Research Project: Children In Television

In this new digital age, what are we truly understanding about children in this media?

Introduction

For decades we’ve had an in-depth understanding of what children enjoy when it comes to television and entertainment. Researchers and child psychologists know what stimulates children and what will help them, with their cognitive development. “Young children are much more attentive to highly perceptually salient features including animation, peculiar voices, lively music, rhyming, auditory changes” (Evra, 2007). This research has then assisted public service broadcasters such as the BBC, to know what programmes will excite, educate, and entertain children. And beyond that, for more commercial purpose, they want to know what will keep them watching day in day out. Although all this research has been done on children. Television, technology, and society have carried on developing. Online platforms are very common in nearly every household worldwide. Over the Top Providers (OTT) such as YouTube and Netflix are now being used more than you bog-standard tv set. This has contributed to a decline of children’s television viewing. Children today have so many more options as to what they want to watch, how they want to watch, and what they can find. But what do we truly know about children in this media?

Compliancy/Broadcasters such as The United Kingdom’s Office of Communication (Ofcom); who oversee the UK’s broadcasting and video and demand services (VOD) and focus mainly on children’s programmes. They are concerned with issues such as protecting children against sexual content, dangerous and imitable behaviour on screen and bad language, for example. CHILDWISE (who specialise in the research of children in regards to media and other issues) and BBC have no control over what the OTT providers put out to their audiences. The regulations of which the BBC comply with and Ofcom instils aren’t followed by Netflix and YouTube and other OTT providers. So how do we really know what children are watching? The online revolution has arguably made it increasingly difficult to truly monitor and restrict the content consumed by children. If it doesn’t comply with government standards then can these be considered safe places for children?

An opposing point of view is that the vast variety of platforms gives children, and adults, more freedom of choice. Children now have an almost endless portal of information to go to look at things that interest them, and beyond. Although there are many consequences of children having online access, for example abusive images, bullying, stalking and bad language, there are positive things to take from this change. As an anecdotal example my younger brother of eleven years old was constantly watching YouTube videos online. This behaviour did initially worry my Dad, but we found out that he was searching videos on how to fix cars, change gearboxes etc. These are things they don’t teach him in school. So, this new digital age has all the tools to let children develop their understanding and, in some ways, find their interests.

Audience Research

"The provider of children’s television appears to have a quasi-parental role and thus seen as a provider for other kinds of needs as well as including intimacy and mutual trust" (Davies 2001). Davies depicts that children feel as though they have an intimate relationship with Children’s Television. "Dear Children’s Television could you please put more programmes about art on television. I really love art and want to improve my art skills. Can you also put Ace Ventura Pet Detective on another day because on Mondays and Wednesdays I have swimming lessons - Boy 9, inner-city primary school, Cardiff" (Davies,2001). This child not only tells the broadcaster personal things about his life, his likes, his dislikes, he also opens with "Dear" demonstrating a fondness for Children’s Television. This demonstrates that Broadcasters such as the BBC have a huge duty of care to children and therefore need to understand their audience, so that the trust given to them by the child is not broken.

We can determine from Davies findings that even in 2001, children have been wanting more freedom regarding television broadcast times, and by 2007 on the 30th April, The BBC Trust approved the iPlayer. This is a clear example of the fact that audiences are clearly listened to, as without audience research the lack of development would be detrimental for broadcasters and any type of public media service. “British Children’s TV content plays an important role in nourishing the development, learning and enjoyment of children across the breadth of the UK – and the BBC is proud to have always been the cornerstone of the sector and an innovator in meeting the needs of such a fast-changing audience.” (BBC, 2018).

Shari Donnenfield, who is in charge of marketing at Nickelodeon UK was quoted saying "The whole emergence of digital will offer a whole world of opportunities as well as videos on demand. [This] creates more air time for us, producing more, making sure its quality and quantity will need to be there as well ... there will be more available to kids... today kids are watching television because they want to, not because there’s nothing else on" (Davies,2001). This highlights the fact Broadcasters and Marketing are aware of how important children are as consumers. Their opinions and ideals, especially within the new digital age (VOD) helps Broadcasters gain advantages within the marketplace. It also proves the fact that children do enjoy television and most especially when there is a choice of things to watch. "As Livingstone and Bovill comment, there is no doubt that the screen is seen as a friendly and welcome presence there"(Davies,2001). This is about the fact, television is a familiar and normal thing to children within the household and within their bedrooms. "The model of the child as future citizen with a role to play in the public sphere, and thus the responsibility of the state, can be more easily sustained when broadcasting is regulated according to socially agreed ideals of how the children of a given society should be treated” (Davies,2001). Parents trust broadcasters and the BBC trust.

When speaking to families about children’s television, people have so many positive experiences to share about their own childhood or things their children have done. “Me and my son learnt sign language off a children’s show” (Darby, 2018). “My father thought the funniest thing on TV was the Teletubbies, it used to be on before the news. He found it that funny that even to this day he doesn’t call the vacuum a vacuum, he calls it a Noo-Noo” (Darby, 2018). This demonstrates a clear fondness for television but also shows that these programmes become part of a family tradition and form ideals that families raise their children by. In a sense television can build the foundations of a child and develops their moral compass. Through watching shows that demonstrate acts of compassion, by having storylines about sharing and teamwork. A key show that demonstrates this to children is Peppa Pig there are multiple episode where people is told to share and how she deals with it. (Peppa Pig Official Channel, 2018). Similarly, television shows such as Sesame Street were very influential over children’s learnings. My dad remembers watching one of the ‘Word on The Street’ episodes, where Elmo is trying to learn the word ‘You’. He asks this little girl to read the word out to him, so she says “You!”. Elmo replies saying “No, I can’t read, you need to tell me what the word says.” So again, the girl says “You”. This goes on for some time until Elmo realises what the little girl means. I found this story interesting because my dad was watching this with one of his younger siblings and at the same time Elmo understood what was goes on so did Dad’s sibling. This demonstrates how clever the show really was. Having a character who behaves the age of the children watching the show, firstly makes the child more immersed in the show but it also gives the child the chance to understand what’s going on in real time; which in this case is the same time as it took Elmo.

Therefore, children who watched the show, know how the word ‘You’ is spelt and have also understood what it means. This relates back to the fact television has always been a way to aid child development. Long-running shows in the UK such as Fireman Sam and Postman Pat have always been on television in family homes. Because of the homely and quaint environment, they present. The countryside and the sense of community within these shows have demonstrated a positive impact upon children. As Davies pointed out it’s the societal norms that broadcasters present to children in television shows which make them more relatable and keep the children interested whilst educating them. Similarly, within each episode you learn about fire safety and how to keep your friends and family safe. This information, of what you shouldn’t do, is relayed in a memorable way from the clear and calm adult character of Fireman Sam. Not only do the children learn but it also proves that sense of confidence which families and parents can place within the programmes they know. This was highlighted in the BBC’S response to Ofcoms review in 2018, “[the] majority of parents expect CBeebies and CBBC to be at the top of the children’s TV menu – more than two and a half times over the next nearest channel. When asked why, they cite trust and their children’s favourite programmes as the leading drivers” (BBC, 2018). This abundance of trust the BBC are given by parents not only keeps them in business it also drives them to create higher quality content to keep their audiences engaged and content.

Watershed and the BBC

Many children have televisions in their rooms, which has been a concern amongst broadcasters and Ofcom regarding 'Watershed'. As just because there is a regulation in place to show child appropriate content before 9pm, who is to say children won't carry on watching television after this time in their bedrooms? Voicing the question, is television safe for children in the present day? Do broadcasters really have control over the child’s safety. From the hours before 9pm television is a safe place for children it's a "social place where they can combine friends and media, establishing a life style away from parental monitoring" (Davies,2001). (This is regarding having a television in a child’s room). This is where the trust given to the Broadcasters from the parents of the child, should be appropriately instilled within the home. If a parent cannot monitor or safeguard their child at home after the hours of 9pm, how can the broadcasters be held responsible?

Although "the state lays no legal responsibility on parents for making them [the children] go there [to bed] by this time". (Davies,2001) Still, it is a well-known fact that the shows aired after 9pm are not child appropriate. Therefore, whether a child does or does not have a television in their room should not affect the safety of said child. As this is when parental monitoring would take place. Which relates back to Davies' statement about social ideals "of a given society". (Davies, 2001).Within our society it is, in my eyes, a social norm for children under the ages of ten to be in bed by or before 9pm. Therefore, the uneasy feeling around 'Watershed' should not and cannot be purely blamed on broadcasters. As overall 'Watershed' has "provided the basis of a partnership between broadcasters, government and families in managing the access of children to television in the UK”. (Davies, 2001).

Now that there are televisions in most children’s bedrooms this is also means that OTT providers are likely connected to said television, due to fact more televisions are smart TV’s. So not only have children got access to broadcasting after 9pm they have constant access to the internet and providers that do not comply to regulatory standards. Channel 4 and ITV over the last 10 years have nearly diminished their obligations to child friendly content on television.

Other broadcasters such as Channel 5 "now provide just for 2-7-year olds" (Livingstone, Local, 2017). Whereas, the BBC is "virtually the sole commissioner of UK-originated children’s television content"(Livingstone, Local, 2017). Although this is true a decline in television audiences is still an issue for broadcasters like the BBC as they rely on high audience ratings for funding. When looking at the BBC we also have to take into account they have a big government influence. Making sure they represent cultural diversity, take into account relevant issues going on in the media at that time. “BBC is a powerful tool; expanding our knowledge, experience and imagination, bringing the country together in shared experiences and supporting our national culture and public life.” (Department for Culture Media and Sport, 2016, 27).

Their duty of care is not only to their child audiences it is to the nation. The government put a lot of time and effort into commissioning surveys and quantitative polling for the BBC. So that they can learn about their audiences and see where they may not live up to standards. They also “require the BBC to meet the growing challenge of serving all audiences” (Department for Culture Media and Sport, 2016, 28). But does this government overlook, impact what we see on television and what children see on television.

The BBC’s lack of freedom in some way can be put down to the fact they are representing a whole nation of people and with that comes a lack of power to have an independent voice. This idea of abiding to social norms creates positivity through a sense of community for children but it may also cause a lack of diverse or unconventional content.

Online Safety

When looking into Audience Research this story from the Guardian highlighted a few key issues presented in this body of work. "Research firm CHILDWISE found that on average five- to 15-year-olds were spending three hours a day using the internet, compared to 2.1 hours watching TV." (Jackson,2016) This research was from an online survey of over 2,000 children sadly “did not distinguish between TV-like services on the internet, such as Netflix and iPlayer, and other forms of browsing such as Facebook, meaning it is unclear whether children are merely watching shows in different ways." (Jackson,2016) Illustrating the fact that YouTube has become a favourite amongst children aged 5 to 15.

The regular use of YouTube by children demonstrates the fact that children are watching what they want to watch. YouTube gives them the freedom to choose, but what are they choosing? The new popularity that comes with the internet to the children of today is the fact Ofcom and CHILDWISE are in some ways going blind. Audience Research through television is easier to obtain in some ways as it’s a matter of looking at ratings and is a much smaller scope of shows than the wide area of YouTube. Similarly, this easy access to internet is proven by the magnitude of children with internet connected devices. "The study also found that more children now live in households with a tablet than any other web-connected device such as a laptop, with four in five saying there is a tablet at home, and more than two-thirds say they have their own tablet." (Jackson,2016). Although children are going online for more choice it is not to say that they aren’t watching their favourite shows from television. A huge development in television for children is the fact they have always been able to watch video on demand or binge-watch an entire season of their favourite show online through their iPad of television. “TV viewing has been redefined,” he said. “Children are now seeking out the content of their choice. They still find traditional TV programmes engaging but are increasingly watching them online and on-demand or binge watching box sets” (Jackson, 2016).

So, when talking about the idea of freedom of choice it doesn’t always mean the programme or film they decide to watch is from OTT providers. It also highlights the fact they can watch what they want, when they want. There is no regulation as far as times are concerned. This does not include the fact that the first place some of their favourite shows are aired would be on television at a certain point, so this is more key for when a show has been aired for a while or an older show/film. This does not hinder the fact that children are wanting to watch television in many ways it illustrates the fact that television will always be entertaining to children, because even nowadays they go onto the internet to find the shows.

Although this section isn’t specific to television, with the new access to the internet for children it was important to look into statistics about the overall online use of children. Ofcom have a detailed report on ‘Children and Parents: Media Uses and Attitudes’ from 2017. Below are some statistics from this report:

· “Nearly all internet users aged 8-11 (97%) and 12-15 (97%) recall being told about how to use the internet safely.

· Both 8-11s and 12-15s are most likely to say they have been given this information or advice from a parent (86% for 8-11s and 83% for 1215s) or from a teacher (75% for 8-11s and 79% for 12-15s).

· More than half of 12-15s who go online say they know how to block messages on social media from someone they don’t want to hear from (68%); about half (53%) had done this.

· Less than half (47%) know how to change the settings so fewer people can view their social media profile; a third (33%) have ever done this.” (Ofcom,2017)

All this information has been compiled from Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) software downloaded onto tablets, so that the children could answer these questions in private but also be made to feel more comfortable. As some would feel uneasy answering questions as serious as this with their parents around. They also had the option to talk face to face with an interviewer who was in the room, as well as using the tablet.

This is a graph on children stating they had been given advice about how to use the internet safely. Figure 86 demonstrates that children are being told about using the internet safely by either their parents or teachers. This implies the children interviewed have a healthy and positive relationship with both their parents and teachers. It also illustrates the fact that parents and teachers are very aware the internet is not always the safest environment for children. What I found most shocking about this graph is the sheer lack of information being given to children about internet safety online or through television. If this is where they spend most of their time and where they look for tv shows, comedy, and a place where they are given some choice. Shouldn’t there also be regulations put in place for them when they go online? Which tells them the main ways to be safe or who to get in-touch with if they don’t feel safe at any point.

What we are learning about children right now is that they are still not safe online. This is also proven by the fact that 20% of the children asked had “seen something worrying or nasty and not reported it” (Ofcom,2017). Is this because it has become so normal to see negative or nasty things online that audiences have become desensitised to it to some extent? Or is it because they do not know who to speak about it to or that something can be done to address such problems? It is not that every child would not tell their parents if they saw something bad, it is the fact that there was a staggering 20% that said they wouldn’t, who were of the ages 12 to 15. Children should be able to confide and open up to a parent or caregiver. Therefore, has negative and nasty behaviour online become the norm to children of these ages?

Within this report there was also some clear differences when gender is concerned:

· “Girls are more likely than boys to say they have been contacted online by someone not known to them who wants to be their friend (27% vs. 18%).

· Boys aged 8-11 who go online are more likely than girls to say they have seen something online that they considered worrying or nasty (21% vs. 13%).

· (9%) [of children] say they have ever seen something of a sexual nature that made them feel uncomfortable, either online or on their mobile phone.” (Ofcom,2017)

The implication of the internet being unsafe for children is so obvious when you see statistics like these. Girls are shown to be more likely to get un-wanted attention which could be of a sexual nature from offenders. Boys are more likely to go onto violent or negative sites (through no fault of their own) as they may not be aware that the things they are searching can be mistaken as threatening content. What I understand from this information is that because children are so innocent to the things going on the world, it makes it difficult to explain why certain things shouldn’t be searched for. For example, a young boy may want to look at cars and then races etc. but what’s to say he won’t stumble across negative content such a gory crash scenes etc. Things that wouldn’t be available to him if he were watching and children’s television show on cars instead of being on YouTube.

This notion that parents are aware of the negatives of the internet is clear in children ages 3 to 7. “Children 3-4 and 5-7 spend more time than in 2016 watching tv on a tv set.” (Ofcom, 2017) Younger children spend less time online, this can indicate multiple things, like the fact a smaller number of children this age have access to a tablet; but majority of households have them, so it isn’t to say they couldn’t have access if the parent wanted them too. So perhaps it is the fact that parents don’t want their young child to be on the internet. Given the fact there are no strong regulations out there to protect the child from negative or harmful content. Whereas television has broadcasters such as the BBC and regulations like editorial guidelines to monitor children’s television outputs and make sure they comply to these guidelines. BARBS, Ofcom and CHILDWISE are also there for the safeguarding of children.

Social Media

Although there are regulations put in place for television broadcasters. BBC still come under fire for inappropriate content. It is not unusual for broadcasters to receive bad press but this influx in negative complaints in some way has been made catastrophic by the easy access to online complaint sites. Everyone and anyone can now hop onto their social media accounts and start an online debate. Potter explains it as a “Culture of Complaint” (Potter,2017). Not only is the rapid amount of online criticism a negative in its self, it also then causes a high workload for broadcasters in addressing the problems. Which are either fake or from parents who seem to want their children to watch the most unprogressive television programmes and can pick faults with nearly everything. Peppa Pig came under fire for ‘fat shaming’ her Dad. Peppa was also accused of being a bully for making her dad exercise. There were multiple tweets about Peppa Pig most with bad language and genuine offence for the programme. Although these are real issues, many people took their complaint to the extreme accusations of bullying and body shaming in children’s television programmes are very serious issues for kids shows. “Broadcasters are concerned about attracting public criticism, feeling it may jeopardise future funding for children’s television” (Potter,2017). But when we think back to shows that where on decades ago there must have been thousands of complaints regarding them but because there was not such a huge social media presence back then, or even one at all. This ‘fear of offending’ has become a big issue since the rise of social media. The effect of this on children was the fact that children’s programmes were becoming more conservative.

“In 2006, questions were asked in parliament when the ABC’s Playschool featured a same-sex couple and their child. In 2015…The Sun criticised CBBC’s stop-motion animation OOglies for showing a ‘toast soldier staging an ISIS-style beheading of a boiled egg” (Potter,2017). Not only were these issues highly publicised online, which is not good for the broadcasters, the OOglies story was based on a single complaint. If a single complaint can create this much publicity, it isn’t shocking that many broadcasters are becoming more conservative in what the produce to children. This also illustrates the world in which children today are growing up in, one wrong comment on YouTube, a picture posted onto their social media can cause daily bullying and abuse. Online debates happen all the time but nowadays a 11-year-old child could be up against a 30-year-old adult. The affects this could have on a child’s confidence and mental health could be detrimental.

Immersive Content

“Technological advances toward higher image and sound fidelity have reduced the sensory gap between reality and TV content” (Evra, 2007). Although this was written and based upon the findings in 2007, Evra raises a good point. This was in reference to children watching television and the fact that the better the picture quality the more immersed in the programme the children became. Which in many ways is fairly obvious. A higher quality image, a bigger screen, better sound all make for a more immersive experience; it’s why we all go to the cinema and why technology is constantly evolving and improving within this sphere. This notion of immersive content has a clear correlation to my overall question. In this new digital age, what are we truly understanding about children in this media? New technology is out there for children to be able to experience television and the media in new ways. Children can now access Virtual Reality (VR) for example what do we understand about this so far? If a higher image quality blurs the lines of reality and make-believe for children what is the impact of Virtual Reality (VR), “children of 6-18 years reported higher levels of presence and ‘realness’ of a virtual environment compared with adults 19-65 years”. (Bailey, Bailenson,2017) The more immersed the child becomes in the content, the more the content could affect the child emotionally. This means not only could this have a positive impact; experiencing things they may never actually be able to experience it also implies that negative impacts could occur, like imitative behaviour or sheer panic and terror from what they are seeing and experiencing. IVR Immersive Virtual Reality “has a rich sensory fidelity and immersive features that block out the physical and enable users to feel psychologically located in the stimulated environment by experiencing it as real” (Bailey, Bailenson,2017) This sheer realness in the VR can have some damaging effects on children as to adults they would understand that what they are experiencing is not real-life. The “embodied agent” (Bailey, Bailenson, 2017) or avatars (digital character) within the virtual reality may be mistaken as real people by children which could make their decision making and judgement more intense cause them to create emotional ties with computer systems. Although this is true, many positive things can come of IVR like developing children’s cognitive skills and illustrating a higher brain function through new experiences. In the conclusion of Baileys and Bailenson study they raise a good point, the fact that children’s expectations of computers are so high. If they can now speak and be immersed in the content what will they expect as they grow older.

Conclusion

In conclusion, children of today have an abundance of options when it comes to what to watch and where to find it. It is clear that the easy access to tablets, mobile phones and computers aids children in being able to browse things like YouTube and Netflix at their leisure. This freedom of choice is a gateway for children to learn and be able to narrow down and specialise in one subject. There is a definite influx of children being on social media. This does form some worries for their confidence and state of mind as I don’t think there is any clear evidence that social media is a safe place for children. It is shown to be a place with high amounts of bullying and also a way for dangerous people to contact children. From this data I have learnt about many age ranges of children but there is a gap in the statistics. We seem to understand a lot about children around the ages of 0 to 3, 4 to 7 and 10 to 15, demonstrating an in-depth study about these children’s needs, wants and struggles.

Children around the ages of 0-7 are shown to have a lack of presence online, due to parental monitoring. They are illustrated to have less access to tablets, mobile phones and social media. Which presents them as being the most present audience for television. Broadcasters invest a lot of time into this age range as it’s the one that will be avid spectators of children’s shows. Children within this age range that do have tablets are less inclined to go onto Netflix and YouTube and stay on mostly things such as iPlayer’s, which is still a place to see regulated content. Parents of younger children are shown to be more inclined to let their children watch television rather than OTT providers. This demonstrates a clear point that parents are aware of the negative implications of letting children have the freedom to go online and do not feel confident that their children will be safeguarded.

When it comes to the ages of 10-15, we know that their online presence is high they spend most of their day online through social media and OTT providers. Although they still enjoy their favourite shows from television the places they go to view them are no longer just through watching them on the family television. Which demonstrates children have a lot more freedom of choice. The fact that there are many ways to educate children online is a very positive outcome for the children of today, but throughout this research lines have been blurred between safe and un-safe and a lack of communication with children on how to deal with the internet, does depict some worrisome outcomes. The fact that this future in media is so new makes it very hard to determine a child’s safety online.

Being a next generation graduate going into this new and redefined marketplace, it was interesting to see the lack of knowledge surrounding children between the ages of 7-10. They are at a pivotal age in many ways; the last few years of primary school, waiting to go into high school- yet they are at this point in the digital age where they could not only have a social media presence, while also being avid television viewers. As a graduate of animation who aims to pursue the production of children’s media, I believe that this lack of knowledge for this age range will leave producers in children’s television in a difficult place. How will they ever advance in production with this lack of knowledge on a clear demographic?

More time needs to be spent learning about where these children spend their time, online or offline, so that we can, first and foremost, be ahead of the game but also make sure the relevant outputs are there for children to utilise. Having places where parents feel comfortable to let their children have freedom online, without having to constantly monitor their wellbeing. Overall, what I have learnt from this is that we are entering a new form of spectatorship for children. Because iPlayer, Netflix and YouTube are becoming so much more accessible, I believe it may be time for the regulations put in place for broadcasters to be reassessed during this period of change, so that they have more freedom but also develop with the new millennial generation (whom in many ways are the ones we need to follow). Davies raised a good point within ‘Dear BBC’ that children need to be treated and thought of as a “citizen-in the-making” (Davies 2001). They are being given so much choice that it is imperative that we listen to what they want to see online and offline.

References

BBC (2018) BBC response to Ofcom's Children’s Content Review. Available from https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/112212/BBC.pdf [Accessed on 9 Jan 2019]

Davies, M,M. (2001) 'Dear BBC' Children, television storytelling and the public sphere. Cambridge: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.

Darby, J. (2018) Children’s television shows and family. [telephone call] Conversation with Alice Gain, 27 December.

Department for Culture Media and Sport (2016) A BBC for the future: a broadcaster of distinction. Cm9242.London. OGL. Available from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524863/DCMS_A_BBC_for_the_future_linked_rev1.pdf [Accessed 9 Jan 2019]

Evra, J V. (2004) Television and child development. 3rd Edition. Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Jackson J (2016) Children spending more time online than watching TV for the first time. The Guardian, 26 January. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jan/26/children-time-online-watching-tv [Accessed December 2018]

Ofcom (2017) Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report. Available from https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/108182/children-parents-media-use-attitudes-2017. [Accessed on 27 December 2018]

Peppa Pig Official Channel (2018) Peppa Pig English Episodes, Sharing is Caring, Peppa Pig Christmas| Peppa Pig Official [online video] Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5Ef8rOUWUo [Accessed 20th December 2018]

Potter, A. (2017) Regulating contemporary children’s television: how digitisation is re-shaping compliance norms and production practices. [pre-print] Available from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1329878X16687400 [Accessed November 2018]