Day 065 - 09 Dec 94 - Page 43

     
     1
     2        One looks over the page, if you will, at pages 90 and 91,
     3        and one sees a pair of tables; the first shows what the
     4        frequency of children's responses to the question was,
     5        "What is the difference between programmes and
     6        commercials?"  In that chart are set out the answers for
     7        each age group.  Then at table 3: "Number of children
     8        correctly responding to the direction point to the
     9        character who is in a commercial", and one sees that the
    10        scores for the younger children were very considerably
    11        better than they were when they were asked the question in
    12        words; do you see that?
    13        A.  Yes.
    14
    15   Q.   Under table 2 appear these words:  "Three-quarters of the
    16        four year-olds were unable to specify a difference between
    17        programmes and commercials."   Ms. Dibb, that means in this
    18        context "unable to articulate or specify a difference in
    19        words", does it not?
    20        A.  Yes.
    21
    22   Q.   Yes.  Then, finally, if you would not mind, turn over the
    23        page to "Discussion" on the last page.  I will start, if
    24        may, at the second paragraph:  "Finally, the disparity
    25        between children's verbal explanations of what commercials
    26        are and their ability to select characters on the basis of
    27        various definitions of the term 'commercial' illustrated
    28        that children's understanding of commercials was better
    29        than their verbal responses alone would allow us to infer.
    30        This disparity between verbal and non-verbal responses was
    31        particularly strong for the four year-olds.  The findings
    32        of the present study were consistent with the cognitive
    33        development literature, which suggests that young children
    34        are often unable to express what they know.  Their powers
    35        of comprehension characteristically outpace their skills of
    36        expressing what they understand".  Then a number of pieces
    37        of research are cited.  "Consequently, it is potentially
    38        misleading for researchers to infer from verbal responses
    39        alone what children do or do not perceive and understand
    40        about television programmes and commercials."
    41
    42        That paper was cited by you on page 21 of your discussion
    43        paper in these terms:  "Zuckerman and Gianinno found that
    44        three-quarters of four year-olds were unable to
    45        differentiate between programmes and advertisements.
    46        Neither could over a third of seven year-olds or one in
    47        five ten year-olds".  That is simply untrue, is it not?
    48        A.  I also quote Zuckerman and Gianinno's study in the next
    49        column as well, so it is not the only reference to it.
    50 
    51   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No.  Answer that question, first of all. 
    52        A.  OK. 
    53
    54   Q.   Because I am not sure -- the reason I say that is if you
    55        start off, "I also quote", and refer to something else,
    56        I do not know whether you are accepting Mr. Rampton's
    57        suggestion or denying it; do you see?
    58        A.  I understand.  That does refer to their ability, those
    59        figures, to verbally differentiate.  The column under the
    60        discussion quite clearly shows that children were able to