertainment-educa-
tion and social change: History, research, and practice (pp. 75–96). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Pastorelli, C., Bandura, A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2000). Prosocial
foundations of children’s academic achievement. Psychological Science, 11, 302–306.
Carter, C., & Allan, S. (2005). Public service and the market: A case study of the BBC’s News-
round website. Intervention Research, 1, 209–225.
CBS. (2014). Bevolking: geslacht, leeftijd en burgerlijke staat, 1 januari [Population: Sex, age,
and marital status, January 1]. Retrieved June 12, 2014, from http://statline.cbs.nl/Stat
Web/publication/?DM=SLNL&PA=7461BEV&D1=0&D2=1-2&D3=0-100&D4=0,10,20,30,40,
50,l&HDR=T,G3&STB=G1,G2&VW=T
Christakis, D. A., Garrison, M. M., Herrenkohl, T., Haggerty, K., Rivara, F. P., Zhou, C., &
Liekweg, K. (2013). Modifying media content for preschool children: A randomized
controlled trial. Pediatrics, 131, 431–438. doi:10.1542/peds.2012-1493
Cillessen, A. H. N., & Rose, A. J. (2005). Understanding Popularity in the Peer System. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 102–105.
Clark, K. E., & Ladd, G. W. (2000). Connectedness and autonomy support in parent-child rela-
tionships: Links to children’s socioemotional orientation and peer relationships.
Developmental Psychology, 36, 485–498.
Clifford, B. R., & Gunter, B. (1995). Television and children: Program evaluation, comprehension,
and impact. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
PROSOCIAL NEWS AND CHILDREN’S PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR 13
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
De Cock, R., & Hautekiet, E. (2012). Children’s news online: Website analysis and usability
study results (the United Kingdom, Belgium, and the Netherlands). Journalism and
Mass Communication, 2, 1095–1105.
Dlugokinski, E. L., & Firestone, I. J. (1974). Other centeredness and susceptibility to charitable
appeals: Effects of perceived discipline. Developmental Psychology, 10, 21–28.
Dunn, E. W., Aknin, L. B., & Norton, M. I. (2008). Spending money on others promotes happi-
ness. Science, 319, 1687–1688. doi:10.1126/science.1150952
Eayrs, C. B., & Ellis, N. (1990). Charity advertising: For or against people with a mental handi-
cap? British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 349–366.
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. (2007). Prosocial development. In N. Eisenberg &
W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 646–718). New York, NY: Wiley.
Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2,
300–319. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.300
Gerrig, R. J. (1993). Experiencing narrative worlds. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Goodman, R., Meltzer, H., & Bailey, V. (1998). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A
pilot study on the validity of the self-report version. European Child & Adolescent
Psychiatry, 7, 125–130.
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public
narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 701–721. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.79.5.701
Greitemeyer, T. (2011). Effects of prosocial media on social behavior: When and why does
media exposure affect helping and aggression? Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 20, 251–255. doi:10.1177/0963721411415229
Grusec, J. E., Davidov, M., & Lundell, L. (2002). Prosocial and helping behavior: Blackwell
handbooks of developmental psychology. In C. H. Hart & P. K. Smith (Eds.), Blackwell
handbook of childhood social development. (pp. 457–474) Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Haidt, J. (2003). Elevation and the positive psychology of morality. In C. L. M. Keyes &
J. Haidt. (Ed.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the well-lived (pp. 275–289).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hastings, P. D., Utendale, W. T., & Sullivan, C. (2007). The socialization of prosocial develop-
ment. In J. E. Grusec & P. D. Hastings (Eds.), Handbook of socialization: Theory and
research (pp. 638–664). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Holder, M. D., & Coleman, B. (2008). The contribution of temperament, popularity, and physi-
cal appearance to children’s happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 279–302.
Jeugdjournaal. (2014). Over het Jeugdjournaal (About the Dutch Children’s News). Retrieved
from http://www.jeugdjournaal.nl
Krevans, J., & Gibbs, J. C. (1996). Parents’ use of inductive discipline: Relations to children’s
empathy and prosocial behavior. Child Development, 67, 3263–3277.
Layous, K., Nelson, S. K., Oberle, E., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2012). Kindness
counts: Prompting prosocial behavior in preadolescents boosts peer acceptance and
well-being. PLoS ONE, 7, e51380. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0051380
Lemish, D. (1998). What is news? A cross-cultural examination of kindergartners’ understand-
ing of news. Communications, 23, 491–504.
Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does
happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 803–855. doi:10.1037/0033-
2909.131.6.803
14 REBECCA N.H. DE LEEUW ET AL.
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
Mares, M. L. (2013). Prosocial TV content: Children’s interpretations and responses. In
E. Scharrer (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of media studies: Volume V. Media
effects/media psychology (pp. 657–677). Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell.
Mares, M. L., & Woodard, E. (2005). Positive effects of television on children’s social interac-
tions: A meta-analysis. Media Psychology, 7, 301–322.
Mares, M. L., & Woodard, E. (2012). Effects of prosocial media content on children’s social
interactions. In D. G. Singer & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of children and the media
(2nd ed., pp. 197–214). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Matthews, J. (2005). “Out of the mouths of babes and experts”: Children’s news and what it
can teach us about news access and professional mediation. Journalism Studies, 6,
509–519.
Moore, C. W., & Allen, J. P. (1996). The effects of volunteering on the young volunteer. The
Journal of Primary Prevention, 17, 231–258.
Moyer-Guse
´, E. (2008). Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persua-
sive effects of entertainment-education messages. Communication Theory, 18, 407–425.
NOS. (2014). NOS Jaarverslag 2014: Kijk-, luister- en internetcijfers Annual report of the Dutch
Broadcasting Corporation 2014. Retrieved from http://nos.nl/jaarverslag/nos-cijfers/22-
kijk-luister-en-internetcijfers/
O
¨stberg, V. (2003). Children in classrooms: Peer status, status distribution and mental well-
being. Social Science & Medicine, 56, 17–29.
Padilla-Walker, L. M., Coyne, S. M., Fraser, A. M., & Stockdale, L. A. (2013). Is Disney the nicest
place on earth? A content analysis of prosocial behavior in animated Disney films.
Journal of Communication, 63, 393–412.
Paik, H., & Comstock, G. (1994). The effects of television violence on antisocial behavior: A
meta-analysis. Communication Research, 21, 516–546.
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and
classification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Piff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., Co
ˆte
´, S., Cheng, B. H., & Keltner, D. (2010). Having less, giving more:
The influence of social class on prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 99, 771–784. doi:10.1037/a0020092
Raver, C. C. (2002). Emotions matter: Making the case for the role of young children’s emo-
tional development for early school readiness. Social Policy Report, 16, 3–19.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology – An introduction.
American Psychologist, 55, 5–14. doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.5
Smith, S. L., Pieper, K. M., & Moyer-Guse, E. J. (2011). News, reality shows, and children’s
fears: Examining content patterns, theories, and negative effects. In S. L. Calvert & B. J.
Wilson (Eds.), The handbook of children, media and development (pp. 214–234). Malden,
MA: Blackwell.
Smith, S. W., Smith, S. L., Pieper, K. M., Yoo, J. H., Ferris, A. L., Downs, E., & Bowden, B.
(2006). Altruism on American television: Examining the amount of, and context sur-
rounding, acts of helping and sharing. Journal of Communication, 56, 707–727.
doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00316.x
Strasburger, V. C., Wilson, B. J., & Jordan, A. B. (2009). Prosocial effects of media Children, ado-
lescents, and the media. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Walma van der Molen, J. H., & De Vries, M. (2003). Violence and consolation: September 11th
2001 covered by the Dutch children’s news. Journal of Educational Media, 28,
5–19.
PROSOCIAL NEWS AND CHILDREN’S PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR 15
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
Walma van der Molen, J. H., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peeters, A. L. (2002). Television news and
fear: A child survey. Communications, 27, 303–317.
Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomous motivation for proso-
cial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and recipient. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 222–244.
Zillmann, D., & Brosius, H. B. (2000). Exemplification in communication: The influence of case
reports on perceptions of issues. New York, NY: Routledge.
Received 12 July 2014
Final version received 1 June 2015
Accepted 10 July 2015
Rebecca N.H. de Leeuw (PhD cum laude, 2011) is an assistant professor at Communica-
tion Science, Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University. She devotes her
research to the role of parenting and media in relation to well-being in children
and adolescents, with a special focus on positive media psychology. E-mail:
r.deleeuw@bsi.ru.nl
Mariska Kleemans (PhD, 2013) is a postdoctoral researcher of Communication Science,
Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University. Her research focuses on the
causes and consequences of emotional (news) messages. In particular, she investi-
gates how news producers can optimize their task of informing children and ado-
lescents about significant events in society. E-mail: mariska.kleemans@bsi.ru.nl
Esther Rozendaal (PhD, 2011) is an assistant professor in Persuasive Communication at
Communication Science, Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University. Her
research focuses on children’s advertising literacy (i.e. advertising-related knowl-
edge, attitudes and skills) and their defenses against the persuasive appeal of
advertising. In addition, she investigates whether and how advertising interven-
tions (e.g. education programs) can increase children’s motivation and ability to
defend against advertising. E-mail: e.rozendaal@bsi.ru.nl
Doeschka J. Anschu
¨tz (PhD, 2011) is an assistant professor in Communication Science,
Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University. She examines the effects of
exposure to mediated food or alcohol cues on youth’s eating and drinking behav-
iors, and the processes involved. Currently, she is focusing on the effects of the
addition of entertainment elements to information, education, and advertising on
health behaviors in youth. She received her PhD in Psychology from the Radboud
University. E-mail: d.anschutz@bsi.ru.nl
Moniek Buijzen (PhD, 2003) is professor and chair of Communication Science, Beha-
vioural Science Institute, Radboud University. Her research focuses on young
(media) consumers within the paradigm of positive communication science. She
strives to apply insights on communication processes to improve child and ado-
lescent well-being. E-mail: m.buijzen@bsi.ru.nl
16 REBECCA N.H. DE LEEUW ET AL.
Downloaded by [213.93.181.165] at 22:46 28 September 2015
