A study conducted by Iowa State University sought to answer some of the questions and opinions this issue has aroused. This experiment used 3,000 "gamers" of all ages from young children to college students. The study concluded that "high video-game violence was definitely associated with heightened aggression. Indeed, this effect of violent video-games on aggression is as strong as the effect of condom use on the risk of HIV infection." However, this experiment also studied a person's level of aggression when not playing a violent video-game. The findings showed a similar heightened level of aggression as when a person was not playing a violent video-game. Over 75% of all individuals in this study presented evidence that any sort of video-game, violent or nonviolent, was unhelpful for their level of aggression. Does this mean that video-games as a whole increase a person's aggression and, therefore, the likelihood that a person will commit a violent act?
One of the nicest guys I know plays a video-game where he kills people by beating them with a bat and shows no aggression towards others. However, evidence points towards the correlation between violent video-games and aggressive behavior. If this is true, what are some of the possibilities, other than parental guidance, that can be done to control this problem? Are there any sanctions that can be placed on the gaming industry to decrease the graphic nature of games? Are there any other possible explanations for the correlation between aggression and video games?
Anderson, Craig A., and Brad J. Bushman. "Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggressive Behavior, Aggressive Cognition, Aggressive Affect, Physiological Arousal, and Prosocial Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Scientific Literature." Rep. Sept. 2001. Iowa State University. 25 Feb. 2009
As a true journalism student, I believe that people have the right to play video games. Therefore, I think it is up to the parents to censor video games for their child.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the tie between violence and video games, I think the majority of people can play violent video games without displaying violence in real-life. In fact, playing violent video games may serve to relieve some frustration and hostility in real-life.
However, the few people who seem to elicit increased violent behavior after playing video games could serve as a potential problem to their family, friends and community. Although I do see reasons for hesitation before including it as a disorder in the DSM-IV, I am not against the idea of creating more internet and gaming help/rehabilitation rehabilitation centers. I think you can set up avenues for support without classifying individuals with a "disorder"
I believe that the correlation between gaming and increased agression is the nature of competition that is stimulated by video games. When people play the games, they want to win because otherwise, the game sucks and you would not want to continue playing. Therefore, I believe that a person's outside influences (parenting, friends, etc.) causes people to be more violent and not the video games themselves. If the games caused everyone that played them to be more violent, then there would be an incredible surge in violence in this country because millions of people play violent video games every day.
ReplyDeleteI think it's essential to understand the difference between causation and correlation. This study claimed that the relationship b/t game violence and aggression was the same as condom use and HIV risk. However, lower HIV risk is an causal effect from using condoms; the same relationship cannot be said with game violence and aggression without more research. The problem with correlations is that we don't know if a third variable is responsible for the appeal of violent games and aggression. Also, we can't say for sure that more violent games cause more aggression or more aggressive people like to play more violent games. Many published research findings are exaggerated by the media when they mistakenly interpret 'associations' between two variables as cause-and-effect.
ReplyDeleteIn response to your first question, I do think that videogames are a major cause of violence in young adults today. I think that our society will continue to see the impact of violence in videogames as generations below us mature. A good example of this is in wrestling videogames in which wrestling moves the children see on TV are portrayed in the game. This further increases the likelihood that they will attempt the moves they see in the videogame on their friends, etc, not knowing the consequences of reality. For first person shooter games such as DOOM, which was introduced in the early 1990s, the ability of the character to “die” and the player to continue playing could only lead adolescents to believe that the harm guns can do is lesser than reality. I think playing these game increases the chance that the player will eventually show aggression towards real people. In response to these worries, games have labels on them putting an age limit on the person buying the game. These are easily maneuvered and I think that to assist with this problem the industry should monitor the type of games they release more closely.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that games should be censored or the industry should be monitored just because there is a correlation between violence and violent gaming in children. If parents want to buy "Mature" games and give them to their kids then that should be up to their discretion.
ReplyDeleteI think individuals should have the right to play any game they choose and I don't feel like it is the industry's job to police consumers. Just as parents deem what movies are appropriate for their children to watch, parents have the same responsibility to monitor their children's video game consumption. At the same time, I don't think consumers can ignore the correlation between aggressive behavior and video game playing. Instead of instituting more controls, the industry should be more transparent with consumers, particularly parents, with studies that are done. Hopefully, this will help educate parents and allow them to make more informed decisions.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Aivi N. Many misinterpret an association between two things by deeming it "cause-and-effect." It's a chicken and egg scenario that needs more research done before a concrete conclusion can be drawn. The number of other variables to consider for a potentially violent subject(home environment, family, friends, etc...) are too significant for one to completely endorse a specific side on this issue, and this is why there is ample research on both arguments. I think in order to draw any substantial conclusions, the experiments would need to be more narrowly tailored to address more specific areas of study.
ReplyDeleteI believe there is a slight correlation between video games and violence, but should we go as far as censorship? As tessa stated in class there has yet to be a conclusive test to show that video games cause violent actions. I think it is a bit too sensitive to start restricting another thing in our lives. Is this not America? Should the market not dictate how people want to be governed? If there is enough demand for these games shouldn't we have the right to play them? Murder and violent acts have been around well before violent video games were popular, and won't stop because we stopped making violent video games.
ReplyDeleteI think it's important for parents to monitor their child's exposure to violence from all types of media, and I feel that video games get more than their share of blame for juvenile violent behavior. However, it makes sense that parents would be more worried about video games than movies. I know that a lot of young adults play these violent games and are not affected, but the mind of a child is much more malleable than ours and repeated exposure and interaction with violence would most certainly have a negative effect on the child's world view. For example, it is well known that children who grew up in an abusive home, whether or not they were abused, are much more likely to abuse their own children or spouse. This is due to the repeated exposure to violence at a susceptible age. Video games, however, engage the child in artificial violence, so that they are not just exposed to it, they actually see themselves doing it. In order to address this problem, parents should be well informed of the consequences of this exposure and monitor their child's behavior in a responsible way. It is not up to the government to set rules and regulations, because honestly this type of enforcement is inconceivable.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who was never allowed to have video games while growing up, I definitely think parental control is an important way to control video game use, but not the only answer. My parents refused to purchase video games not because they're violent but because they thought we should find more productive things to do... then we got the Internet and I think they lost control of that all together. I do think the correlation between aggression and violent video games is interesting and it's really difficult to say whether violent people like violent games or violent games make people violent. The most interesting study to me is the one we discussed in class where, whether a typically aggressive person or not, people were more aggressive immediately after playing a violent game. I'm not saying it's a huge breakthrough or we should ban video games or anything, but I think it's an interesting finding that can most likely be applied to violent movies and TV shows, etc. I think it's human nature to have a physical response to things we see and hear, so of course we respond to something as engaging and interactive as a video game, violent or not, which is why they're such effective learning tools as our speaker two weeks ago discussed.
ReplyDeleteI thought the point that Matt brought up about all video games seeming to cause an increase in aggression was a very interesting result of that one study. I think Brad's probably on the right track, in suggesting that this increased aggression has something to do with the competitive nature of most video games. It's also very interesting to consider Matt's point about his friend who plays violent games and is a very non-threatening person. It's difficult to say how games should be regulated when people's responses to them can be so different. I'm not sure we'll ever reach a point where we can say "children younger than this age shouldn't play this game" or "this type of game is bad for everyone". It seems to me that for every person who seems to be influenced by a video game negatively, that there are many more people who just enjoy playing the game and keep the game world separated from their reality.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you can create a direct relationship between violence and increased aggression. There's way too much involved, but if there was any link my opinion is that desensitization can cause one to react in a less serious way to normally violent actions. I do agree that games should have a rating system based on age. As children are much more likely to be swayed than adults, the same logic applied to movies should be applied to video games.
ReplyDeleteAs mentioned by some, there is a reason for ratings and individuals such as parents should be responsible for utilizing the ratings. Correlation does not equal causation. Some claim television shows excessive sexual or violent based acts quite often. So should we shut down television? No, we place ratings on age and parents can program their tv, so they should practice the same caution with video games. People need to learn to be mature and separate their entertainment from their real life behavior. Who is to say that those who are prone to violence after video games won't be violent without playing them?
ReplyDeleteViolent games, such as Grand Theft Auto, are situated in a world with no consequences. Games like these allow you to be creative in how you kill innocent people. You can run over pedestrians, shoot civilians in a burger joint, or burn cars in the middle of traffic to cause major explosions. I believe the problem lies in that some individuals cannot transition between this fake world of video gaming into the real world. They fail to understand the consequences of committing these heinous acts in real life. Do I think violent games increase aggression? I think it primarily affects individuals with psychological disorders. Millions of people play violent games every year, but the number of cases where video games are the blame for criminal activity are few.
ReplyDeleteHere's a link to a reading I just found on how several kids have blamed Grand Theft Auto for recent acts they committed:
http://www.thatvideogameblog.com/2008/08/09/car-bombings-blamed-on-grand-theft-auto/
Videos games and other forms of media only encourage up to the age of 8. Once a child matures to the point where they understand that the real world cannot be treated like a video game, they stop becoming violent from the things they see. I had a 4 year old cousin who loved trying the wrestling moves he learned by watching WWF on anybody. His older brother at 9 would only wrestle when he was messing around with his friends and such moves were appropriate. Also, the aggression could be caused by the competition of the game, rather than from the game itself. The positive correlation could be due to various factors, not just the video games.
ReplyDeleteParental supervision and regulation is necessary for all young children. It is difficult to understand the exact age at which a child fully understands the extent of his or her actions. This being said, regulation and control responsibility can not be left to the parents alone. Media outlets which create games, videos or attractions specifically aimed at young children have an ethical responsibility to steer clear of excessive violence. This can not be capped at a certain age range because many younger children may have access to older siblings’ materials. Violence is often used as an added perk to a game or video; however, is violence really the only possible outlet to create such excitement? Society is typically enthralled by competition. Competition and other game qualities could be used to replace unnecessary violence and similar acts.
ReplyDeleteVideo-games and violence seems to be a very controversial issue, but at the same time a very serious one. When I think about the violent games that these younger kids play its hard for me to understand how it affects them in real life. The only justification I can make is that a individuals background can greatly affect the way a video game alters their behaviors. Personally I can play a shooting game all day and it wouldn't make me want to go shoot people or be violent in real life, but I was brought up with very strict rules and respect my parents a lot. If a child doesn't have a good up bringing violent video games could just be another negative force influencing the wrong things.
ReplyDeleteAnother way I look at it is that if its something you are constantly doing, it may become habit. If kids are consuming their day with violent acts it can slowly affect their behavior, but again I think a strong upbringing or parent relationship will lessen the problem,
My old post just got deleted so let's try this again...
ReplyDeleteLike Emily my parents would not buy video games for my brothers and I. Not necessarily due to the violent factor, but they wanted to encourage a healthy lifestyle of us being active and playing outside. The class discussion also brought up by Emily was very interesting to me. I feel that when discussing this issue it is not just about the video games and violence. It is important to have background information on how participating in different things make you feel. For instance, I have read about how post movie watching changes people's moods. People who have just watched a movie with a happy ending, i.e. a romantic comedy, will leave the movie being in a more cheerful mood than they came. People who are watching an action or scary movie will leave the movie in a more depressed or violent mood right after. Also the fact that sports for instance give you endorphins, which make people happy. Therefore, one could draw the conclusion that athletes wouldn't kill someone because they work out so they are happy. However, as you know that is definitely not the best argument. That being said, I think there are so many factors that make up why someone is violent and maybe violent video games will change their mood, therefore someone who plays a lot will be in a violent mood more than others causing them to possibly do harmful things.
I wonder if already violent-susceptible individuals simply CHOOSE to play violent video games. There could be a correlation, but remember, correlation is not causation. I don't think that violent video games cause individuals to be violent or commit outrageous crimes. I used to play lots of Mortal Combat in my day and I like to think of myself as a generally non-violent person. It never caused me to go imitate or want to imitate the brutal beatings that I committed virtually. I do believe that those games may get a person's adrenaline going or work them up, but I tend to get that way while playing Mario Cart. The studies show that it isn't video games that cause violence, it's people. There are so many other factors that Matt posted as well, such as TV and the news.
ReplyDeleteI think that the correlation between violent gaming and people actually becoming more violent in person is just a correlation. However, correlation does not mean causation. I tink that people all want something to blame other than themselves, and games is just something that is an easy target. Like others have said before, there is really a lot that goes into violence, and it cannot be pinpointed to just video games. If people are going to be violent, a game will not really tell them that acting out their vioelence is now ok.
ReplyDelete