Violence and Video Games.

Violence and Video Games

Today on Amazon.com, one of the most popular video games being sold is titled "Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare." In this game, players can take on the role of either a U.S. or British soldier who is sent to military "hot spots" to defeat the world's most dangerous enemies. Like other games in its genre, the images are near lifelike and the violence is graphic.

As the level of violence in video games has increased, so has concern for the effects on those who play - especially those who play a lot. Many are quick to point out that most school shootings in recent years have been carried out by avid gamers, and their games of choice were always dark and violent.

But it begs the question: Which comes first? Can aggressive and violent behavior be attributed to violence in video games? Or do those who play already have violent tendencies which draw them to violent games? It's a type of "chicken or the egg" debate that has strong advocates on both sides.

Though video games made their appearance in the 1970s, it wasn't until systems like the Sony PlayStation were released in the 1980s that violence became an issue. Along with these more sophisticated systems came the ability to make graphics more lifelike. The more lifelike they've become, the more interest there has been in the correlation between violent games and violent behavior.

One of the primary concerns with violence in video games is that gaming is not passive. In order to play and win, the player has to be the aggressor. Rather than watching violence, as he might do on television, he's committing the violent acts. Most researchers acknowledge that this kind of active participation affects a person's thought patterns, at least in the short term.

Another factor that concerns both researchers and parents is that violence in video games is often rewarded rather than punished. In army and sniper games, players "level up" based in part on how many people they kill. If played frequently enough, games like this can skew a young person's perception of violence and its consequences.

In 2002, researchers Anderson and Bushman developed the General Aggression Model (GAM). Often considered one of the greatest contributions to the study of violence and video games, the GAM helps explain the complex relationship between violent video games and aggressive gamers. The GAM takes some (though not all) of the heat off video games by acknowledging that a gamer's personality plays into how he is affected by violence. Anderson and Bushman refer to three internal facets - thoughts, feelings, and physiological responses - that determine how a person interprets aggressive behavior. Some people's responses are naturally more hostile, making them predisposed to respond more aggressively to violent video games.

Short-term effects were easily identified in the GAM; the most prominent being that violent games change the way gamers interpret and respond to aggressive acts. Even those who aren't predisposed to aggression respond with increased hostility after playing a violent video game. The game becomes what's called a "situational variable" which changes the perception of and reaction to aggressive behavior.

Long-term effects of violent video games are still uncertain and are fiercely debated. No long-term studies have been conducted to date, so there are only hypotheses. Anderson and Bushman theorized that excessive exposure to violent video games causes the formation of aggressive beliefs and attitudes, while also desensitizing gamers to violent behaviors.

Though long-term effects haven't been clinically documented, one need only look at the way video game violence has progressively increased over the past two decades to get a sense of potential long-term effects. Parents would be wise to monitor the amount of time their kids spend gaming and watch closely for any negative effects.

http://www.video-game-addiction.org/violence.html

Challenging the Popular View
Recently, however, other researchers have challenged the popular view that violent video games are harmful.
In an article appearing in the Review of General Psychology in 2010, Dr. Christopher Ferguson of Texas A&M International University argued that many studies on media violence measure aggression in ways that don't correspond with real-world violence.

Even more important, these associations don't prove cause and effect. He also cited data from federal criminal justice agencies showing that serious violent crimes among youths have gone down since 1996, even as video game sales have soared.

Other researchers have challenged the connection between violent video game use and school shootings. They note that most of the young shooters had signs of anger, mental illness and aggression before the shootings, and that these factors made them more likely to commit violence. So it's harder to accept that playing violent games is a direct cause of violent behavior. When the U.S. Secret Service and Department of Education looked at targeted school violence, they cautioned that no particular behavior, including interest in violence, could be used to produce a “profile” of a likely shooter.

The U.S. Department of Justice has funded research at the Center for Mental Health and Media at Massachusetts General Hospital to better determine what impact video games have on young people. This research and several other studies suggest that only some youths may become more aggressive after playing violent video games. However, in most cases, playing violent video games may be part of normal development, especially in boys — and a legitimate source of fun, too.

Because no two children are alike, experts stress that a youngster's personality, motivations and his or her situation influence behavior rather than the games themselves. For example, psychologists at Villanova and Rutgers Universities have presented evidence that watching and playing violent video games does not affect most children. After reviewing the research, they concluded that certain personality traits might make an individual more likely to act and think aggressively after playing a violent video game: These include a tendency to:
Be angry and depressed
Be highly emotional and easily upset
Be disagreeable, cold or indifferent to other people
Act without thinking, fail to keep promises, break rules

Cheryl Olson, cofounder of the Massachusetts General Hospital Center for Mental Health and Media led a study of 1,254 students in public schools (most were ages 12 to 14) in South Carolina and Pennsylvania. The results showed that certain situations increased exposure to violent video games. These included, for example, locating game consoles and computers in children's bedrooms, and allowing older siblings to share games with younger ones. In this study, children who played video games often with older siblings were twice as likely as other children to play mature-rated games (considered suitable for ages 17 and older).

A youth's peer group also influences behavior. In a three-year study done at the University of California, Irvine, researchers interviewed and observed the online behavior of 800 youths. They concluded that video game play and other online activities have become so common among young people that they have changed how young people socialize and learn.

While adults tend to view video games as isolating and antisocial, most youngsters describe the games as fun, exciting, something to counter boredom, and something to do with friends. Thus, for many youths, violent content is not the main draw. Boys, in particular, are motivated to play video games in order to compete and win. In this context, playing violent video games may be similar to the roughhousing play that boys do as part of normal development. Video games are just one more way boys compete for status or to establish a pecking order.

http://www.planforyourhealth.com/living-healthy/harvard-medical-school-commentaries/minding-your-mind/commentaryc/Commentary/commentarya/single/show-commentary/violent-video-games-harmful-or-not-2/

I am curious as to others opinions. My guess is that those that play Video Games which are considered to be "violent" will defend the games and the playing of them.

I use to play a lot of "violent" video games. Counter Strike, Battle field 1942 just to name a few. For me, they were a great release and I felt better after playing them. But, I did notice the addictive effect they had. I would start playing and not want to stop.

Granted, I was a much angrier person then too. Did I play because my life had desensitized me to violence already; I am naturally a violent person; violence was the only way I knew how to deal with stress... who knows!

I was playing Legend of Zelda the other day (a week ago) and as I smashed pots, pumpkins and other random things to find rubies I thought to myself, "why do I have to break things to find gems?" "who would hide a gem in a pumpkin?" It just didn't make sense. Sure, fighting "bad guys" in a quest to save the world and rescue Zelda was fine... but why do I need to destroy everything I run across? hahhahahhha

Don't get me wrong, I like video games. And I like shooting, stabbing, slashing, smashing, crushing, stomping, burning and blowing stuff up as much as the next guy... but is the constant exposure having some negative effect?

We are all creatures of habit to some extent, but I was thinking how often I do not notice it in my own actions. Often we busy ourselves in cycles of reward, doing this to get that. Most of them small, but some of them take a lifetime such as working to pay off your home loan. Computer games often play to this focusing on shorter and shorter decision cycles such as observe, orient, decide and act loops as a means to increase pleasure through greater numbers of meaningless rewards. It is a very consumer based model of fun in my opinion but it is not limited to violent games. Violent games just seem to recruit survival instincts and aggression to tie it into determination.

So the only problem I have with violent video games is if they are used by young people, perhaps < 12 years old. I'd be concerned about its influence on brain development, as when puberty strikes a lot of the brain structures seem to transition from building structure to building efficiency. Expose before then could teach some really bad habit's, not about violence, but about impulsive decision making. I'd probably wonder if the violence also did not have some negative impact, as a lot of it is mindless behaviour.

I remember the first violent game I played was called Deja Vu. It started waking up a strange 1940's bathroom of a cheap motel with a bruised head, concussion, an empty revolver and no idea where I was or who I was. I then had to work things out alone the way.... it was a loooong way from rewarding in the short term, but this gave it character and made success more rewarding by giving the content more meaningful association. It made me think, and I cannot say that modern violent games make me thing much at all.



So for me, violent games are a means to exercise strategy learnt elsewhere. In of themselves I would say they have little benefit beyond exercising some virtual spatial awareness and an ability to make quick decisions based on small amounts of information. For mentally healthy adults I do not think they increase violence one bit. Have to remember though, the brain is plastic and that means it changes based on our actions and thoughts, reinforcing habits and making them more of a person's 'self'. I even think people can even brain wash themselves if they try hard enough!! So moderation is important too.

Playing mahjong or suduku helps us develop better pattern recognition skills. Strategy games help us to learn to think strategically. Is it such a stretch to think that playing violent games develops our ability to be violent? After all, humans learn first and foremost though play.

Im also a big believer in visualization. If someone who is already unstable, spends enough time "visualizing" violence towards others, it goes a long way to both normalizing the violence, and potentially even helping that person manifest it.

Anything we consume physically or mental does have an impact on us. I certainly think its something we need to be more aware of.

Hmmm...I've been playing violent video games and real world games my whole life....and I'm not out there killing people with the skills/knowledge/experience gained from them....as a preteen/teen we played survivalist styled stalking games in the woods hunting down and "killing" the other team...even now I'll play paintball or airsoft when given the chance...I learned growing up (more specifically had it beaten into me) that society has rules and consequences...it was also impressed upon us (beaten in) to accept responsibility for our actions as the punishment would be less severe than if we tried to deceive our way out of it...so when I see people blaming anything other then themselves for their choices, their actions all I see is a weak, weak minded, lying coward grasping at any cop out they can in order to avoid responsibility....

Parents should be responsible enough to teach their children right from wrong, reality and fantasy....and stop using unmonitored surrogate parents.....

yes, violent games breed violent individuals. I think the real reason we are having trouble linking violence to video games is because there is big money behind the game-makers.

I have no problem with violent video games. I consider them cathartic. And kids at least have an outlet for their violent tendencies instead of taking it out on others. And they aren't actively looking for trouble, bored and dangerous while playing.

I think it comes down to the level of parental involvement. Is the kid sequestered in his. Room, curtains drawn, eating junk food an d gettign all angry and sullen, os are parents actively involved in his life as well ? Thisis the case with my son and I. He is an avid halo player. If you were to run across hi? Playing on my live account, you probably wouldn't even know it wasn't me. He has learned basic combat strategy: utilize cover, squad command and control, distant strikes. He only plays for a little while at a time, and almost alwys with me. He asks questions about the physics of the game:. FTL travel, chiefs armor (of course), plasma vs conventional rounds, could superweapons like Halos be real. I consider it good bonding time, we both enjopy it. If he misbehaves, losing Halo priviledges is a good detereent.

So in conclusion, I like violent video games, tho I am nonviolent. So does my son. We live in the most peaceful time on this planet. And there are simply more important things to worry about.

Whyte Horse wrote: yes, violent games breed violent individuals. I think the real reason we are having trouble linking violence to video games is because there is big money behind the game-makers.

Sorry Horse, lol, i just picked on your answer in the 'Alpha' thread, and I am here, but your posts jumped out at me...

No offence, and much love to ya brah...

What about wrestling as a kid with my buddies? how about cops and robbers? how about playing star wars? how about paintball and airsoft?

They didnt make me violent.... Nor my son, nor many others I could name, like everyone I grew up with...

If a person is violent, it comes out no matter the situation...

Dressing up like a girl when I played dress up didnt make me a cross dresser... Nor gay, not confused, not trans gendered... Didnt make me feel bad for being a man, and that being a woman is sexy... (Cause I couldnt pull off sexiness? lol)

My son shoots people, sometimes cops, in video games (Im thinking about GTA)... As an good parent, I ask him about it, and he realizes the potential trouble it could cause...

KNow what happens generally when you shoot a cop? Your game is about to be over... Becaus evideo game cops are even worse drivers than real cops, lol (sorry to the cop brothers and sisters here, just joking and trying to be funny)....

It teaches them that when you break the law in a minor way, you earn one star, and the cops are watching for you....

You shoot a cop, or copS, then, they: "strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you."


Part of the message is hidden for the guests. Please log in or register to see it.

You KNOW what I'm sayin!!!

I have to agree with Jestor, I've never found myself wanting to go out and shoot Germans after playing Call Of Duty, nor did I think it would be a good idea to go out on a mad killing spree after playing Manhunt.

I disagree completely when people use Video Games / Movies / Television as an excuse for doing something horrific "oh he was playing Resident Evil and that is what made him break into the nearest Laboratory and kill everyone before they could create the T Virus".

If these people can be so influenced by a pastime then the problem is not the pastime itself but the person who is passing time with it, it's evident in the fact that at least half of the worlds population is playing video games, watching violent movies and we aren't all going out on Grand Theft Auto style runs.

The medium isn't the problem, it's how the person processes it in my honest opinion, and fair enough there may be the odd individual that was actually effected by it, but the majority who use it as an excuse are usually clutching at straws to find a means of explaining their own actions or passing the blame onto something else.

We all get a secret thrill at some point about breaking the rules...

Whether its the "California stop" (as we Illinoians call it, lol... almost stoppping arcade stop sign), or speeding past a cop, and he didn't pull out to get you....

Video games, honestly, provide a trial and error for things....

We get another chance if, when leaping a gorge, we fail...

As Leandros said, shoot, we've all said....

"We are each responsible for our actions"

Don't want your kid lashing out? Teach control...