Observed links between media violence and aggression have four rival causal explanations

Evidence

Correlations involving televised violence can arise through four different paths of influence. Viewing violence fosters aggression. Aggressive viewers are attracted to violent programs. The influence is a bidirectional one: Viewing violence fosters aggression; in turn, an aggressive proclivity increases the attraction to violent programs. In the fourth path of influence, a third factor may influence both aggression and viewing violence, creating a spurious causal relation between the two other factors. They are co-effects of the third factor rather than causally related. The third factor has no fixed content. It could be socioeconomic status, ethnicity, or intelligence. Multiple controls, therefore, must be applied to rule out third-factor causation. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 720

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the vault’s methodological skepticism about survey/authoritarianism links (e.g., Katz’s critique in Adorno’s group work) - both worry about third-factor explanations masquerading as causal. — connects to: Media-violence correlations arise from four causally distinct paths of influence.
• DEFINE: Clarifies that a media-aggression correlation can arise from genuine influence, reverse selection, bidirectional feedback, or a spurious shared cause.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 720