Journal of Communication ISSN 0021-9916

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Indirect Aggression in Animated

Disney Films
Sarah M. Coyne1 & Emily Whitehead2
1 School of Family Life, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602
2 Department of Psychology, University of Central Lancashire at Preston, PR7 2HE United Kingdom

Children’s cartoons have been documented to be some of the most violent TV programs
currently on the air, showing nearly 3 times the amount of violence per hour as non-
children’s programming (Wilson et al., 2002). However, violence is not the only form
of aggression on TV. Indirect aggression (e.g., gossiping, spreading rumors, social exclu-
sion) has also been found on TV, at rates that exceed the current violence levels (Coyne
& Archer, 2004). Although indirect aggression (also called relational aggression) has
been examined in TV programs popular among adolescents, it has never been exam-
ined in children’s TV or films. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to examine
the frequency and portrayal of indirect aggression in children’s animated Disney films.
Overall, Disney films portrayed indirect aggression 9.23 times per hour. When character
counts were taken into account, indirect aggression was portrayed by males and females
at equal levels. Indirect aggression was more likely to be portrayed as unjustified and
by ‘‘bad’’ characters. ‘‘High SES’’ characters were also more likely to engage in indirect
aggression than ‘‘low SES’’ or ‘‘middle-class’’ characters. Compared with the amount of
violence in children’s TV programs, the amount of indirect aggression in Disney films
was quite low and was usually portrayed in ways that would not facilitate imitation.

doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00390.x

Violence in the media

Children’s TV programs and films have been criticized for being some of the most
violent on the air and with good reason. As part of the United States’ National
Television Violence Study, Wilson et al. (2002) found that children’s TV programs
were more violent than adult programs, showing up to 30 violent acts per hour.
Violence in children’s programs is often justified, rewarded, humorous, and por-
trayed by attractive characters, all characteristics that have been shown to increase
subsequent imitation by viewers (e.g., Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1961; Berkowitz, 1970;
Berkowitz & Rawlings, 1963).

Corresponding author: Sarah M. Coyne; e-mail: smcoyne@byu.edu

382 Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association

S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead Indirect Aggression in Disney Films

Viewing acts of violence in the media may increase the risk of short-term and
long-term negative effects on viewers, particularly in children. For example, Bushman
and Anderson’s (2001) meta-analysis revealed that the effect of viewing media
violence on subsequent aggression was just as strong as the effect that smoking
has on the development of lung cancer. A recent longitudinal study found that
exposure to media violence at an early age was related to aggressive and criminal
behavior for both males and females 15 years later (Huesmann, Moise, Podolski, &
Eron, 2003).
How does TV violence influence us? The General Aggression Model (GAM)
(Anderson & Bushman, 2002) states that each person has a multitude of scripts in
memory, including that for violent behavior. These scripts are usually formed early
in childhood and are either strengthened or weakened throughout time. A child who
views vast amounts of violence on TV is likely to be forming new scripts concerning
violence and then strengthening these scripts each time they view more. When faced
with a situation that may or may not involve violence, a person will rely on the
cognitive scripts they have in memory to guide their behavior. Other factors, such as
personal disposition, past history, and situational influences, combine with these
violence scripts to determine whether a person will behave aggressively in any given
situation. As these scripts are formed early in youth, children are especially vulner-
able to media effects.
Disney films are not immune to this trend. Yokota and Thompson (2000) stud-
ied violence in 74 G-rated animated films shown in U.S. cinemas from 1937 to 1999.
Although suitable for a ‘‘general’’ audience, Yokota and Thompson found many
examples of violence in these child-friendly films. Their results indicated that at least
one violent act was present in each of the 74 G-rated animated films, with many
programs containing vastly more. Violence was frequently initiated by the bad char-
acters (74%) and the rest by good characters; however, the acts committed by good
characters were often justified. Disney films are extremely popular among children,
with some children viewing programs over and over again. Although Disney films
usually contain some form of ‘‘moral message’’ at the end, this does not protect
children from the violence they witness (e.g., Liss, Reinhardt, & Fredriksen, 1983).
According to the GAM, the portrayal of violence in Disney cartoons may influence
young children’s behavior toward others in real-life situations.

Indirect aggression
In the past, the focus has largely been on physical acts of aggression, but in real life
and in the media, other more subtle methods of aggression exist which can be just as
harmful and distressing to the victims as acts of physical aggression (Archer &
Coyne, 2005). Indirect aggression, also referred to as ‘‘relational’’ (e.g., Crick &
Grotpeter, 1995) and ‘‘social aggression’’ (e.g., Underwood, 2003), is a manipulative
form of aggression that is often initiated under the cloak of anonymity. This
means that the costs of harming others in this way are minimized for the perpe-
trators, who if questioned, may apply deflective strategies such as denial or

Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association 383

Indirect Aggression in Disney Films S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead

creating a scenario that seems rational when scrutinized (e.g., Björkqvist, 1994).
Examples of indirect aggression include gossiping, ignoring, dirty looks, socially
excluding others from a conversation or group, and generally hurting or manip-
ulating other people’s feelings (Archer & Coyne, 2005). It should be noted that
some acts of indirect aggression will inevitably reveal the perpetrator’s identity,
for example, ignoring or saying that they will not be friends anymore unless the
person does what they want.
Indirect aggression occurs in both male and female social groups; however, it
may be especially harmful in tightly knit female groups (Björkqvist, Österman, &
Kaukiainen, 1992). Relationships are particularly important to girls; therefore, they
make a perfect target for those wishing to hurt another person in the group. Inter-
view research suggests that there are a number of reasons why girls find indirect
aggression preferential to other forms, including obtaining social power stemming
from higher social knowledge, a desire to be in the ‘‘right’’ social group and remain
there, the relatively small costs of indirect aggression due to its subtle nature, and
a desire to control others (Owens, Shute, & Slee, 2000).
Indirect aggression does not appear until later in childhood, once children have
the verbal and social skills to successfully manipulate their peers (Björkqvist et al.,
1992). Because girls mature more quickly than boys (both verbally and socially), this
may be one reason why indirect aggression is more frequent in girl’s social groups.
The gender difference becomes less marked when boys ‘‘catch up’’ to girls in matu-
rity. Archer’s (2004) meta-analysis on sex differences in indirect aggression found
that differences in indirect aggression were only apparent in adolescence, disappear-
ing by adulthood.
Empirical evidence beyond gender issues suggests that indirect aggression is also
associated with socioeconomic status (SES). Bonica, Arnold, Fisher, Zelijo, and
Yershova (2003) found that preschoolers from a higher SES background were more
likely to be relationally aggressive compared with those with a low SES status.
Further, McNeilly-Choque, Hart, Robinson, Nelson, and Olsen (1996) found that
higher SES children preferred to use relational aggression, as opposed to the more
overt aggression typical of the lower SES sample. Overt physical aggression is often
frowned upon in higher social circles, whereas ‘‘street smarts’’ and a quick backhand
are often needed to survive in poorer areas where crime and violence are common.
Therefore, children with a high SES are more likely to use indirect aggression as a way
of harming others, primarily because it is more accepted in their social world and is
less likely to be punished than other types of aggression.
Why study indirect aggression, as compared to physical violence, which
obviously has profound individual and societal implications? Victims of indirect
aggression have been shown to experience a host of problems, including having
a lower self-esteem and feelings of self-worth. They also experience more depression,
loneliness, and anxiety than nonvictims (e.g., Craig, 1998; Paquette & Underwood,
1999). Extreme cases have even led to suicide. Although the scars of indirect aggres-
sion are not as easy to see, they may last a lifetime.

384 Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association

S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead Indirect Aggression in Disney Films

Indirect aggression in the media

The role of the media in terms of the development of direct (physical) aggression has
been outlined above, but little is known about the portrayal of and the effects of
viewing indirect aggression in the media (Coyne, 2004). Compared with the many
analyses of violence on TV, only two studies have examined how indirect aggression is
portrayed on TV. Coyne and Archer (2004) found that indirect aggression was
extremely common on TV programs that are popular among adolescents, being
shown at even higher rates than physical violence. Consistent with real-life studies,
they also found that females were more likely to be portrayed as indirectly aggressive,
whereas males were more likely to be physically aggressive. Indirectly aggressive acts
were also shown to be justified and rewarded and often portrayed by attractive
characters, all characteristics that have been shown to increase subsequent imitation
by viewers (e.g., Donnerstein, Slaby, & Eron, 1994). In a much smaller scale study,
Feshbach (2005) also found that females on TV were more likely to be portrayed as
indirectly aggressive. According to the GAM, the high amount and portrayal of female
indirect aggression on TV might particularly have an influence on subsequent female
aggression as young girls may use this behavior as a way of harming their peers.
Does viewing indirect aggression on TV influence real-life aggressive behavior?
Compared with other forms of aggression, indirect aggression has received less
research attention with regard to media effects. In one example, Coyne and Archer
(2005) set out to determine whether viewing acts of indirect aggression on TV pre-
dicted the occurrence of this aggression in real life. Their results supported this view,
with indirectly aggressive girls (but not boys) viewing more indirect aggression on TV
than nonaggressive girls. Coyne and Archer (2005) suggest two possibilities, namely,
that indirectly aggressive individuals learn how to aggress by viewing such behavior on
TV or that these individuals seek out such behavior to confirm their own use of it.
To our knowledge, there is only one experimental study on the short-term effects
of viewing indirect aggression on TV. Coyne, Archer, and Eslea (2004) showed
adolescents one of three videos, containing indirect aggression, direct physical
aggression, or no aggression. Participants who viewed either the indirect or the direct
video were more indirectly aggressive than those participants who viewed a video
containing no aggression. Coyne et al.’s (2004) findings support the GAM (Anderson
& Bushman, 2002) as it appears that general scripts relating to aggression were
activated in individuals viewing either form of aggression. When given an opportu-
nity to aggress, these activated scripts may have guided their decision-making pro-
cess, thus influencing them to indirectly aggress against the confederate. As a whole,
although few in number, the above studies suggest that indirect aggression in the
media is very frequent and may lead to subsequent aggressive behavior.

Purpose of the study

To date, research on indirect aggression in the media has focused on adolescents.
Therefore, we have little knowledge of how indirect aggression is portrayed in

Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association 385

Indirect Aggression in Disney Films S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead

children’s media and how it influences them. This is particularly problematic, as

children are much more vulnerable to media effects than at other ages. Previous
research has also only examined TV programs so the amount of indirect aggression
in films is also unknown. The purpose of the present study was to bridge this gap by
examining how indirect aggression is portrayed in children’s films. Animated Disney
films are extremely popular among young children and have a universal appeal
(Dreier, 2007). Worldwide, children watch the films time and time again, fall in love
with the characters, buy the merchandise, and so on. The Disney Princesses theme
has become particularly popular in recent years with little girls not only dreaming of
becoming princesses but also decorating their entire rooms in Disney themes and
dressing up as Snow White, Cinderella, and Sleeping Beauty. Because of the popu-
larity and mass appeal of Disney films, they represent an ideal medium for this
investigation.
Based on previous research, five hypotheses were adopted in the present study.
First, female characters are predicted to be more indirectly aggressive than males.
Second, human characters are predicted to be more indirectly aggressive than animal
characters. Third, acts of indirect aggression are predicted to be justified if those who
initiate it are ‘‘good’’ characters and unjustified if the characters are ‘‘bad.’’ Fourth,
characters with a higher SES are predicted to display higher levels of indirect aggres-
sion than poorer characters. Finally, bad characters are predicted to show higher
levels of indirect aggression than good characters.

Method
Programs
Forty-seven children’s animated (including computer animation) Walt Disney films
(about 70 hours worth of viewing) were reviewed in the present study. To be
included in the sample, the film must have been initially released in the theatre,
be primarily animated, and must be at least 60 minutes in length.

Procedure
The second author viewed all films and completed a coding sheet for each film. Each
act of indirect aggression was coded on the following variables: type of indirect
aggression, sex of aggressor, character appearance, justification of the aggression,
SES, and character type. These categories were based on Coyne and Archer’s (2004)
content analysis of indirect aggression on TV.

Type of indirect aggression

Indirect aggression was operationally defined as any behavior that is intended to hurt
another person by using psychological or social means. The behavior can be either
covert or overt. Direct relational types of aggression were also included (e.g., ‘‘We
aren’t friends anymore, unless you share with me’’), as were nonverbal gestural types
of aggression (e.g., dirty looks). Finally, ‘‘physical’’ behaviors that were carried out

386 Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association

S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead Indirect Aggression in Disney Films

covertly were also included (e.g., vandalism). Such a wide definition is intended to
include all behaviors examined by researchers in indirect, relational, and social
aggression fields.
Indirect aggression was further subdivided into four areas. These categories were
based on factor analyses by Forrest, Eatough, and Shevlin (2005) and classification by
Coyne and Archer (2004). These groups included social exclusion (e.g., malicious
gossip, excluding others from the group), malicious humor (e.g., gestures behind the
back and practical jokes), guilt induction (e.g., involving undue pressure and influ-
encing others by making them feel guilty), and finally, indirect physical aggression
(e.g., plotting and kidnapping).

Sex of aggressor
The sex of the aggressor was coded as either male or female based on physical
characteristics commonly associated with each category. When the aggressor was
an animal, classification was based on name and voice quality.

Character appearance
Characters were either classified as human, animal, or other (e.g., toy, alien).

Justification
Acts of indirect aggression were coded as justified if they were portrayed as socially
sanctioned or necessary to achieve a greater good. An example of justified aggression
would be when Cinderella gives a ‘‘dirty look’’ to her malicious stepmother and ugly
sisters after they needlessly pressure her to complete their work. An unjustified
example of indirect aggression included Gaston plotting to kill the beast in Beauty
and the Beast and also the wicked queen poisoning Snow-White’s apple. Here, the
aggression is not socially acceptable and was not necessary to gain a greater good.

Socioeconomic status
The SES of each character was coded when acts of indirect aggression were commit-
ted. This was based on the character’s housing, dress, and any comments made about
the financial situation. For example, high SES characters appeared to be wealthy,
perhaps having hired help, wearing nice clothes, and so on (e.g., Jasmine in Aladdin).
Those classified as low SES status usually lived on the street, wore tattered clothing,
or were slaves or hired help (e.g., Aladdin, Cinderella). Those classified as middle
class were neither portrayed as rich or poor. These individuals did not appear to be
lacking anything major; however, they also did not appear to be extremely wealthy
(e.g., The Incredibles). Although animals do not make money, per se, they were
surprisingly easy to code. For example, Mufasa from The Lion King was coded as
high SES status, as he was the ‘‘king of the jungle,’’ had the best place to live
compared with other animals, and had plenty of resources nearby. On the other
hand, Abu from Aladdin was classified as low SES status, as he lives with Aladdin on
the street, needs to steal to eat, and wears tattered clothing.

Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association 387

Indirect Aggression in Disney Films S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead

Character type
Acts of indirect aggression were also recorded with regard to the character type.
Good characters were those who were portrayed as unselfish, kind, and caring
individuals (e.g., Snow White, Bambi). Bad characters were the opposite, those
who were malicious, selfish, callous, or cruel (e.g., Ursula from The Little Mermaid,
Captain Hook from Peter Pan). Characters that were not clearly one of the above or
that changed throughout the course of the program fell into an ‘‘average’’ category
(e.g., the beast from Beauty and the Beast, Stitch from Lilo and Stitch).

Reliability
Both authors viewed approximately 21% of the sample (10 films) to check reliability.
Interrater reliability was calculated using Cohen’s Kappa. The reliabilities for each
category were as follows: detection of aggression (0.74), type of indirect aggression
portrayed (0.94), sex of the aggressor (0.95), character appearance (1.00), justifica-
tion (0.95), social class of the aggressor (0.93), and character type of the aggressor
(0.96). All figures exceeded the 0.70 minimum as suggested by Bakeman and
Gottman (1986), with most reliabilities being above 0.90.

Results
Overall aggression
Overall, we coded 584 acts of indirect aggression in the Disney films. The most
indirectly aggressive Disney films were Aladdin (20 acts per hour), Cinderella
(19.17 acts per hour), and Pinocchio (18.35 acts per hour) with very few acts of
indirect aggression being found in So Dear to my Heart (2.28 acts per hour), Fantasia
(2.61 acts per hour), and Bambi (2.69 acts per hour). We also ranked each film
by date of release to assess whether indirect aggression changed throughout time.
A Spearman’s rho calculation revealed that it did not (r = .01, p = .94).
Table 1 shows the frequencies and rates per hour for each individual type of
aggression. From the table, the most common type of indirect aggression portrayed
was dirty looks, followed closely by plotting and gesturing. A chi-square analysis
revealed that social exclusion (n = 222) was the most common type of indirect
aggression, followed by indirect physical (n = 173), guilt induction (n = 146), and
malicious humor (n = 43), x2(3) = 145.77, p , .001, fc = 0.50.

Sex of aggressor
To date, females have always been unrepresented in TV and films. Recent estimates
(e.g., Coyne & Archer, 2004; Potter et al., 1995) reveal that approximately 70% of
characters on screen are male, whereas only 30% are female. When these statistics
were taken into account, we found that there was no significant difference between
male and female overall indirect aggression, x2(1) = 0.88, p = .39, f = 0.04. In fact,
we found that indirect aggression was portrayed by a male 72% of the time and by
a female 28% of the time, figures that correspond very well with the 70/30 split.

388 Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association

S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead Indirect Aggression in Disney Films

Table 1 Types of Indirect Aggression in Disney Films

Type of Indirect Aggression Frequency Rate per Hour Percentage
Social exclusion
Dirty look 135.00 2.13 23.10
Gossip 20.00 0.32 3.40
Ignore 16.00 0.25 2.70
Tell someone to leave 11.00 0.17 1.90
Made them feel like they do not fit in 10.00 0.16 1.70
Social ostracism/exclusion 8.00 0.13 1.40
Criticize clothes and personality behind back 7.00 0.11 1.20
Turn others against 5.00 0.08 0.90
Roll eyes 3.00 0.05 0.50
Huddle 2.00 0.03 0.30
Leaving to make someone feel bad 2.00 0.03 0.30
Withheld information others are let in on 1.00 0.02 0.20
Total 222 3.70 37.60
Malicious humor
Gesture 77.00 1.22 13.20
Made fun of in public 24.00 0.38 4.10
Embarrass in public 15.00 0.24 2.60
Deception 10.00 0.16 1.70
Make someone feel stupid 6.00 0.09 1.00
Practical joke 6.00 0.09 1.00
Not share 4.00 0.06 0.70
Imitate behind back 3.00 0.05 0.50
Get others into trouble 2.00 0.03 0.30
Total 146 2.43 25.10
Guilt induction
Put undue pressure 33.00 0.52 5.70
Try to influence by making feel guilty 5.00 0.09 0.90
Blame unjustly 4.00 0.06 0.70
Judge work in an unjust manner 2.00 0.03 0.30
Total 43 0.72 7.60
Indirect physical
Plotting 81.00 1.28 13.90
Kidnap 38.00 0.60 6.50
Spell 18.00 0.28 3.10
Vandalism 10.00 0.16 1.70
Steal 9.00 0.14 1.50
Brainwash 8.00 0.13 1.40
Blackmail 5.00 0.08 0.90
Poison 2.00 0.03 0.30
Fire someone with no reason 1.00 0.02 0.20
Sue 1.00 0.02 0.20
Total 173 2.88 29.70
Overall total 584 9.73 100

Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association 389

Indirect Aggression in Disney Films S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead

However, when indirect aggression was broken down into its four subcategories,
we did find a difference between how males and females were portrayed, x2(3) =
12.44, p , .01, fc = 0.15. Specifically, males displayed more malicious humor than
females, x2(1) = 6.24, p , .05, f = 0.21, and females displayed more guilt induction
than males, x2(1) = 53.30, p , .001, f = 1.11. There was, however, no significant sex
difference for social exclusion, x2(1) = 2.28, p = .18, f = 0.10, and indirect physical
aggression, x2(1) = 0.26, p = .60, f = 0.04.

Character appearance
Chi-square analyses concerning the character appearance and the amount of indirect
aggression portrayed indicated that human characters showed significantly higher
levels of indirect aggression than animal or ‘‘other’’ characters, x2(2) = 11.75,
p , .005, fc = 0.10. A further chi-square likelihood ratio analysis showed that
there was a significant difference when the four subtypes were taken into account,
x2(6) = 36.25, p , .001, fc = 0.18. These likelihood ratios (similar to others) were
calculated based on the overall amount of each character type portrayed in Disney
films. Specifically, animal characters displayed significantly more social exclusion
acts of indirect aggression than human or other characters than expected, x2(2) =
16.36, p , .001, fc = 0.19, whereas human characters displayed significantly higher
levels of guilt induction, x2(2) = 9.32, p , .01, fc = 0.33, and indirect physical
aggression, x2(2) = 11.92, p , .005, fc = 0.19, than expected. There was no signif-
icant difference for malicious humor, x2(2) = 1.76, p = .40, fc = 0.08.

Justification
Overall, indirect aggression was more likely to be portrayed as unjustified as
compared to justified, x2(1) = 108.7, p , .001, f = 0.43, showing that indirect
aggression is not an acceptable way of behaving for the most part. Again, when
broken down into its subcategories, we found significant differences, x2(3) =
41.92, p , .001, fc = 0.27. When social exclusion was portrayed, it was more
likely to be shown as justified than not, x2(1) = 17.32, p , .001, f = 0.28.
However, both guilt induction, x2(1) = 16.70, p , .001, f = 0.62, and physical
indirect aggression, x2(1) = 12.22, p , .001, f = 0.27, were more likely to be
shown as unjustified, with there being no difference for malicious humor, x2(1) =
0.02, p = .90, f = 0.01.
Further analyses revealed that acts of indirect aggression displayed by good
characters, x2(2) = 274.98, p , .001, fc = 0.90; low SES characters, x2(2) = 55.24,
p , .001, fc = 0.41; and animals, x2(2) = 9.16, p , .05, fc = 0.17, were all
significantly more justified than not (than expected based on overall counts). There
was no significant difference in justification for males and females, x2(1) = 0.25,
p = .61, f = 0.02. On the other hand, indirect aggression was portrayed as unjustified
more frequently than expected when initiated by bad, x2(2) = 56.72, p , .001, fc =
0.33, and high SES, x2(2) = 28.06, p , .001, fc = 0.22, characters.

390 Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association

S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead Indirect Aggression in Disney Films

Socioeconomic status
Characters differed on the amount of indirect aggression they used according to
social class, x2(2) = 120.77, p , .001, fc = 0.32. Specifically, high SES characters
used the most indirect aggression (n = 271), followed by middle-class characters
(n = 233), with low SES characters portraying very little indirect aggression (n =
80). The type of indirect aggression portrayed also differed according to social
class, x2(6) = 42.26, p , .001, fc = 0.19. High SES characters portrayed more guilt
induction, x2(2) = 22.22, p , .001, fc = 0.51, whereas middle-class characters
portrayed more malicious humor than expected, x2(2) = 11.66, p , .005, fc =
0.20. There were no differences in social class for social exclusion and indirect
physical aggression.

Character type
When character type was analyzed, we found that more indirect aggression was
portrayed by bad characters than expected when compared with good and ‘‘neutral’’
characters, x2(2) = 76.83, p , .001, fc = 0.26. Again, however, this depended on the
type of indirect aggression used, x2(6) = 77.96, p , .001, fc = 0.26. Bad characters
displayed more guilt induction, x2(2) = 22.62, p , .001, fc = 0.51, and physical
indirect aggression, x2(2) = 32.58, p , .001, fc = 0.31, than other characters.
However, good and average characters performed significantly more malicious
humor, x2(2) = 6.15, p , .05, fc = 0.10, and social exclusion acts of indirect
aggression, x2(2) = 24.98, p , .001, fc = 0.24, than expected when compared with
other characters.

Discussion
Overall, we found that indirect aggression is fairly common in animated Disney
films, showing approximately 9.23 acts per hour. When studying indirect aggression
in TV programs aimed at adolescents, Coyne and Archer (2004) found that indirect
aggression was portrayed about 9.34 times per hour, an amount extremely similar to
the current study. Furthermore, we found that social exclusion was the most frequent
type of indirect aggression portrayed, followed by indirect/physical, malicious
humor, and finally by guilt induction. This pattern is also found in Coyne and
Archer’s (2004) study. Therefore, the current study shows two major things: (a)
the amount of indirect aggression portrayed in children’s programs is similar to
those aimed at other ages and (b) the amount of indirect aggression portrayed on
film is similar to that of TV. Although the frequency of indirect aggression in Disney
films is similar to other mediums, we did find a number of differences that bear
discussion.
First, Coyne and Archer (2004) found that gossiping was by far the most frequent
type of aggression, accounting for a third of all indirect aggression coded. Our results
revealed that gossiping was actually fairly infrequent, accounting for only 3.40% of
the overall aggression. Instead, nonverbal types of indirect aggression appeared to be

Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association 391

Indirect Aggression in Disney Films S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead

more common (e.g., dirty looks, gesturing behind someone’s back) combined
accounting for 36.30% of the aggression. These behaviors are marginally aggressive
and are likely to be less harmful to the victim when compared with more serious
types of indirect aggression (e.g., destroying relationships, spreading rumors).
Another common type of indirect aggression portrayed in our sample was ‘‘plot-
ting.’’ This behavior is not even listed in Coyne and Archer’s (2004) sample, although
it accounted for nearly 15% of the aggression in our study. Plotting is similar to
gossiping in that the aggressor is discussing a person without his or her knowledge.
However, there is a marked difference as the aim of plotting was to plan and discuss
ways to destroy a person’s physical or social world, whereas gossiping is merely
discussing someone (albeit negatively).
Coyne and Archer (2004) also found that females were much more likely to be
portrayed as indirect aggressors, whereas our study found no overall difference
between males and females. We did find a few sex differences when analyzing each
type of indirect aggression separately in that males were portrayed as using more
malicious humor, whereas females were portrayed as using more guilt induction.
The reason for this marked difference becomes clear when related to real-life
studies. In a meta-analysis of indirect aggression studies, Archer (2004) found that
sex differences were only apparent during adolescence. Although indirect aggres-
sion was found in younger children, the sex difference does not become marked
until later. This brings up two possibilities. First, the media may be portraying
indirect aggression accurately, at least in terms of sex differences; specifically,
it shows marked sex differences in programs popular among adolescents but not
among children. Second, in a broader sense, our findings may also explain why sex
differences in indirect aggression do not become apparent until adolescence.
According to the GAM, TV may be one influence that determines whether a child
will behave aggressively or not (Anderson & Bushman, 2002). Several personal
characteristics, such as family, background, personality, and even gender, may
mediate this relationship. Therefore, a child viewing Disney films may learn that
both boys and girls engage in indirect aggression. This knowledge may carry over to
their own behavior, equally among boys and girls, accounting for the lack of
sex difference in childhood. It is not until adolescence, when TV sends out the
message that girls are much more indirectly aggressive than boys, that we see this
difference in real life. Although this explanation is preliminary in nature, several
studies have found a link between the indirect aggression viewed on TV and
aggression in real life (e.g., Coyne & Archer, 2005); therefore, it is not inconceivable
to suggest that the way TV portrays sex differences in aggression might also carry
over. One limitation to this explanation is that real-life studies examining indirect
aggression rarely account for different subcategories, those that do usually involve
adult participants; therefore, it is unknown whether our results mirror real-life
studies in regard to subcategories. Second, we only examined indirect aggression
in Disney films; other children’s programs might portray indirect aggression quite
differently.

392 Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association

S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead Indirect Aggression in Disney Films

Not surprisingly, we found that human characters were portrayed as more indi-
rectly aggressive than animal characters. In the real world, animals are unable to be
indirectly aggressive, namely, because most indirect aggression involves language and
social skills of some sort (Archer & Coyne, 2005). However, we did find that animals
portrayed more social exclusion than was expected. Although many of the animals do
speak in Disney films, this category may be one where it is more believable for animals
to behave indirectly aggressively, as it involves much nonverbal behavior. For exam-
ple, after Emperor Kusco is turned into a llama in The Emperor’s New Groove, he finds
a llama herd to eat with. They all turn round, give him a collective dirty look, and
then turn their backs and shun him, effectively excluding him from the pack. In this
example, language was not needed for a character to socially exclude another.
As a whole, indirect aggression was more likely to be portrayed by bad characters
that are unjustified for their actions. Effectively, this tells the viewer that indirect
aggression is not an acceptable behavior to use against others. This confirms research
on violence in children’s TV (Wilson et al., 2002) and Disney programs (Yokota &
Thompson, 2000), where more often than not, aggression is not warranted. On the
other hand, Coyne and Archer (2004) found that indirect aggression was much more
likely to be justified, especially if the character was female or attractive, although their
analysis was on programs popular among adolescents and not children.
However, we did find that when good characters did behave indirectly aggres-
sively, their behavior was usually portrayed as justified. In fact, good characters that
used indirect aggression did so many times in response to a bad character’s actions. A
child viewer is unlikely to want to imitate a bad character’s behavior; typically, most
children want to be the hero or the princess not the evil villain. Therefore, this
finding may have implications on the way children view indirect aggression. Namely,
children may come to believe that indirect aggression is alright as long as the cause is
justified. According to the GAM (Anderson & Bushman, 2002), this may increase the
likelihood of such behavior in real life when the child feels their behavior is justified.
For example, children may feel that their own indirect aggression is acceptable when
being targeted by another (instead of more prosocial responses, such as telling
a teacher or ignoring the behavior).
We also found that high SES characters were most likely to be portrayed as
indirect aggressors, followed by middle-class and finally by low SES characters. This
variable, to our knowledge, has not been studied in terms of aggression on TV.
However, this result confirms real-life studies, whereby children coming from
a high SES background are more indirectly aggressive than those from lower classes
(Bonica et al., 2003; McNeilly-Choque et al., 1996). As stated before, physical
aggression is often frowned upon in ‘‘higher class’’ society; therefore, more hidden
and socially acceptable types of aggression are used in this arena. Interestingly, we
also found that indirect aggression portrayed by high SES characters was usually
shown as not justified. So, although it may be more common in well-to-do areas,
Disney films send the message that indirect aggression is not acceptable just
because a person is wealthy.

Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association 393

Indirect Aggression in Disney Films S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead

It should be noted that this analysis is merely a description of indirect aggression in

Disney films. It does not tell us whether this indirect aggression will be imitated by
children viewing these programs. However, when integrated into the media violence
literature and specifically the GAM, it is likely that children will develop a view concern-
ing indirect aggression as a function of viewing programs containing this type of aggres-
sion. Whether they imitate such behavior is dependent on many factors, including family
background, personality, and so on. Luckily, Disney films appear to portray a fairly
negative view of indirect aggression, making it less likely to be imitated on a vast scale.
As a whole, animated Disney films send a fairly good message to children, at least in
terms of indirect aggression. Specifically, that indirect aggression is typically done by
bad characters that are not justified for their behavior, regardless of their wealth or
gender. Unlike violence, children’s programs do not contain vastly more acts of indirect
aggression as compared to nonchildren’s programs (e.g., Wilson et al., 2002); in fact, it
appears that the rates are extremely similar. As stated before, children’s programs have
consistently been criticized for being one of the most aggressive genres on TV. However,
when indirect aggression is taken into account, they might not deserve such a bad rap.

References
Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology,
53, 27–51.
Archer, J., (2004). Sex differences in aggression in real-world settings: A meta-analytic review.
Review of General Psychology, 8, 291–332.
Archer, J., & Coyne, S. M. (2005). An integrated review of indirect, relational and social
Aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 212–230.
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1986). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential
analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of
aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575–582.
Berkowitz, L. (1970). Aggressive humor as a stimulus to aggressive responses. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 710–717.
Berkowitz, L., & Rawlings, E. (1963). Effects of film violence on inhibitions against subsequent
aggression. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 405–412.
Björkqvist, K. (1994). Sex differences in physical, verbal and indirect aggression: A review of
recent research. Sex Roles, 30, 177–188.
Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1992). The development of direct and indirect
aggressive strategies in males and females. In K. Björkqvist & P. Niemelä (Eds.), Of mice and
women. Aspects of female aggression (pp. 51–64). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Bonica, C., Arnold, D. H., Fisher, P. H., Zelijo, A., & Yershova, K. (2003). Relational
aggression, relational victimisation, and language development in preschoolers. Social
Development, 12, 551–562.
Bushman, B., & Anderson, C. (2001). Media violence and the American public. American
Psychologist, 56, 477–489.
Coyne, S. M. (2004). Indirect aggression on screen: A hidden problem? Psychologist, 17,
688–691.

394 Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association

S. M. Coyne & E. Whitehead Indirect Aggression in Disney Films

Coyne, S. M., & Archer, J. (2004). Indirect, relational, and social aggression in the media:
A content analysis of British television programs. Aggressive Behavior, 30, 254–271.
Coyne, S. M., & Archer, J. (2005). The relationship between indirect aggression on television
and in real life. Social Development, 14, 324–336.
Coyne, S. M., Archer, J., & Eslea, M. (2004). Cruel intentions on television and in real life: Can
viewing indirect aggression increase viewers’ subsequent indirect aggression? Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 234–253.
Craig, W. (1998). The relationship among bullying, victimization, depression, anxiety, and
aggression in elementary school children. Personality and Individual differences, 24,
123–130.
Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological
adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710–722.
Donnerstein, E., Slaby, R. G., & Eron, L. D. (1994). The mass media and youth aggression.
In L. D. Eron, J. Gentry, & P. Schlegel (Eds.), Reason to hope: A psychosocial
perspective on violence and youth (pp. 219–250). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Dreier, H. (2007). Disney. In J. J. Arnett (Ed.), Encyclopedia of children, adolescents, and the
media (Vol. 1, pp. 148–150). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Feshbach, N. (2005). Gender and the portrayal of direct and indirect aggression on television.
In E. Cole & J. H. Daniel (Eds.), Featuring females (pp. 155–165). Washington DC:
American Psychological Association.
Forrest, S., Eatough, V., & Shevlin, M. (2005). Measuring adult indirect aggression: The
development and psychometric assessment of the indirect aggression scales. Aggressive
Behavior, 31, 84–97.
Huesmann, R., Moise, J., Podolski, C., & Eron, L. (2003). Longitudinal relations between
children’s exposure to television violence and their later aggressive and violent behavior in
young adulthood: 1977-1992. Developmental Psychology, 39, 201–221.
Liss, M. B., Reinhardt, L. C., & Fredriksen, S. (1983). TV Heroes: The impact of rhetoric and
deeds. Journal of Applied and Developmental Psychology, 4, 175–187.
McNeilly-Choque, M. K., Hart, C. H., Robinson, C. C., Nelson, L. J., & Olsen, S. F. (1996).
Overt and relational aggression on the playground: Correspondence among different
informants. Journal of Research and Childhood Education, 11(1), 47–67.
Owens, L., Shute, R., & Slee, P. (2000). ‘‘I’m in and you’re out .’’: Explanations for teenage
girls’ indirect aggression. Psychology, Evolution and Gender, 2, 19–46.
Paquette, J. A., & Underwood, M. K. (1999). Gender differences in young adolecents’
experiences of peer victimization: Social and physical aggression. Merril-Palmer Quarterly,
45, 242–266.
Potter, J. W., Vaughan, M. W., Warren, R., Howley, K., Land, A., & Hagemeyer, J. C. (1995).
How real is the portrayal of aggression in television entertainment programming? Journal
of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 39, 496–516.
Underwood, M. K. (2003). Social aggression among girls. New York: Guilford Press.
Wilson, B. J., Smith, S. L., Potter, W. J., Kunkel, D., Linz, D., Colvin, C. M., et al. (2002).
Violence in children’s television programming: Assessing the risks. Journal of
Communication, 52, 3–35.
Yokota, F., & Thompson, K. M. (2000). Violence in G-rated films. Journal of the American
Medical Association, 283, 2716–2720.

Journal of Communication 58 (2008) 382–395 ª 2008 International Communication Association 395

 Agressions indirectes dans les films animés de Disney
Sarah M. Coyne
Brigham Young University
Emily Whitehead
University of Central Lancashire at Preston, England

Résumé
Il a été démontré que les dessins animés pour enfants sont parmi les émissions
télévisuelles les plus violentes qui existent aujourd’hui au petit écran, présentant
près de trois fois plus de violence par heure que les émissions qui ne s’adressent
pas aux enfants (Wilson et al., 2002). Toutefois, la violence n’est pas la seule
forme d’agression présente à la télévision. Les agressions indirectes (par
exemple le commérage, la propagation de rumeurs et l’exclusion sociale) ont
aussi été notées à la télévision, à des taux qui dépassent les niveaux actuels de
violence (Coyne & Archer, 2004). Bien que l’agression indirecte (aussi nommée
agression relationnelle) ait été étudiée dans les émissions télévisuelles
populaires chez les adolescents, elle n’a jamais été étudiée dans les émissions
ou les films pour enfants. La présente étude vise donc à examiner la fréquence
et la représentation des agressions indirectes dans les films animés pour enfants
de Disney. Globalement, les films de Disney ont présenté des agressions
indirectes 9,23 fois par heure. Prenant en considération le recensement des
personnages, l’agression indirecte fut représentée comme le fait de personnages
masculins et féminins à des niveaux égaux. L’agression indirecte était plus
susceptible d’être présentée comme injustifiée et faite par de « mauvais »
personnages. Les personnages à haut statut socio-économique (SSE) étaient
aussi plus susceptibles de participer à de l’agression indirecte que les
personnages à bas SES ou les personnages de classe moyenne.
Comparativement à la quantité de violence présente dans les émissions de
télévision pour enfants, la quantité d’agressions indirectes dans les films de
Disney était plutôt basse et généralement présentée de manière à ce qu’elles
n’incitent pas l’imitation.
 Indirekte Aggression in animierten Disney-Filmen

Cartoons für Kinder zählen zu den gewalthaltigsten Fernsehsendungen, die

derzeit im Programm sind. Sie zeigen fast dreimal soviel Gewalt pro Stunde wie
Nicht-Kindersendungen (Wilson et al., 2002). Trotzdem ist Gewalt nicht die
einzige Form von Aggression im Fernsehen. Indirekte Aggression (z.B. Tratsch,
Gerüchte verbreiten, soziale Ausgrenzung) findet sich auch im Fernsehen in
einem Ausmaß, dass die derzeitigen Gewaltlevels übersteigt (Coyne & Archer,
2004). Auch wenn indirekte Aggression (auch als relationale Aggression
bezeichnet) in populären Fernsehsendungen für Jugendliche untersucht wurde,
gibt es keine vergleichbaren Ergebnisse für Kinderfernsehen oder -filme. Diese
Studie untersucht also die Häufigkeit und die Darstellung von indirekter
Aggression in animierten Disney-Filmen für Kinder. Disney-Filme zeigen 9,23-
mal pro Stunde indirekte Aggression. Berücksichtigt man die Anzahl der
Charaktere, wurde indirekte Aggression von männlichen und weiblichen
Figuren gleichstark dargestellt. Indirekte Aggression wurde häufiger von
ungerechtfertigten oder „bösen“ Charakteren gezeigt. Figuren mit hohem
sozioökonomischen Status waren häufiger an indirekter Aggression beteiligt als
solche mit niedrigem sozioökonomischen Status oder aus dem Mittelstand.
Verglichen mit dem Ausmaß von Gewalt im Kinderfernsehen, ist das Ausmaß
von indirekter Aggression in Disney-Filmen als eher niedrig einzuschätzen und
die Darstellung so gewählt, dass Imitation nicht gefördert wird.
 La Agresión Indirecta en las Películas de Dibujos Animados de Disney
Sarah M. Coyne
Brigham Young University
Emily Whitehead
University of Central Lancashire at Preston, England

Resumen
Los dibujos de caricaturas para niños han sido documentados como alguno
de los programas más violentos de televisión actualmente en el aire,
mostrando cerca de 3 veces más que la cantidad de violencia por hora de los
programas que no son para niños (Wilson et al., 2002). No obstante, la
violencia no es la única forma de agresión en televisión. La agresión
indirecta (por ejemplo, el chusmerío, la distribución de rumores, la exclusión
social) fue hallada en TV en proporciones que exceden los niveles de
violencia corrientes (Coyne & Archer, 2004). A pesar de que la agresión
indirecta (también llamada agresión relacional) ha sido examinada en
programas populares de TV para adolescentes, no ha sido examinada en
programas de TV ó películas para niños. Por lo tanto, el presente estudio
tiene como objetivo examinar la frecuencia y la representación de la
agresión indirecta en las películas animadas de Disney para niños. En
general, las películas de Disney representaron 9.23 veces por hora de
agresión indirecta. Cuando el conteo por personaje fue tenido en cuenta, la
agresión indirecta fue representada por mujeres y hombres en niveles
similares. La agresión indirecta fue representada más probablemente como
injustificada y por los personajes “malos”. Los personajes “altos en SES”
entablaron agresión indirecta con más frecuencia que los “bajos en SES” ó
aquellos personajes “de clase media.” Comparados con la cantidad de
violencia en los programas de TV para niños, la cantidad de agresión
indirecta de las películas de Disney fue mucho menor y usualmente
representada en formas que no facilitan la imitación.
 迪斯尼动画电影中的间接侵犯行为

Sarah M. Coyne
杨伯翰大学
Emily Whitehead

英国：University of Central Lancashire at Preston

儿童卡通片已被证明是目前播放的最暴力的电视节目，每个小时的暴力数量
是非儿童节目的 3 倍 (Wilson et al., 2002)。然而，暴力不是电视中侵犯行为
的唯一表现形式。间接的侵犯（比如搬弄是非、散布谣言、社会性排斥等）
已出现在电视节目中，其数 量超过了目前暴力的水平 (Coyne & Archer,
2004)。尽管人们已研究了青少年所喜爱之电视节目中的间接侵犯行为（也被
称作关联性的侵犯行为），但从未有人研究过儿童电视或电影中的此类行
为。因此，本研究旨在检测迪斯尼儿童动画影片中间接侵犯行为的出现频率
及描述。总的来说，迪斯尼影片每个小时包含了 9.23 次间接侵犯行为。将人
物加以考虑，男性和女性所描述的间接侵犯数量相当。间接侵犯更有可能被
描述成不正当的，且是“坏”家伙所干的。“社会经济地位高”的人物比
“社会经济地位低”或者“中产阶级”的人物更有可能从事间接的侵犯行
为。与儿童电视节目中的暴力数量相比，迪斯尼电影中的间接数目非常低，
而且常常以一种不鼓励儿童模仿的方式出现。
 만화화된 디즈니 영화에서의 간접적인 공격에 관한 연구
Sarah M. Coyne
Brigham Young University
Emily Whitehead
University of Central Lancashire at Preston, England
요약
어린이 만화들은 현재 방영되고 있는 텔레비젼 프로그램중 가장 폭력적인
것중의 하나로, 비 어린이 프로그램보다 무려 시간당 3 배 가까이 높은
폭력성을 보여주고 있다 (Wilson et al., 2002). 그러나, 폭력은 텔레비젼에
있어 유일한 형태의 공격은 아니다. 간접적인 공격들 (예를들어, 소문내기,
루머확산하기, 사회적 왕따) 또한 텔레비젼에서 발견되고 있으며, 이들은
현재의 폭력정도를 훨씬 넘어서고 있다 (Coyne & Archer, 2004). 비록
간접적인 공격 (또는 상대적 공격으로 불리기도 한다) 어른들 사이에서
인기있는 텔레비젼 프로그램에서 조사됐어도, 어린이 텔레비젼
프로그램이나 영화에서 조사된 적은 없었다. 따라서 본 연구는 간접적
공격의 빈도와 묘사가 디즈니 어린이 애니메이션 영화에서 어떻게
나타나는지를 연구하고자 한 것이다. 전체적으로 디즈니 영화는 시간당
9.23 번의 간접적 공격을 묘사하고 있는 것으로 나타났다. 캐릭터를 고려할때,
간접공격은 남성과 여성에서 동일한 정도로 나타났다. 간접공격은
비신사적인 것으로 묘사되거나 나쁜 역할로 나오는 캐릭터들에 의해 더
묘사될 가능성이 높았다. 상위 SES 캐릭터들은 낮은 SES 나 중간 정도
계급의 캐릭터들보다 간접공격에 더 연계될 가능성이 높았다. 어린이
텔레비젼 프로그램들에서의 폭력성 정도와 비교해볼때, 디즈니 영화에서의
간접적공격의 정도는 상대적으로 낮았으며, 일반적으로 모방으로 이어질 것
같지 않은 정도로 묘사되었다.