大众媒体占据了我们闲暇时间的很大一部分：人们平均每周花25小时看电视，

Mass media takes up a large part of our leisure time: people spend an average of 25 hours a week watching TV, and they also have time for radio, movies, magazines and newspapers. For kids, time spent watching TV is similar to time spent at school or with family and friends. While school, family and friends are all cited as major factors influencing children's social interactions, there has been a lively debate around the possible influence of mass media, with results both in favor and against. Impact questions are often raised out of the urgency of the public rather than academic agenda, the simplicity of which does not lend itself to the complexity of the problem (we don't ask for other social impacts, what is the parent's impact on the child? What is the school's impact on the family? What positive or negative influence does a friend have. The possibility of a media effect is often seen as a challenge to personal respect and autonomy, just as the pro-effect view sees the public as a gullible mass, cultural idiots, vulnerable to ideological injection needle harm, as if television was proposed as the sole cause of a range of social behaviors. This stereotyped view of research tends to foster an equally stereotyped alternative view that creative and informed viewers make rational choices about what to watch. <br>Review Articles often describe the history of research progress over the past 70 years, alternating between these two extremes—first we believe in strong effects, then arguments for zero effects, then regression to strong effects, etc.—when reinterpreting old ones with new eyes A history of contradictions becoming apparent when researching. Contemporary media research sometimes defines itself by rejecting the study of effect language—criticism of laboratory experiments, causal reasoning logic, and psychological reductionism. As I will argue in this chapter, this rejection is partly justified Yes, some are exaggerated

Mass media occupy a large part of our leisure time: people spend an average of 25 hours a week watching TV. They also have time to watch radio, movies, magazines and newspapers. For children, the time spent watching TV is similar to that spent at school or with family and friends. Although school, family and friends are considered to be the main factors affecting children's social interaction, there has been a heated debate about the possible impact of mass media, and the results of supporting and opposing the impact are controversial. Impact issues are often raised out of the urgency of the public rather than the academic agenda, Its simplicity is not suitable for the complexity of the problem (we don't ask for other social influences. What are the influences of parents on children? What are the influences of schools on families? What are the positive or negative influences of friends? The possibility of media effect is often regarded as a challenge to personal respect and autonomy, just as the view of Pro effect holds that the public is a gullible public, cultural fool and vulnerable to ideological injection It is as if television is proposed as the only reason for a series of social behaviors. This stereotyped research view tends to form an equally stereotyped alternative view, that is, creative and informed audiences make rational choices about viewing content.<br>Review articles often describe the progress history of research in the past 70 years. These two extremes alternate - first, we believe in the strong effect, then the argument of zero effect, and then the return to the strong effect. When the old research is reinterpreted with a new perspective, the contradiction becomes obvious. Contemporary media studies sometimes define themselves by rejecting the study of effective language - critical laboratory experiments, causal reasoning logic and psychological reductionism. I will point out in this chapter that this rejection is partly reasonable and partly exaggerated

Mass media occupy a large part of our leisure time: people spend an average of 25 hours a week watching TV, and they also have time to watch radio, movies, magazines and newspapers. For children, the time spent watching TV is similar to the time spent at school or with family and friends. Although school, family and friends are considered to be the main factors that affect children's social interaction, there is a heated debate about the possible influence of mass media, and the results for and against the influence are controversial. The question of influence is usually put forward because of the urgency of the public rather than the academic agenda, and its simplicity is not suitable for the complexity of the question (we don't ask for other social influences, what are parents' influences on children? What impact does school have on family? What are the positive or negative influences of friends? The possibility of media effect is often regarded as a challenge to personal respect and autonomy, just as the pro-effect view holds that the public is a gullible mass and a cultural fool who is vulnerable to the injection of ideology, just as television is proposed as the only reason for a series of social behaviors. This rigid view of research tends to form an equally rigid alternative view, that is, creative and informed audiences make rational choices about what to watch. Reviews often describe the progress history of research in the past 70 years. These two extremes appear alternately-first, we believe in the strong effect, then the argument of zero effect, then the return to the strong effect, etc.-when the old research is reinterpreted with new eyes, the contradiction becomes obvious. Contemporary media studies sometimes define themselves by rejecting effect language studies-critical laboratory experiments, causal reasoning logic and psychological reductionism. I will point out in this chapter that this refusal is partly reasonable and partly exaggerated.