Daniel Anderson, a famous psycholog

Daniel Anderson, a famous psychologist, believes it’s important to distinguish television’s influences on children from those of the family. We tend to blame TV, he says, for problems it doesn’t really cause, overlooking our own roles in shaping children’s minds.
One traditional belief about television is that it reduces a child’s ability to think and to understand the world. While watching TV, children do not merely absorb words and images (影像). Instead, they learn both explicit and hidden meanings from what they see. Actually, children learn early the psychology of characters in TV shows. Furthermore, as many teachers agree, children understand far more when parents watch TV with them, explaining new words and ideas. Yet, most parents use an educational program as a chance to park their kids in front of the set and do something in another room.
Another argument against television is that it replaces reading as a form of entertainment. But according to Anderson, the amount of time spent watching television is not related to reading ability. TV doesn’t take the place of reading for most children; it takes the place of similar sorts of recreation, such as listening to the radio and playing sports. Things like parents’ educational background have a stronger influence on a child’s reading. “A child’s reading ability is best predicted by how much a parent reads.” Anderson says.
Traditional wisdom also has it that heavy television-watching lowers IQ (智商) scores and affects school performance. But here, too, Anderson notes that no studies have proved it. In fact, research suggests that it’s the other way around. “If you’re smart young, you’ll watch less TV when you’re older,” Anderson says. Yet, people of lower IQ tend to be lifelong television viewers.
For years researchers have attempted to show that television is dangerous to children. However, by showing that television promotes none of the dangerous effects as conventionally believed, Anderson suggests that television cannot be condemned without considering other influences.

結果 (中文) 1:

丹尼尔 · 安德森，一个著名的心理学家，认为它是重要的是区分那些家庭对儿童的电视的影响。我们往往怪电视，他说，它不会真的引起，俯瞰我们自己在塑造孩子们的心灵的角色的问题。关于电视的一个传统信念是，它减少了孩子的能力去思考，去了解世界。看电视时，孩子们不只是吸收文字和图像 （影像）。相反，他们学会从他们所看到的显式和隐含义。实际上，儿童学习早在电视节目中人物的心理。此外，许多教师也同意，孩子们理解得多当父母看电视与他们，解释新的话语和想法。然而，大多数父母使用教育程序作为一个机会公园出孩子和做一些事情在另一个房间。对电视的另一个论点是，它会替换阅读作为一种娱乐形式。但安德森说，花时间看电视的数量无关的阅读能力。电视并不取代大多数儿童; 阅读它发生的一种相似的娱乐方式，比如听收音机和做运动。像父母的教育背景的东西有更强的影响，对孩子的阅读。"一个孩子的阅读能力最好有人预言是多少由父读取。安德森说。 Traditional wisdom also has it that heavy television-watching lowers IQ (智商) scores and affects school performance. But here, too, Anderson notes that no studies have proved it. In fact, research suggests that it’s the other way around. “If you’re smart young, you’ll watch less TV when you’re older,” Anderson says. Yet, people of lower IQ tend to be lifelong television viewers. For years researchers have attempted to show that television is dangerous to children. However, by showing that television promotes none of the dangerous effects as conventionally believed, Anderson suggests that television cannot be condemned without considering other influences.

結果 (中文) 3:

a著名心理学家Daniel Anderson认为，它是重要的区分电视影响儿童从那些家庭。我们的责任，电视，他说，它没有真正的问题，因为我们自己的角色塑造，俯瞰儿童心理。为一个传统的电视是它降低了孩子的能力去思考和理解世界。而看电视的儿童不只是文字和图像（影像）吸收。相反，他们学习都显隐意义和从他们所看到的。其实早在大学学习心理学，儿童电视节目中的人物。此外，许多教师同意，当父母的儿童更多的了解远看电视与他们的想法，解释新单词。然而，大多数家长教育计划作为一个机会使用到他们的孩子在公园的前面做的东西在另一套房间。另一个论点是，它取代了对电视作为娱乐阅读的形式。但根据安德森的量时，从看电视是不相关的阅读能力。电视不把儿童阅读的地方最需要的地方；类似的分类：娱乐，如听收音机和玩体育。这类父母受教育背景有一个更强的影响对儿童的阅读。“孩子的阅读能力是最好的预测由多少a parent读。”安德森说。因此，它是传统的智慧，有电视看，降低重金属的智商（智商affects）评分和学校的表现。但在这里，太，安德森的研究已经证明没有注意它。事实上，研究表明，它的其他方式。“如果你聪明的年轻人，你看电视当你老了，”安德森说。然而，低智商，人民大学的终身电视观众。多年的研究表明电视作为一个孩子是危险的。然而，这是不显示在电视台推出《危险的效果被认为是作为conventionally，安德森和其他电视台是注定不能没有影响。