"* * * the forms of thought and behavior presented by the movies are such as to provide material and incentive to those sensitized to delinquent and criminal suggestion.
"Motion pictures play an especially important part in the lives of children reared in socially disorganized areas. The influence of motion pictures seems to be proportionate to the weakness of the family, school, church, and neighborhood. Where the institutions which traditionally have transmitted social attitudes and forms of conduct have broken down, as is usually the case in high-rate delinquency areas, motion pictures assume a greater importance as a source of ideas and schemes of life.[1]
Mortimer Adler. Art and Prudence. New York; Longmans, Green & Co., 1937, 686 pp. [{{reconstruct|PN1995.5.A4|PN1995.5 .A4]
- (The author at the time of writing was associate professor of the philosophy of law at the University of Chicago.)
Dr. Adler gives the following explanation for writing this book:
"As result of their reading of Crime, Law and Social Science, representatives of the motion picture producers asked me to review for them the recent empirical investigations specifically concerned with the influence of motion pictures on human behavior—to make, in short, a similar analysis of the problems, methods and results of research'[2]
He specifically discusses the Blumer and Hauser study in the following statements:
"All through these pages in which case histories are reported, figures cited, and similar may-or-may-not conclusions drawn, there is no recognition on the part of the investigators that they are proceeding without control groups. For all they know, if non-delinquents and non-criminals were made to write their autobiographies under the same type of guidance [as the delinquents], they might find exactly the same kind of items reported as having been impressive in or memorable from the motion pictures they had seen. One would then be entitled to presume that there may be an unconscious connection in their lives between motion pictures and law-abiding behavior, or perhaps the opposite—maybe they were law-abiding in spite of motion pictures.
"Considering the admitted worthlessness of their statistical data and the admitted unreliability of questionnaire responses, how are Blumer and Hauser able to conclude the chapter on female delinquents with the statement: 'It seems clear from the statistical data and from the autobiographical accounts * * * that motion pictures are of importance, both directly and indirectly in contributing to female delinquency.'[3]
"As I have said before, research of this sort does not warrant the amount of critical attention I have given it. It could be dismissed in terms of the authors' direct or implied admissions of the inadequacy of their method, the unreliability of their raw materials and the insignificance of their numerical data.
"But there are good reasons for exhibiting this piece of research in such a way that all of its defects are plain to anyone. For one thing, the work of Blumer and Hauser has been cited by laymen who are bent upon reform, as a scientific demonstration that the movies are a cause of crime. For another, this type of work is considered creditable by some social scientists."[4]
Dr. Adler has the following comment to make about the reliability of scientific research in the study of human behavior:
"Little of what has been accomplished by research in the field of criminology has improved upon the state of common and expert opinion—the "unscientific" opinion of men experienced in dealing with criminals. At best, research has been confirmatory of our doubt about any factor or set of facts as causative of crime.
"In the light of speculative standards, the attempt of scientific investigation in the field of human behavior should always be praised, even when its achievements are of no practical significance. To be practically significant, science must definitely alter the state of existing opinion; but ever when it fails to do this, the same probability is better held as a matter of scientific knowledge than as a matter of opinion. * * * The intrinsic weakness of the study of human behavior as science is further complicated by the methodological incompetence of most of the attempts which have been made."[5]
