Video games causal risk factor for aggression

[dewkl]

According to the latest meta-analysis: http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/facul ... ISBSRS.pdf

There's been some talk about this back and forth the past 20 years. One of the psychologists behind this meta-analysis have actually been publishing papers on this since Doom. It's therefore very interesting to read the content in the analysis to see just how far his/their video game (and video game culture) knowledge stretches.

Does anyone here have any insight into this? I'm not asking for a peer review or debunk, but if someone have read about this topic and have something to share.

[Major Banter]

I think we had a thread on this.

SO SHUT THE FUCK UP

/irony

[dewkl]

Doesn't seem like it. The essay-one is the most relevant but perhaps not enough to bump. Besides, this is from a new study.

[Major Banter]

FAIR ENOUGH YOU FUCKER

Now I'm off to kill some innocent people.

I hope you are able to read my opinion of these studies in my answers thus far.

[Unstoppable Florence]

Lol Banter. ^.^

I support academic study into this, but I'm never surprised when it comes out saying that 'there is an increased risk of aggression in those who play violent video games'. You just spent 3 hours fragmenting virtual peoples' skulls with a desert eagle, of course you come away from the experience pumped and more aggressive! All that these studies show is that video games are no more damaging than any free-thinking adult would expect them to be.

There's also the fact that the definition of 'aggressive' behaviour is ridiculously broad. Violent aggressive behaviour? Or just competitive aggressive behaviour? Playing Mario Kart will make you more aggressive in a competitive sense. Can we have a study into the potential 'casual risk' caused by playing sport after school?

[MNM]

Well I just played Pokemon, so if you'll excuse me I'll go throw round plastic objects at animals...

[MáØ]

Not to mention the fact that any parent worth a damn should be able to teach their children the difference between cartoon/video game violence and the real world.

I know my parents did, I turned out fine (for the most part...)

[Terr]

The trick is (A) distinguishing causation (B) whether the effect is significant.

[nub]

I started playing games when I was 4, and Mortal Kombat was one of them. I played games like Sonic too, but a lot of it consisted of MK and Streets of Rage...I turned out fine. I'm not throwing a blade tied to a rope in to anyone's chest and yanking them back towards me while yelling "GET OVER HERE!" I'll admit the thought of doing so has crossed my mind on several occasions, but who hasn't had violent thoughts before? Everyone does, it's just that I've played so many video games that I sort of emulate them in my violent thoughts.

[leadphalanx]

I think the only sort of people that violent video game effect negatively are children who were poorly raised. Of course, this is coming from the generation of kids I grew up with playing video games. I've got no idea how today's kids are being affected by it. If anything, people should be more worried about kids these days getting distracted from schoolwork and such from playing too much video games.

[Habboi]

Playing the sex minigames in the God of War series has really helped me understand how it all works.

*Prepares finger to press circle.*

[stoopdapoop]

I think that this isn't specifically what this thread is about, but It seems that violence in schools (this seems like the best indicator of violent or aggressive behavior to me) has been steadily going down since 94.

http://youthviolence.edschool.virginia. ... stics.html

Kinda ironic considering doom was released in late 93, and it seems to be referenced alot, especially in relation to the columbine shootings. Maybe we have it all wrong, the more violent games children play, the better off society is.

Just curious as to whether or not anybody on these forums believes violent games have a longterm negative effect on individuals, or children as a whole, and why.

[Gary]

We already solved the problem, kids can't buy the games if there rated M or AO. Thus, it's not the games fault, it's the parent's that buy the games for mentally unstable children.

[Stupidity /]
Only other option is to ban video games over E, but what about R movies? We need to ban them too, but wait, what if the kids see cops shooting at criminals, we got to get rid of cops as well. [/ Stupidity]

[Pwnd_Ja]

[dewkl]

edit: (repost)
I've looked at the study further and I'm left with some questions. It seems to me that most of the studies with methodological quality (according to the meta-analysis) have been performed by "Craig A. Anderson". He has also exclusively reported findings that support the claim.

The meta-analysis' conclusion is based on the short-term studies, where a person plays the game for 15 minutes and immediate effects are monitored. These are apparently the only studies that show clear effect, unlike longitudinal studies.

My main concern is the lack of insight that is demonstrated. Video gaming is not like its counterparts, you cannot expose a person to 15 minutes of a video game in the same way that you do with film or music. Most of the high-quality studies (of those I looked at) had one person explain how to play the game before they were given access to the content for 15 minutes.

One definition of video games could be; an abstract system wherein the player performs problem solving. Regardless of whether you are shooting rockets at crashing helicopters or more sophisticated environmental puzzles (Portal); you are almost always performing problem solving in some way or another, whether it's abstract or in form of "puzzles". My point is that when you are exposed to such short duration of a video game, you are more occupied with learning that system than fully enjoying the experience. Whether you have been shown how to play is irrelevant, the player must explore and experiment in the system himself/herself in order to become comfortable with it. During this period the player is prone to frustration and irritation, depending on the quality of the game design. There are simply too many influencing variables that I see no mention of.

I'd also like to know how they researched Japanese gaming, whether proper industry professionals were consulted. The method by which they define violent games and non-violent games are cringe-worthy, the definition also differs greatly in the these studies. Some would define Super Mario Bros. as a violent video game while others set the bar to decapitation and gore. Some statements are outright incorrect. It might be that some video games are risk factor for violent behavior, but this meta-analysis has done little to convince me so far.

Besides, meta-studies doesn't have a history for being well done or good research. Even organizations like WHO are capable of messing these up. (This is a medical study, so that's even worse).