Family Contexts of Television Hope Jensen Leichter Durre Ahmed Leoncio Barrios Jennifer Bryce Eric Larsen Laura Moe

Hope Jensen Leichter is the Elbenwood Professor of Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027; Durre Ahmed is Associate Professor of Communication, National College of Arts, Lahore, Pakistan; Leoncio Barrios is Assistant Profes- sor of Communication, Central University of Ven- ezuela, Caracas, Venezuela; Jennifer Bryce is at the American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon; Eric Larsen is at Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027; and Laura Moe is a doctoral student in Family and Community Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027.

Two power fu l educators , te levis ion and the family, come together in the home . M a n y inst i tut ions o ther than schools can be as- s u m e d to educate , inc lud ing libraries, hos- pi tals , m u s e u m s , r e l ig ious in s t i t u t ions , families, and the media . Those work ing in any one ins t i tu t ion a n d those p l a n n i n g broader educat ional p rog rams and policies need to unde r s t and no t on ly h o w educa t ion takes place in each of these inst i tut ions, bu t also the re la t ionships a m o n g t h e m (Leich- ter, 1973; Leichter, 1979).

Televis ion and the family p resen t par t icu- larly significant cases because they are so c lose ly i n t e r w o v e n . Te l ev i s ion v i e w i n g mos t often takes place in homes , w h e r e the direct or indirect educa t ion of family m e m -

ECTJ, VOL. 33, NO. 1, PAGES 26-40 ISSN 0148-5806

This research is part of a study of "The Mediation of Television by the Family" being conducted at the E1- benwood Center for the Study of the Family as Educa- tor. The research was made possible by a grant from the Spencer Foundation. We wish to express our apprecia- tion for this generous support. We wish to thank others who participated in the data collection for their skillful assistance: Delois Blakely, John Desjarlais, Glenna Pohly Fischer, Michele Grodner, Miriam Heller, Pattie Kearns, Amy Lawrence, Jacqueline McDonald, Carmen Eramia, and Janet Weber. We also wish to express our appreciation to James Jensen Leichter for valuable sug- gestions and indispensable technical assistance in the preparation of the manuscript.

FAMILY CONTEXTS OF TELEVISION 27

bers is a continuing process, where ac- tivities are organized in time and space, and where the interactions of individuals with each other form a continuous screen of in- fluence through which the world is experi- enced. We shall argue that television has become so much a part of the fabric of everyday family life in the United States today that it cannot adequately be under- stood as an isolated phenomenon. Rather a careful examination is required of the social contexts in which television viewing takes place.

CONCERNS ABOUT THE EDUCATIONAL IMPACT OF TELEVISION

Peculiar phenomena can be observed in re- lation to television. From many quarters, one hears expressions of deep concern over its impact. These views are often alarmist in tone, represented by negative images such as that of television as a Plug-in Drug (Winn, 1977), by arguments for the elimination of television (Mander, 1978), and by studies to determine whether television contributes to children's violence (Report to the Sur- geon General, 1971). To be sure, there are some, such as those involved in the devel- opment of educational technologies, who are apt to have an impressive optimism about the educational advantages that can be achieved through various forms of technology, including television.

But many discussions about television have the flavor of a present-day morality play. This is reflected in exhortations from those in many quarters--educational, reli- gious, and political--to reduce television viewing. In the recent presidential cam- paign, both candidates argued the dangers of television. In his speech accepting the Democratic nomination, Walter Mondale said: "It is time for America to have a season of excellence. Parents must turn off that television; students must do their home- work; teachers must teach. And America must compete. We'll be number one if we will follow those rules. ''1 Similarly, Presi- dent Reagan, in his weekly radio address, urged students to "stop watching too much

1From the acceptance speech of presidential candidate Walter F. Mondale, New York Times, Friday, July 20, 1984.

TV," saying that "time given to a television show that ought to be given to a school book is time badly used . . . . Watching TV is passive. It's not living life. Life involves ef- fort and growth. You won't grow by watch- ing a situation comedy, though you can grow by reading a book. ' 'a It is ironic that Mr. Mondale's advice was given over care- fully arranged prime-time television, and that two decades ago President Reagan was himself the host of television's "Death Val- ley Days." Despite this bipartisan agree- ment on the dangers of television viewing and similar warnings from many other quarters, the time spent viewing television continues to increase, with recent figures showing that in the average household television was on almost 7 hours per day (Gertner & Pay, 1984).

This alarm over the impact of television is characteristic of discussions in the United States today, but it does not necessarily rep- resent the situation in other countries, re- minding us that evaluations of television are themselves part of the larger social con- text. In Pakistan, for example, public de- bates over television have tended to focus on rather different questions: whether women with uncovered faces should be al- lowed to appear on television, whether programs transmitted from countries with different religions should be viewed in Pakistan, and how the educational potential of television can be extended to the large segment of the population where literacy has not yet been achieved (Ahmed, 1983).

Yet in the United States it is noteworthy that despite warnings from many quarters about the dangers of pervasive television viewing, and the widespread sense of guilt on the part of many parents over the televi- sion viewing habits of their families, these habits remain hard to change. And dis- crepancies, ironies, and inconsistencies of a variety of kinds are to be found between what people say about their television view- ing and what they do, and between the rhetoric of those who give advice and their own reliance on the media.

Why should it be that television viewing is hard to change? We will argue that one of the reasons television viewing is difficult to

aCampaign Notes. New York Times, September 9, 1984.

28 ECTJ SPRING1985

modify is precisely because it has become so much a part of the basic organization of family life, including ways of handling such fundamental matters as time and space, that a change in television viewing would have ripple effects that would entail changes in many other areas of family life.

APPROACHES TO THE ANALYSIS OF THE SOCIAL CONTEXTS OF TELEVISION

If these assumptions are correct, an under- standing of the significance of television re- quires a shift from questions about the im- pact of television on individuals to those about the ways in which television shapes and is shaped by its social context. This constitutes a significant shift of focus from many recent inquiries into the impact of television. In many of these studies, the final outcome under consideration has been the impact on the individual, even when, as is in some of the studies, interpersonal con- ditions were considered (for example, the extent to which a parent is present during the child's television viewing and talks to the child about it). While the impact on in- dividuals is certainly important, it is coming to be recognized that the ways in which television is embedded in family relation- ships must become a major focus of re- search efforts (Brody, Stoneman, & Saun- ders, 1980; Brown & Linn6, 1976; Comstock, Chaffee, Katzman, McCombs, & Roberts, 1978; Ellis, 1983; Lull, 1980a, 1980b; Med- rich, 1979; Schramm & Lerner, 1976; Singer & Singer 1981). 3

Moreover, many of these habits of living with television are so ingrained that they cannot readily be reported by those en- gaged in them; they are at the margins of awareness, recognizable once described but not ordinarily the subject of deliberate at- tention. The position of television in the family is, in fact, so commonplace that it is, in a sense, almost invisible, and specific re- search efforts are required to uncover these everyday habits. Given the discrepancies between what is said and what is done, an examination that encompasses different

3For further discussions of the family and television, including rationales for employing interactional and sys- tems perspectives, and for additional references to re- cent literatures on television, see the volume edited by Godfrey Ellis (1983).

levels of data--observation and report--is required.

The matter is hlrther complicated by the fact that rapid social changes are in prog- ress. The variety of ways of living with tele- vision is undoubtedly greater than has been recognized in the past, and television itself is not a unitary phenomenon but one that is changing as new television technologies (kinds of sets, forms of programming) are coming to be widely distributed. The move from network television to cable and video- recording, for example, is significantly modifying the ways in which television is meshed with other family activities. In addi- tion, other new forms of technology that are rapidly entering the home, such as video- games and computers, are themselves in- fluencing television viewing.

For these reasons, we embarked upon an intensive ethnographic study. Space pre- cludes a detailed discussion of the research. Rather, through examples drawn from the data, we will illustrate the importance of examining the social context of television as well as ways of approaching the study of families as interpersonal systems in which television is embedded. While the research covers a variety of aspects of the family's relation to television, including the ways in which families talk about television (Bryce, 1980; Bryce & Leichter, 1983), for present purposes we will concentrate on the ways in which television fits into the family's or- ganization of space and time.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS FOR THE STUDY OF FAMILY ENVIRONMENT

Given that television exerts its influence in social contexts, a basic assumption of the research was that families can and do modify, or mediate, the television experi- ence of their members. By mediation we mean "those processes whereby the family (or other institution) filters educational inf luences-- the processes by which it screens, interprets, criticizes, reinforces, complements, counteracts, refracts, and transforms" (Leichter, 1979, p. 32). We set out to examine these processes in closer de- tail.

FAMILY CONTEXTS OF TELEVISION 29

As we moved into the research, it became clear that the processes of mediation them- selves needed to be understood in terms of the organization of the family as a system. One could, for example, observe the ways in which parents criticized television, but the time spent watching with children and the nature of this criticism were dependent in turn on the overall organization of the family. And it became increasingly clear that the need to understand the impact of television did not rest on the number of viewing hours alone, even when these were extensive. Indeed, television, almost like electricity, is a presence in the family that exerts its influence whether or not it is being viewed at a particular moment. Decisions, for example, about when to watch, whether to watch, and what kinds of content to let children see are interwoven with other ac- tivities on a continuing basis. It is, there- fore, necessary to examine the ways in which television is embedded in families as interpersonal systems.

The idea that the interpersonal environ- ment is one context for individual behavior, and the consequent need for contextual ex- amination of individual characteristics, is coming to be well recognized (Lerner, Hultsch, & Dixon, 1983). A number of re- cent studies have been based on the as- sumption that individual characteristics, such as styles of attention and modes of remembering, can be better understood through a consideration of how they are manifested in social contexts. The approach to social organization as interconnected sys- tems has also been widely utilized (Leich- ter, 1979). The literature on family therapy, for instance, has relied significantly on sys- tems concepts with clear recognition that a change in one area of family relationships may have repercussions for other areas (Leichter & Mitchell, 1978). In attempting to examine the ways in which television is mediated by the family, we were therefore building upon a larger body of research on the interpersonal context of individual be- havior.

The study of the ways in which television shapes and is shaped by interpersonal in- teractions within the family also requires a shift from a focus on the outcomes of televi- sion viewing to a consideration of the pro-

cesses of interaction among individuals. Since television-related interactions, like other family interactions, can be assumed to take place on a moment-to-moment basis, the effort to understand these step-by-step processes in detail becomes essential.

Space and time are two basic dimensions in terms of which processes of familial or- ganization may be examined. A significant literature in the behavioral sciences gives points of departure for this examination.

Approaches to the Study of Spatial Organization Spatial organization has been studied in fields that range from animal ethology to anthropology, sociology, philosophy, and literature. The term "proxemics" has been coined to refer to "man's use of space as a specialized elaboration of culture" (Hall, 1966, p. 1). The organization of space, in- cluding household space, has been shown to vary from one cul~tre to another in terms of both "fixed-feature" space, such as the basic structure of houses or apartments, and "semi-fixed feature" space, which is defined by elements that can be rearranged for different uses, such as furniture. In addi- tion, interpersonal space--that is, the dis- tances that individuals maintain from each other in various settings--has been shown to vary socially and culturally. Spatial awareness depends on a variety of senses: auditory, visual, kinesthetic, tactile, and ol- factory. It has been argued that architectural spaces can best be understood not only in terms of visual space but also in terms of orienting or "haptic" systems, the bodily sensations of movement, and the paths employed when going from one space to another (Bloomer & Moore, 1977).

It is important to note that certain ar- rangements of people are more suited to certain activities (Ashcraft & Scheflen, 1976). For example, conversations are more likely to occur between people seated adja- cent to each other at the comer of a table than between those seated next to each other along one of the sides (Sommer, 1969). Thus, there is a distinction between spaces that are "sociofugal" and those that are "sodopetal"-- that is, between those that tend to push people apart and those that tend to draw people together. That

30 ECTJ SPRING1985

which is sociofugal in one setting may be sociopetal in another. Room arrangements, for example, tend to vary culturally; it has been noted that in Japanese homes, furni- ture tends to be arranged in the center of the room, leaving the areas next to the walls empty, whereas in American homes, furni- ture tends to gravitate toward the edges and walls.

Whatever the variations may be, spatial organization is of profound significance in interpersonal relationships within families. Moreover, the sense of space can be in- tensely emotional and deeply ingrained; as one observer has noted, our earliest homes are "physically inscribed in us" (Bachelard, 1964, p. 14).

Of particular importance for the study of television and the family are the boundaries that separate one activity from another, as well as the personal boundaries that sepa- rate private from semiprivate and public spaces. It has been shown that households vary significantly in the extent to which separate areas are assigned to separate ac- tivities, as well as in the ways in which activities and spaces are classified as similar or dissimilar. There have been historic changes in such classification; separate rooms for separate activities have existed only at certain times and places. And there are cultural as well as class variations in the extent of separation and overlap of activities in different household spaces. As one study of lower class households found, crowding may make it necessary for children to sleep in the kitchen (Ashcraft & Scheflen, 1976). There are, moreover, symbolic overlays to the meaning of spaces and objects, includ- ing television sets, within homes (Csikszentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981).

These considerations imply that the or- ganization of space both reflects and influ- ences the multiple spheres of interpersonal interaction that occur within families (Leichter, 1973; Leichter, 1979). The ways in which television is fitted into the spatial or- ganization of a home will reflect the choices and priorities of family members and will, in turn, influence the way they combine television with other activities, the constel- lations of individuals who watch together, and the forms of mediation that take place.

Approaches to the Study of Temporal Organization Time, like space, is basic to the organization of all social systems, and it has also been the subject of substantial literatures, from studies of the details of biological time clocks (Gibbon & Allan, 1984) to sweeping social and literary criticism of temporal or- ganization in society (Schlesinger, 1977). Anthropological studies have indicated that the organization of time varies significantly from one society to another (Hall, 1984). One distinction is between societies that are predominantly oriented toward the past as compared to the present or future (Kluck- hohn & Strobtbeck, 1961). Another is be- tween monochronic societies, those tend- ing to emphasize "schedules, segmenta- tion, and promptness," and polychronic societies, those characterized by "several things happening at once," with the em- phasis on "involvement with people" and "completion of transactions," rather than adherence to schedules (Hall, 1976, p. 14). Other researchers have studied the ways in which social and cultural time perspectives become part of individual orientations in such matters as attitudes toward the future and the ways the life course is reviewed (Cottle & Klineberg, 1974).

One basic issue concerns how time is con- ceptualized or represented. Symbolic rep- resentations of time vary from one culture to another and differ among individuals of the same culture. It has been argued that "basic values and perceptions are projected onto the abstract concept of time" (Gorman & Wessman, 1977, p. 234). Thus, there are both concepts of time and evaluation of the organization of time. Learning these con- cepts and evaluations becomes part of an individual 's acquisition of culture and psychosocial development, as indicated in such classic works as those of Piaget.

Another fundamental issue concerns the coordination of activities in time. "All forms of coordination involve problems of time, synchronization, and sequence" (Moore, 1963, p. 136). The elaborate scheduling of activities in an industrial society is one form of coordination; another is the gearing of activities to cycles of nature in agricultural and fishing societies. Some recent research indicates that individuals differ in basic

FAMILY CONTEXTS OF TELEVISION 31

biological activity levels and that various biological rhythms and time clocks are fitted together in social interaction. The extent to which synchronization results, or fails to result, varies considerably from one in- stance to another (Byers, 1972; Chapple, 1970). Time is also a significant factor in the linkages among social institutions, the or- ganization of interactions within families, and the educative styles of individuals (Leichter, 1973; Leichter, 1979).

Yet another fundamental issue is that of temporal demarcation and sequencing. Time periods may be marked off in a variety of ways: abstractly and mechanically--by clocks, bells, and metronomes, for exam- ple--or in terms of natural cycles such as seasons and tides. Rituals of a variety of kinds may serve to mark calendric divi- sions. On another level, the beginnings and endings of sequences of interaction, that is, the ways in which the "stream of activity" is broken up (Barker & Wright, 1971) and the distinction between one " f r a m e " and another established (Goffman, 1974), have been shown to be basic to all social systems. How the transition from one activity to another, and from times of being with others to times of being alone, is handled, has been investigated, for example, in a study of bedtime stories as transitional events (Albert & Jones, 1977). Turn-taking and interruptions in conversation have been shown to have general significance as well as importance in educational settings (Jackson, 1968).

Issues of time have been the subject of frequent discussion in the literatures on television, from concerns about the amount of time devoted to television to those oc- casioned by the rapid-tire pacing of much television programming (Leichter, 1979). Thus, the question of how the family's tem- poral organization conditions and is con- ditioned by television viewing is basic.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES IN THE STUDY OF FAMILY ENVIRONMENTS

When the purpose is to obtain a detailed picture of the ways in which television is interwoven with the underlying organiza- tion of the family, a method is required that makes it possible to uncover habits that are

so ingrained that they are often not recog- nized by those engaged in them. In our case, the method of choice was what has been variously termed ethnographic, natu- ralistic, or observational data gathering. In short, we sought to make intense observa- tions of families over a sufficient period of time to enable us to obtain a picture of the role of television in their lives, induding the rules and regulations, the conflicts, and the ways of discussing and appraising televi- sion, both when it was being watched and when it was not. To this end, we drew upon a spectrum of data-collection procedures, including participant observation, inter- viewing, recording of specific behaviors such as eye-gaze direction during viewing, and video and audiotaping of interactions, both in the context of viewing and outside of this context. This variety of techniques made it possible to obtain different levels of data: transcripts of verbal discussions; de- scriptions of posture, gesture, and other " n o n v e r b a l " communicat ions; photo- graphs and diagrams of the spatial organi- zation of the home; reports by observers and family members.

Locating oneself as an observer raised a number of difficult choices. One can place oneself in a fixed position, such as near a television set, and simply watch what goes past, or one can follow a particular family member around and watch the interactions in which that individual engages. Since being in a particular location at a particular moment necessarily means missing things that are going on elsewhere, it becomes im- portant to obtain data from a variety of loca- tions. Thus, it was important to have obser- vations in a variety of household areas. It was also necessary to make observations over a sufficient time span to obtain a pic- ture of the varying seasonal, weekly, and daily cycles of the family's life. Initially, one observer moved in with families in order to make round-the-clock observations (Bryce, 1980). Later other researchers attempted to obtain observations over a variety of time periods.

The research was concept generating, not hypothesis testing. Families were selected using the methods of grounded theory, which calls for an alternation between data gathering and analysis (Glaser & Strauss,

32 ECTJ SPRING1985

1967). With this method, the sample is not selected at the initiation of-the study; rather, a n u m b e r of cases are obse rved and analyzed closely and then, as patterns emerge, additional cases are added where significant contrasts are deemed likely to arise. Thus, the main objective is to estab- lish types of variation, not to investigate the frequency of distribution of different types. It is important to realize that naturalistic observation involves a shift not only from an individual to an interpersonal focus and from an outcome to a process model but also a shift in the kind of conclusion that can be expected. Otherwise, concept-generating research is l ikely to be rev iewed and eva lua ted- -both by the researchers and others- - in terms of criteria that are associ- ated with hypothesis-testing research.

The first phase of the study was con- cerned with three comparatively homoge- neous families, and important differences in the ways they organized time and space and in the ways they fitted television into this organization were discovered (Bryce, 1980; Bryce & Leichter, 1983). Additional families were selected to enable contrasts and compar i sons wi th pa t te rns that emerged in the initial study. The present analysis rests on intensive study of 10 fam- ilies that may be considered to fall broadly within the middle class. Several of the par- ents were professionals; all had at least a high school education; none faced severe problems of poverty. It was not the purpose of the study to relate variations to broader social categories such as ethnicity and social class. The cross-cultural contrasts that emerged from a similar study of families in Pakistan gave additional insights (Ahmed, 1983).

We do not presume that the variations we have observed are exhaustive. Nor do we presume that concept-generating, natu- ralistic study is the only technique appro- priate for research on families and televi- sion. We do wish to maintain that detailed descriptive data, covering not only what people say about their television behavior but also observations of it, are essential to uncovering significant, often unrecognized patterns in this everyday activity.

SPACE, TIME, AND TELEVISION IN FAMILY ORGANIZATION

Space precludes a detailed presentation, or "thick description" (Geertz, 1973), of our ethnographic data. Our intention is to illus- trate some of the varying ways in which patterns of television viewing both reflect and influence a family's spatial and tem- poral organization. Such an abbreviated il- lustration does not adequately present the richness of the data, the context in which particular illustrations can be best under- stood, or the interrelationships among the various aspects of a particular family's life. The illustrations should make clear, how- ever, the importance of looking at television in a family context.

Dimensions of Spatial Organization In observing the ways in which families mediate television, the close connection be- tween television and the spatial organiza- tion of the household became evident. We do not presume that spatial organization causes certain kinds of attention to televi- sion, encourages discussions about it, or determines the clusters of individuals who watch together; the relationship is much more intricate.

Spatial Definitions, Choices, and Rearrange- ments. Spatial organization is a complex phenomenon that combines the architec- tural characteristics of the home with family members ' definitions and perceptions. In some cases, the same physical structures or arrangements of furniture may be seen very differently by different individuals , as shown in the following discussion between an observer and a family member:

Observer: I would have called it a family room. I thought that would be where (you) would watch TV. It didn't turn out that way. What is it? It's just a big open room. It doesn't move in any way . . . .

Wife: I think I use it all the time. It gives me great pleasure artistically. It's a very beautiful space.

Different family members may, therefore, have significantly different views of a par- ticular space; there are social as well as ar- chitectural constructions of reality.

Choices with respect to the placement of television may be quite deliberate, with ex-

FAMILY CONTEXTS OF TELEVISION 33

plicit considerat ion of how the location might influence viewing pat terns and who has control. In a home in which a television set has been in a particular place for a signif- icant per iod of time, such choices are not always immediate ly obvious; as one woman explained, the present location was "obvi- ously the logical place," and no further ex- planation seemed called for. However , in- t e rv iews abou t p rev ious a r r a n g e m e n t s often reveal the kind of thinking that goes into the placement of television sets. Al- though there may be little choice about the use of certain spaces in most homes (e.g., whether to call a kitchen a kitchen or a bath a bath), there are other spaces that are, in a sense, neutral, and families differed mark- edly in the establishment of leisure areas and the location of television sets. One mother had arranged the television set so that she could tell what programs the chil- dren were watching while she was working in the kitchen. Another had placed the tele- vision as far away from the general activities of the household as possible so that neither the picture nor the sound would be bother- some.

The symbolic significance at tr ibuted to the location of television sets is revealed by the comment of one mother: "We would never have it in the living room"; she went on to explain that her own mother had given her the impression that having televi- sion in the living room was "low class."

Choices with respect to the placement of television are not necessarily made all at once. There may be a sequence of adjust- ments and readjustments after moving into a home. The movement of a previously fixed television set may be a very significant fami ly event , en ta i l ing n u m e r o u s dis- cussions and negotiations. One woman de- scribed the movement of an old, stil l-work- ing television set to a third-floor attic as a major change in family organization. Since sets may be acquired through purchase and as gifts, perhaps as hand-me-downs from relatives, many occasions for moving televi- sion sets may occur. Physical arrangements may last longer in some households than in others, and the sense of permanence about arrangements may also vary. In one case, the mother described her feelings of tenta- t iveness with respect to the location of tele-

vision in the household, explaining that she and her husband were establishing a com- bined household with children from previ- ous marriages and that this entailed a lot of experimentation.

On a short- term basis, television sets may be treated as either "fixed" or "movable ." We observed arrangements that varied from one set in a central location, such as a recrea- tion room or living room, to mobile sets on carts to small portable sets that were carried about. The variety of sizes and shapes avail- able on the market suggests that such varia- tion is common, heightening the signifi- cance of spatial definitions and choices.

Spatial Dispersion and Pathways. Television viewing is not necessarily static, with indi- viduals seated in fixed posit ions in front of a television set. We observed a great variety of viewing postures: sitting in front of a set on a chair or couch or on the floor; lying down on a couch or on the floor, sometimes with a blanket or sleeping bag; standing; leaning on a piece of furniture; walking through the room; s tanding or sitting while engaged in another activity, such as doing dishes or sewing. We also observed varia- tion in the physical proximity of individuals to each other, ranging from no physical con- tact to hugging, cuddling, and sitting on laps. Even when people were seated in front of a set, data on eye-gaze direction showed that there was considerable varia- tion in the extent to which they looked at the set a n d the i r a t t e n t i o n was s u s t a i n e d (Bryce, 1980).

Since viewing takes place while individ- uals are entering and leaving rooms, the pa thways that are routinely used in moving from one area to another are significant. As one observer noted:

The natural pathway of the house turns right at the front door, away from the room with the television. One does not pass through it or stum- ble into it. One chooses to go there. This reflects the fact that television viewing is relegated to an area of the house that has to do with recreation. It is rarely thought of as an educational resource to be used for news or information.

Communica t ion about te levis ion m a y take place between rooms. One observer noted that it was common for family mem- bers to call out to others to come and see a

34 ECTJ SPRING1985

particular item. Other individuals, often in other rooms, would respond by coming into the room, standing for a moment to watch--if they arrived before the item in question was over--and then walking out again. Some viewers, as indicated by both self-report and the descriptions of other family members, appear to sit more and to prefer watching from a seated position; others tend to be more restless physically and to move about the household, watching en route rather than from a fixed position. Specific arrangements may even be worked out to enable individuals to take part in tele- vision viewing while moving about. One woman described her procedure of keeping two sets on at the same time, tuned to the same channel, so that she could walk from the kitchen to the living room without los- ing the thread of the program.

Spatial Boundaries Between Activities. Ac- tivities may be spatially separated or com- bined in a variety of ways. Some architec- tural spaces are more visually and audito- rially "open" than others. In some house- holds, there may be virtually no places where television can be watched without being heard elsewhere. In others, both the placement of sets and the equipment itself make it possible for viewing to be an iso- lated event for a particular individual, sepa- rated from other activities. Such spatial boundaries are definitional as well as ar- chitectural and often become established only through a process of interaction and negotiation. As one man explained, "It is something we keep working at."

It might be assumed that the number of sets in a household has an influence on viewing patterns (for example, on wheth- er family members watch alone or with others). It is not merely the number of sets, however, but rather their placement in rela- tion to the physical structure, furniture, and activity centers that is significant. Televi- sion sets may serve as focal points of activ- ity; one family described their set as the "family hearth" around which people gathered. Television sets may also have varying connections with other centers of activity. In some instances, television sets were deliberately located in places where individuals tended to congregate, such as

kitchens. Sets may also be placed so that viewing may be combined with other ac- tivities. One mother reported that she had one set in the kitchen "to keep me com- pany" while doing dishes. Another re- ported that she placed her sewing center in the family room so that she could get work done while "TV keeps the children amused," going on to explain that "while I cannot always see what they are viewing, I can hear."

Rules and regulations, either explicit or implicit, often exist about how basic family activities such as eating, sleeping, cooking, cleaning, and homework should relate to television. The connection between televi- sion and eating seems to be of particular concern in many homes. In one instance, no eating was allowed in the living room-- the location of the television se t - -and this meant the separation of eating and televi- sion viewing. In another family, by con- trast, the television was moved into the din- ing room on a cart so that it could be viewed during meals. Rules about the loca- tion of toys were also noted. In one case, there were clear r u l e s - "no food and no toys in the living room"--where the televi- sion was located. In other instances, toys were routinely brought into rooms with television in order to be available during viewing.

Personal Spatial Boundaries. One of the crucial issues with respect to the spatial boundaries of activities is that of the control or "own- ership" of television sets. In some in- stances, sets in individual rooms were clearly private, and it was presumed that another person entering to watch television must knock. Sometimes assumptions about knocking were hierarchical; parents could enter a child's room without knocking, but children were expected to knock before en- tering a parent's room.

When a set is in an area that is open to most family members, questions commonly arise as to who has the right to be present and who has priority in choosing what is to be viewed. The often repeated use of the possessive--"my show," "your program" - - i s indicative of the intricate negotiations that take p l a c e - between husbands and wives, between parents and children, and

FAMILY CONTEXTS OF TELEVISION 35

among c h i l d r e n - in establishing rights with respect to program selection and view- ing times.

Personal rights to space can be observed in seating arrangements at meals as well as in living rooms and recreation rooms where television is watched by several family members. In some instances, priorities re- flect roles, such as sex and age roles, that are fairly well established. In one instance, for example, the father's chair in front of the television was not used by anyone else un- less he was away from home. Interestingly, observations from another study of seating arrangements during television viewing in one lower middle class family in Pakistan revealed clear distinctions between the sexes, with men seated on chairs and cots, while women sat on the floor.

Personal boundaries are associated with questions of control over the television set and particularly the switching of channels. As one wife explained, her husband lies with the remote control next to him on the couch and switches the channels at will. Sometimes this is an annoyance, but his dominance in occupying the couch and con- trolling the switch seems well established. Distinctions between children's and adults' areas also arise. The matter is complicated because the same area may be changed at certain times from a general family area to a children's area; in one family, for example, the children brought sleeping bags into the room with the television set early on Satur- day mornings before their parents were up.

Physical structures and television equip- ment combine with spatial definitions in es- tablishing and maintaining personal boundaries. In one instance, a child had a television set with earphones that he kept next to his bed and watched for many hours without interruption. He reported that he used the earphones because "I don't want to bother my brother." He also brought the set and earphones to the dinner table, where he continued watching during meals, thereby isolating himself from con- versation, and this behavior was not chal- lenged.

The issue of auditory boundaries may be exceedingly sensitive. Indeed, a significant amount of attention to television may be auditory rather than visual (Bryce, 1980).

Complaints about violations of auditory privacy were common, ranging from those by parents about their children's choice of "awful music" to irritation expressed by one wife because her husband "rattled the newspaper" while she was watching. The need individuals feel for auditory privacy seems to vary substantially, from a case where parents required their children to conduct any discussion of program selec- tion "in whispers" to a lack of concern, as in the case of a pianist who practiced virtually in the same room with the television on. Differences also arise in whether individ- uals find the sound of television as back- ground bothersome or pleasant. Some re- ported using the television as if it were a radio. Others reported conflicts over sound levels. One wife, for example, reported that when the television was loud enough to give her a feeling of the program's emo- tional content, it was too loud for her hus- band. He accused her of being hard of hear- ing; she claimed that he had overly sensitive hearing.

Thus, the complicated patterns of ac- tivities in space and the intricate interrela- tionship between physical structures and spatial definitions are connected with pat- terns of television viewing, with dis- cussions that mediate television, and with the interpersonal relationships that sur- round it. The significance of these spatial patterns may not be immediately obvious, but they often surface when people attempt to make changes.

Dimensions of Temporal Organization As with the use of space, a family's tem- poral organization both reflects and influ- ences the ways it lives with television. Here, too, considerable variation exists. How fam- ilies organize time and the place of televi- sion in this organization may vary in terms of a number of dimensions.

Temporal Concepts, Representations, and Values. Families and individuals vary in their ways of thinking about and evaluating time. While expressions of guilt over time devoted to television were common, includ- ing such comments as "it's bad for your brains," which probably reflect the broad social concerns discussed above, families

36 ECTJ SPRING1985

differed in their habits of organizing time, both in general and in relation to television.

The emotional charge in issues of time is indicated by such statements as "time is very precious to me," "time ought not to be stolen by others through lack of attention to the clock," and "promptness is a virtue." Concepts about what constitutes "wasting time" were also emotionally charged. Sev- eral parents thought that activities that did not result in a product, such as talking on the telephone or watching television, con- stituted wasting time. Evaluations of the temporal habits of o t h e r s - punctuality or lateness, for example- -were readily avail- able. Yet views about such matters as whether time should be "structured" or "unstructured" varied considerably. The terms used to describe time spent on televi- sion, such as "time ill spent" or time to "veg out" or "wind down," reveal underlying values that also vary.

Ways of talking about time do not neces- sarily correspond to observable ways of handling time, but they are significant as ideas about how life should be organized. A strong emphasis on the importance of scheduling by the clock, in television view- ing and other activities, was revealed in one family where the sons, ages 9 and 11, had self-made schedules posted over their desks. That of the 9-year-old read:

3:30 Arrive home from school 3:30-4:00 Eat 4:00-4:30 Practice piano 4:30-5:00 Practice flute 5:00-6:30 Homework 6:30-7:00 TV 7:00-7:30 Dinner 7:30-8:00 Chores 8:00-9:00 Homework 9:00-9:30 TV 9:30 Bed

In other cases, no such schedules were found, either as ideals or in practice.

It is particularly significant that ways of representing and thinking about time may be learned from television. Observers noted that children's ideas about time sequence were sometimes related to television. And parents were observed to make comments that specifically taught such ideas of se- quence; for example, one mother told her children, ages 5 and 1, "When the Muppet

Show is over, it's time for bed." Children sometimes used television as if it were a clock. One child was reported to recognize the days of the week by the television pro- grams that were on.

Temporal Coordination. The organization of the family's activities in time is affected by the activities of family members in outside institutions and requires the fitting together of the time commitments of various indi- viduals. Where children attend s c h o o l s - generally organized on fairly rigorous clock s c h e d u l e s - the family's activities are con- strained by these schedules. Similarly, workplaces may present rigid schedules with which other family activities must be coordinated. Where parents are self- employed or work at home, there may be more flexibility. In a sense, television is one of the external institutions that influence the scheduling of family activities. Yet, since television viewing takes place within the home, two kinds of schedules meet di- rectly, and families fit them together in a variety of ways.

Families varied in the number of activities in a given time period and in their tendency to do one thing at a time (monochronic or- ganization) or many things at once (poly- chronic organization). Some were involved in numerous outside ac t iv i t i es - churches, PTAs, lessons of different kinds. Some seemed to feel that it was appropriate to be involved in several activities simulta- neously. As one mother put it, " I 'm always trying to do 12 things at once." The ob- server's reports on this family bore out the mother's statement. The baby would be fed over the course of an hour while the mother was babysitting for a neighbor's children and helping her own children get ready to go to a baseball game. This ongoing bustle was the norm in this family, and it charac- terized their television viewing as well. At- tention was spotty, and there were numer- ous concurrent activities. In contrast, other families led more sedate, less busy, lives.

The ways in which activities are planned also varies. Families differed in the extent to which they valued and lived by rigorous schedules. The term "schedule" is itself loaded in that it implies one particular mode

FAMILY CONTEXTS OF TELEVISION 37

of organizing time through precise sequenc- ing and advanced planning. The child's schedule described above is one example of m o n o c h r o n i c time p lanning . A n o t h e r example is a father who required his chil- dren to keep time charts of the same kind as his office employees in order to teach them to organize their time and to be conscious of h o w m u c h time they were wast ing. Another example of a highly structured, monochronic organization of time is the wife who feels passionately about having things "the way they should be," with es- tablished routines and time properly seg- mented. She hates to have "no plan and just fumble around." And she can stay with one activity for hours. This case also illustrates the differences that may exist among family members in styles of temporal organization. This w o m a n described her husband as being exactly the opposite. "He can read difficult intellectual stuff in bed and read several things at once. He needs variety, activity, and is too restless to stay put for long." By contrast, in another family where the organization of time tended to be poly- chronic, the ideal was to have periods of "unstructured time," to allow for the "un- foreseen," to "build the day as it happens" and "be responsive to the kids' needs." The degree to which television viewing is planned or unplanned varies from one fam- ily to another and at different moments in the same family.

How television is coordinated with other family activities, such as sleeping and eat- ing, is a fundamental issue. In some in- stances, television may be regarded as a "pacer" around which other activities are set. In one family, the 2-year-old's nap time was so regular that she awakened just at the beginning of "Sesame Street." The coordi- nation of television with meals is of particu- lar importance. In some instances, televi- sion viewing was rigorously planned so as to avoid conflict with meals and other fam- ily activities. In other instances, television viewing continued during meals, either through moving a television set into the room where eating took place or by carrying food into a room with a television set. The timing of meals varied from specifically planned family gatherings to individuals snacking alone. The description of one ob-

server illustrates the dose meshing of eating habits, food preferences, and television- viewing patterns, as well as rules with re- spect to space:

There was not a fixed schedule for dinner. Dinner was determined by the mother's appointments for that day; by the location of the girls; by what was actually being served. Often the parents and children ate different meals. There were many foods which the girls would not eat, so a separate meal was prepared by or for the girls. Con- sequently, if the girls wanted to finish watching a particular show, they could delay their mealtime without disrupting the parents' mealtime. The girls, though, were not allowed to eat meals in the sunroom while watching television, but snacks were permissible there.

Various ways of negotiating the relation of television to other activities were ob- served. In some instances, there were spe- cific "rules" about when television could be watched and how much could be watched, so that viewing was often a matter of delib- erate decision. In other instances, television viewing was more by habit, with television being on much of the time. Television was sometimes treated as the activity around which other events were structured; in one family, almost all other activities, including getting to school on time, were adjusted to allow the completion of television viewing. In other cases, television was a filler be- tween activities. The description by one mother shows how she used television while waiting for a call to pick up her chil- dren:

Sometimes there would be two separate pick-ups - - a boring, boring life--sometimes I'd lie down and I'd fall asleep, l'd sit there and I'd put the television on because I couldn't do anything else between picking them up because I was on the move all the time. The television sort of baby-sat m e .

Thus, television viewing is closely interwo- ven with other family activities, but the forms of coordination vary significantly from one family to another and from one occasion to another.

Temporal Demarcations-- Beginnings and End- ings: Television-viewing episodes may be initiated and terminated in a variety of ways. How and by whom this is done, and how the demarcations are marked, is signif-

38 ECTJ SPRING1985

icant for the meshing of television with other family activities.

The beginning of an episode may be an elaborate ritual, entailing a major change of scene and extensive "getting ready," such as rearranging furniture and bringing food into the room. Or the beginnings may be barely marked transitions from one event to another, noticeable only in comparatively minor shifts of posture. Similarly, endings may be major moments, sometimes fraught with conflict and even tantrums, or they may entail a click of the switch and a change of visual attention from TV screen to book or newspaper. In one family, television view- ing was almost always interrupted; rarely did family members feel that they had watched enough and voluntarily get up and shut off the set. In another family, television was commonly terminated by family mem- bers voluntarily turning off the set. The clustering of individuals who participate in the beginnings and endings of television events also varies; there may be a continu- ous gathering, with individuals sitting to- gether for an entire episode, or the group may shift as one person after another moves into and out of the room.

The importance of expected roles is clear in considering who initiates viewing episodes. Our observations suggest that some family members are more likely than others to turn on the television when view- ing is not already taking place; they may be thought of as initiators. In contrast are noninitiators, who rarely turn the set on and begin viewing. The presence of an ini- tiator means that other family members will view more television than they would were the initiator absent. In one family, the young son was the initiator for almost all cartoon episodes that occurred in the early morning. Once he had turned on the set, his sisters were likely to join him in viewing. When he was away, the television did not go on. His older sister played the role of initiator during the middle of the day, turn- ing on "her" soap opera if she was home. This resulted in several siblings viewing to- gether if she was home, and no viewing if she was away.

Another variation of these initiation pat- terns was "surrogate initiation," in which one family member would prompt or indi-

rectly suggest to another that the set be turned on. In one family, the mother would say to her 4-year-old, "your program is on" or "Mr. Rogers is coming on in 15 minutes," knowing that once such information was offered, the child would go and turn on the set.

Reasons for the initiation of television viewing varied, from interest in a program to avoidance of conflict. In one instance, two children started fighting and the mother said, "Let's see if there is anything on television." When she turned it on, the children stopped fighting and started watching the show.

Implicit rules and expectations with re- spect to television apply not only to the initiation and termination of episodes but also to how turns are taken and coordi- nated. There may be fairly well-established priorities. As one child explained, "Mommy and Daddy can't watch TV while the Muppets are on. They must find some- thing else to do." Sometimes turn-taking requires strenuous negotiation, and dif- ferences may or may not be resolved.

CONCLUSIONS

Since many institutions in addition to schools educate, those concerned with broad educational planning, as well as those concerned with education in any par- ticular institution, need to understand the relationship among institutions as well as how education goes forward in each of them. For an understanding of education in any one setting, conceptual frameworks are required for examining the social organiza- tion of that institution since that is the con- text in which the processes of education-- using particular technologies and practices - - g o forward and have their consequences.

We have examined families as the social context in which television viewing takes place and have argued that families can and do influence education through television. We have presented illustrations to show that television is deeply enmeshed in the organization of the family as an interper- sonal system in terms of such fundamental matters as the handling of space and time. Our analysis leads us to argue that the rela-

FAMILY CONTEXTS OF TELEVISION 39

tion of education to organization of space and time in institutions that educate is of general significance, although the particu- lars of that organization may differ substan- tially from one setting to another. How sleeping and eating are organized and in- terwoven with the family's television view- ing and how they condition the family's mediation of television is of special impor- tance in families. But analogous questions can and should be raised with respect to other institutions. We have examined some of the variations that may occur in how fam- ilies live with and mediate television. It is our presumption that these dimensions are fundamental for further examination of television and the family, for investigations of television in other settings, and for in- s ights into h o w the rap id ly chang ing technologies that are entering the home will come to be embedded in family organiza- tion.

Those concerned with efforts to modify educational programs in various institu- tional contexts need to take into account the networks of close social interconnections within those systems. Otherwise, efforts to bring about change may be unsuccessful because they have failed to anticipate the potential ripple effects of the change that is sought. Thus, a change in television view- ing would have the potential to change many other aspects of a family's life. Those who wish to change television viewing would do well to understand the variety of intricate interpersonal relationships that surround t e l e v i s i o n - the connections be- tween spatial pathways and boundaries and attention to television; the relation be- tween the timing, preparation, and eating of meals and television viewing; the rela- tion between sleeping habits and television viewing; the roles that are taken by different family members in the beginning and end- ing of television viewing episodes--rather than simply admonishing families to "turn television off."

REFERENCES

Albert, S., & Jones, W. (1977). The temporal tran- sition from being together to being alone. The significance and structure of children's bed-

time stories. In B. S. Gorman & A. E. Wessman (Eds.), The personal experience of time (pp. 112-132). New York: Plenum.

Ahmed, D. (1983). Television in Pakistan. Unpub- fished doctoral dissertation, Columbia Univer- sity, Teachers College, New York.

Ashcraft, N., & Scheflen, A. E. (1976). People space: The making and breaking of human bound- aries. Garden City, NY: Anchor, Doubleday.

Bachelard, G. (1964). The poetics of space. Boston: Beacon.

Barker, G., & Wright, H. F. (1971). Midwest and its children: The psychological ecology of an Ameri- can town. Hamden, CT: Anchor Books.

Bloomer, K. C., & Moore, C. W., with Yudell, R.J. (1977). Body, memory, and architecture. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Brody, G., Stoneman, Z., & Saunders, A. (1980). Effects of television viewing on family interac- tions: An observational study. Family Interac- tions, 29, 216-220.

Brown, R., & Linn6, O. (1976). The family as a mediator of television's effects. In R. Brown (Ed.), Children and television. Beverly Hills: Sage.

Bryce, J. W. (1980). Television and the family: An ethnographic approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, Teachers College, New York.

Bryce, J. W., & Leichter, H. J. (1983). The family and television: Forms of mediation. Journal of Family Issues, 4(2), 309-328.

Byers, P. (1972). From biological rhythm to cultural pattern: A study of minimal units. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, New York.

Chapple, E. D. (1970). Culture and biological man: Explorations in behavioral anthropology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Cottle, T. J., & Klineberg, S. L. (1974). The pres- ent of things future: Explorations of time in human experience. New York: The Free Press.

Comstock, G., Chaffee, S., Katzman, N., McCombs, M., & Roberts, D. (1978). Television and human behavior. New York: Columbia Uni- versity Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Rochberg-Halton, E. (1981). The meaning of things: Domestic symbols and the self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, G. J. (Ed.). (1983). Television & the family. Journal of Family Issues, 4(2), 275-424.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Gertner, R., & Pay, W. (Eds.). (1984). Interna- tional Television Almanac, New York: Quigley.

Gibbon, J., & Allan, L. (1984). Timing and time perception. New York: The New York Academy of Sciences.

40 ECTJ SPRING1985

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The dis- covery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Gorman, B. S., & Wessman, A. E. (1977). The personal experience of time. New York: Plenum.

Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

Hall, E. T. (1984). Thedanceofllfe: The other dimen- sion of time. Garden City, NY: Anchor, Double- day.

Jackson, P. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Kluckhohn, F. R., & Strodtbeck, F.L. (1961). Variations in value orientations. New York: Harper and Row.

Leichter, H. J. (1973). The concept of educative style. Teachers College Record, 5(2), 239-250.

Leichter, H. J., & Mitchell, W. M. (1978). Kinship and casework: Family networks and social interven- tion (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

Leichter, H.J. (Ed.) (1979). Families and com- munities as educators. New York: Teachers Col- lege Press.

Lerner, R. M., Hultsch, D. F., & Dixon, R. A. (1983). Contextualism and the character of de- velopmental psychology in the 1970s. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 412, 101-128.

Lull, J. (1980a). Family communication patterns and the social uses of television. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Com- munication Association, Aculpulco, Mexico.

Lull, J. (1980b). The social uses of television. Human Communication Research, 6, 297-209.

Mander, J. (1978). Four arguments for the elimina- tion of television. New York: Morrow Quill.

Medrich, E. (1979). Constant television: A back- ground to daily life. Journal of Communication, 29(3), 21-26.

Moore, W. E. (1963). Man, time and society. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Schlesinger, A. R., Jr. (1977). The modern con- sciousness and the winged chariot. In B. S. Gorman & A. E. Wessman (Eds.), The personal experience of time (pp. 267-288). New York: Plenum.

Schramm, W.,& Lerner, D. (Eds.). Communica- tion and change - - The last ten years and the next. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Singer, J. L., & Singer, D. G. (1981). Television, imagination, and aggression: A study of pre- schoolers. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Sommer, R. (1969). Personal space: The behavioral basis of design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory on Televi- sion and Social Behavior. (1971). Television and growing up: The impact of televised violence. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

Winn, M. (1977). The plug-in drug. New York: Viking.