Kids 'Unaffected By Game Violence' Says Study 101
Via Game|Life, an article in the Syndey Morning Herald discusses a new study indicating most children are unaffected by videogame violence. Though the study did indicate that children already predisposed to violence or neurotic behavior were over-stimulated by these games, most children showed no difference in behavior as a result of game play. "The study monitored the behavior of children from 10 schools in eastern and southern metropolitan Melbourne before and after playing the violent video game Quake II for 20 minutes, Swinburne's Professor Grant Devilly said. Prof Devilly said only children predisposed to aggression and more reactive to their environments changed their behavior after playing and of those only some showed more aggression."
Re:Finally! Violent behaviour is the Parents Fault (Score:1, Funny)
Can I get a ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Can I get a ... (Score:4, Interesting)
With all the BS legislation trying to censor video games I think we could use all the studies we can get. While it's obvious to gamers that games don't change child behavior, it's not so apparent to the rest of the world. If they wont listen to reason maybe they'll at least listen to some guy in a lab coat with clipboard.
Re:Can I get a ... (Score:5, Funny)
Probably from playing too many violent video games...just a guess.
Re:Can I get a ... (Score:5, Funny)
I played a few MMO's, still play eve and what have you.
The worst is when I started playing WoW, fell in with chinese guys, started grinding and just massing large amounts of gold.
I hit rock bottom... nothing but grinding and gold collecting for weeks.
Now, I'm grinding away with this damned employment.
Just grinding and collecting cash.
Damn video games... I could have been a hippy!
Re: (Score:2)
'til then, keep the studies rolling!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
A year's worth may be something else.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
there might be a difference (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Back on topic, there's a variety of studies from both sides of the spectrum trying to prove or disprove that violent video games cause indidviduals to be violent; and most of these studies are funded by i
Re: (Score:1)
Care to cite the studies that corroborate your claim?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:there might be a difference (Score:5, Funny)
You know the old saying (Score:2)
Re:there might be a difference (Score:4, Funny)
Well, noone who lived long enough to argue their point anyway.
Re:there might be a difference (Score:5, Interesting)
I enjoy looking through a scope, I enjoy the challenge against an enemy sniper, and I find great pleasure in the joy of being the one to pull the trigger first and plant that virtual bullet exactly and deadly between his eyes, in which I look directly just the split second before I end his virtual life. I even find some cruel pleasure in watching an enemy sneak up, thinking himself unseen and switching to his knife for an easy kill, and just before he's in range I cap him with my handgun.
I enjoy rattling down a box of MG ammo through some corridor, actually hoping someone would be foolish enough to step in. Or throwing down a grenade onto a helpless enemy that has only the choice of staying down and eating my grenade or standing up and getting his head capped by the sniper buddy upstairs. I know he is going to die, and I enjoy it tremedously.
I run around tanks and plant that high speed AT-bullet into his rear, knowing exactly that the virtual human inside is finding a very cruel death. Going down in a tank is NOT a pretty way to die!
We're talking very realistic physics (ok, as realistic as hovercrafts and -tanks can get), very detailed textures that let you actually see the face of your enemy and that make, almost force, you to realize that you are indeed killing virtual humans.
Still I never even lifted my fist against anyone in RL. I try my best to avoid physical fights and usually leave when the 'battle' starts to escape the intellectual level. I own no real weapons and I have no drive to get one. At best, their mechanic is interesting, but not their function. Using weapons in RL is no fun.
It's dangerous.
And people who don't get that difference have more serious problems than computer games. Honestly.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe, maybe not. Personally I agree, I'm in my mid-20's now, and I've played violent games of all kinds since I was 10, and I'm the exact opposite of a raving lunatic. I don't need to play violent games either, I don't go crazy if I don't get to kill someone. At the same time, I do acknowledg
Re: (Score:2)
That's not what I'd call "preparing kids for life". That's what I call being overcautious. And the industry, wanting to sell more monitoring tools and more cushioning, isn't helping at all, increasing the hype and fear and generally giving you the feeling you're a bad parent if you don't loc
Re: (Score:1)
I'm borderline paranoid when using firearms, always checking that it is not loaded and keeping the bolt no
Re: (Score:2)
Not gonna take that risk.
It's a bit like racing games. Who cares if I slam that 200k car into the next wall 'cause I thought I'll make it, in a game? In RL, the car might be my least problem with the people that got stuck between car and wall.
I can imagine that shooting a real gun is fun and s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's still not relaxing, like its virtual equivalent. It might well be that this time is responsible for me being a bit uneasy in the presence of real guns. I've seen too many people with too little brains using them. When one of those dimwits gets the smart idea to show you his rifle with the unhealthy end pointing your way (and 30 bullets lined up snugly behind it), you start worrying.
What is true is that guns don
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Duh (Score:5, Funny)
I committed most of my murders before I got into gaming.
From the "Well, DUH" department... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
What's the score so far? (Score:4, Insightful)
No effect: a couple
Inconclusive: also a few
Has effect: 0
Who needs studies? (Score:3, Insightful)
And discussions in that area are hardly if ever rooted in the vicinity of common sense and logic.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder... (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder what they would find if they did a study to see what type of person was the most violent inside a video game? I bet it wouldn't be the people who are violent in the real world.
Thoughts?
Re: (Score:2)
A WHOLE 20 Minutes?! (Score:4, Interesting)
Fuck a doodle-do. Quality work there.
only 20 mins? (Score:4, Interesting)
OK, so only a small minority of children are negatively affected by a 20-minute session of playing Q2. Does that negative effect wear off if they play for 2 hours? Any endocrine effects need to be examined over a longer timeline.
Isn't it possible we accurately label games so that parents of kids who fall into the risk category can make appropriate decisions more easily when buying a game? Would that hurt anyone?
Oops... flames commence in 3... 2... 1...
Re: (Score:3)
2 hours? What about 20 hours straight? I'd like to see a more realistic study than the one they managed to produce.
Re: (Score:1)
The only problem I see with this is that parents, I have observed, don rose colored glasses as far as their kids are concerned at birth. MY child could never do drugs. Torturing small animals? Not MY child. Etc.
The causes of violence in children are hard to evaluate. It is unknown that a child can be triggered to violence unless it has been triggered. Intent is impossible to measure.
Re: (Score:1)
*RUNS LIKE HELL*
-uso.
Is 20 minutes enough? (Score:2)
I don't think that videogames cause violence in passive people but I doubt this study shows anything except for the bias of the researcher.
Only part of the issue... (Score:5, Insightful)
The bottom line is that eventually our culture comes to terms with some form of devient behavior. It's not that we morally condone it, but we become able to rationally assess it, without it becoming a sick fascination. The concern isn't so much that the violent imagery, itself, is a problem, so much as that our cravings for greater and greater violent imagery can pose a problem. We should look at this topic rationally and without reservation, there are no "duh's" or "no shit's" here. It's a valid concern. While I admit that most people, in their habbits, are healthy in their entertainment, I've also witnessed teenagers who play games specifically for the blood... which is sad, and a bit disconcerting. Violence can be used to portray strong messages, but in of itself (just like any type of stimuli) has no merrit.
I think this study is very good because it explore the natural disposition factor to violence in entertainment, and I'm sure that this is exactly WHY they chose Quake 2 to use, instead of the latest extremely violent games. That'll probably come next.
Re:Only part of the issue... (Score:5, Insightful)
From my initial concept to starting the study took a YEAR! It then took all of a semester to run the tests and another semester to field the data. When it was all said and done my study showed no reach change in behaviour from pre-recorded norms for the youth. I saw about as much agressive behaviour in 10 to 12 year old boys from watching a "yellow sponge" cartoon, watching "professional" (cough) wrestling, playing a shooter, or playing flag football (I had to get signed wavers for the football, flag football?!) for 30 minutes. I had my control group walk for 30 minutes (around a track -- I had to get waivers for this one too!?!). Now, that was only 30 minutes but I did have numerous sessions. College studies, by in large, just don't have the time or funding to do these indepth studies that take decades to pan out. My study looked about 150 youth (including control) with four 30 minutes sessions. Drop in scantron questionaires, watching video of the youth, scoring, etc, etc... it took a LONG time. I was told in no uncertain terms I would not be able to finish my research before my masters would be complete... and they were right. I passed my research onto another person who was a Junior when I started my Masters (she was in on it from the ground floor) and she finsihed the project when she received her Masters.
The BIG sticking point is what do you call aggression and how is it measured. It hitting a "BoBo Doll" aggressive? It blowing a whistle loudly aggressive? Is asking a youth to give their "frustration level" a number from 1 to 10 measuring aggression? Is asking a youth to ask a "pretty girl" out for pizza and then asking them what their "frustration level" a measure of aggression?! Is watching a youth's blood pressure or heart rate rise a measurement? Have them watch a "pretty girl" at the beach and take more measurement?! Pupil dilation? Skin temperature? The list goes on and on and on. You can't meausure "aggression" easily, period. What triggers a child's "agressive" response can be just as hard to pin down. Calling one youths mother something colorful will get responses from laughter, to name calling, to tit for tat, to a punch in the mouth. They could all be emotional responses or just learned behavior but only a few could be definately call "agression" every time. Perception.
Now that you have agression defined and measured (hah ha)... define violence? Define condoned violence? Uncondoned? Condonded violence in boys may not be so for girls and vice versa. We consider a youth charging down the field and knocking the $#@! out of another player in football condonded violence. When the other boy gets up and shurgs it off he is tough. One boy slugging another boy in the hall for "no apparent reason" maybe a bullie if the other boy does not fight back he is a "wimp or coward".
Re:Only part of the issue... (Score:5, Insightful)
I couldn't agree more with everything you're saying. I'm just sick and tired of people making up their minds before any results come in. When this thread first started, it was full of "no shit" and "duh" comments, which just really pissed me off, because science is a very very complicated thing that takes some serious and critical thinking.
I'm also sick and tired of the black & white responses that the press and the public are looking for. I've heard people go as far in making flippent comments as to say, "I've been playing violent games since I was 9, and I've never killed anyone, so they must be okay." This is simply rediculous, but it's the same attitude I see in the public every day. Psychology is all a series of grey areas, there are no such thing as hard and fast rules. Of course playing a violent video game won't turn average joe into a gun-toting psychopath, but there's a legitimate question as to whether it might make average joe just slightly more aggressive or irratable in some way that makes other's lives just that much more unpleasant. When you look at a society, little things like this can have major cultural consequences, so it's important to discuss openly, and not jump to conclusions. And I'm not suggesting that it DOES, but we have to be open to the possibility that it might, and be prepared to discuss what to do about it, if it is indeed the case.
Our culture wants everything in black & white terms: good and evil, right and wrong, guilty and innocent. In this day, you're either a crimina or you're an angel. It's all a huge "Us and Them" game, a way of separating ourselves from everyone we don't understand. These studies are important because they tell a lot about how we learn and grow as a society. To ignore the finer points just because they don't help us to stroke our ego, by being "the good guys", is to do violence to the very idea of personal and societal growth.
Re: (Score:2)
I find this really interesting! --I also had such frustrations in my life and entertained violent thoughts in reaction to them. Then a few years back, I stopped playing video games and I stopped watching TV.
Amazingly, life has become much happier and I now never have any call to be frustrated with life to the point you describe.
I re
Re: (Score:1)
Monkeys. . . (Score:2)
Because psychology interests me. And so do games to some degree. --I'm looking forward to knowing how the story-line for the Command & Conquer series unfolds, for instance.
Also, your logic is faulty, to some extent. While I can understand your viewpoint, there is also the question of why you wanted to play video games in the first place, and what prompted you to quit. If you experienced a life-changing decision that rem
Re: (Score:1)
Did you see the Monopoly study? (Score:5, Funny)
The study looks at more than 200 of the top entrepreneurs of the last 20 years and found that 90% of them played Monolpoly as children. The remaining 10% all turned out to be pinko communists.
In a related study, it was found that Stalin, Ghengis Khan, Napoleon and Hitler all played chess as small children. Bans on chess clubs are being considered in 38 states to prevent the rise of further military dictators.
More at 11.
In other news... (Score:2)
People who jog 20 miles are no more likely to become marathon runners.
People who write for 20 minutes are no more likely to become stenographers.
[insert any number of similarly pointless conclusions here]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
If you can jog 20 miles no problem, you nearly are a marathon runner. Full marathons are only 28 miles. My friend who ran the Chicago marathon trained by jogging just 10 miles every other day for several months.
Re: (Score:1)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I wonder why martial arts aren't under the same kind of scrutiny as videogames. Surely punching, throwing and choking people is dangerous and will raise a generation of violent psychopaths who will solve every problem through force, when they should be discussing their in
Re: (Score:1)
Of Course They're Not (Score:1, Flamebait)
From the other 1/3rd one occasionally tries to blame some malfeasance on violent video games. This far that has not got a single one of them excused from having to take responsibility for their actions. That they still try is simply further proof that they're retarded. My regime would actually have no qualms
Re: (Score:2)
You're either trolling, or those video games have affected you more than you realize.
You don't have to act on feelings of hate in order for it to alter the quality of your life and awareness.
Ever since I shifted my own focus a few years back, my life has done nothing but grow brighter and happier; it is filled with loving and compassionate people. The world is an increasingly difficult pla
Re: (Score:2)
* Bring back impaling. It worked for Vlad and it'd work for me! I'd be Bruce the Impaler!
* Ban all organized religion in favor of a mandatory state run religion involving Smurfs.
* Institute mandatory reversible sterilization for all children at puberty.
* Require a breeding license. Right now it's easier to have a child than it is to buy a gun or drive a car. I think there's something wrong with that. And I don't intend to make it
I know I have posted this before... (Score:3, Interesting)
----
I decided to finally write this down in response to some people asking me why I enjoy immeasurably violent video games and movies. This explanation is written using the game "Manhunt" as it's primary example, mainly because of it's subject matter (which can best be described as a "snuff video game"). PLEASE read it in it's entirety before responding, it's easy to think i'm making an uninformed point without reading the whole thing; I explain EVERY viewpoint I express.
Think about this, folks.
This "game" is not about sneakin' around, trying to see what the biggest mess you can make is. It's about much more than that. This game is in direct relation to the JTHM (Johnny the Homicidal Maniac by Jhonen Vasquez, for the uninitiated...) in all of us, the little black beast that we keep to ourselves.
Ever say "I wish he were dead", or "he makes me so angry I want to kill him"? Of course you have. Everyone has. This game is the digital manifestation of those thoughts. It's not about suffocating some guy, or creating the pink mist... This game does one thing and one thing only: it asks you a question. A very simple question to state, and frankly a very simple question to answer:
Is your black beast fictional or real?
Do you have a little playground for the demon inside of you, someplace it can go and harmlessly let out it's frustrations and rage? Or are you so jaded and blind that you cannot discern the difference between reality and fantasy?
Frankly, if you enjoy this game (along with ANY violent video game or movie, regardless of it's subject or presentation) you are not sick. You are normal. You are provided an outlet for the most primal emotions that you, as a human, have. Your most carnal instincts. If you don't like this game because the graphics suck, or the control is wonky, fine. BUT. If you despise this game because you say it's "too violent" and "unneccessary", and "too realistic", and whatever else, guess what: YOU are the sick one. That's not to say that you can't see it as being gross, or that you don't like it because you supposidly don't like violence (then why do you slow down to look at car accidents, hmm?) What it means is that if you say that violent things such as this push sane and "normal" people into being murderers in real life...well, I'm sorry, but you are wrong.
The first step anyone takes to becomming a murderer in real life is not being able to tell the difference between reality and fantasy. Manhunt is fantasy. Does that mean something similar has not happend/could not happen? No. But your experience and memories of it happening are. It's a video game. It is designed to be a playground for your little black beast.
If you take it as being anything more serious than that...well, turn yourself in now.
You have to allow the little monster to come out every now and then and release it's frustrations. If you don't, you risk becomming a quivering mass of nervous and dangerous flesh. What better place to do this than in a simulated environment with simulated violence where the only things harmed are your eyes for staring at the screen?
Feeding the monster. . . (Score:3, Interesting)
If you feed the little monster, the little monster grows.
My own 'little monster' gets smaller all the time, because I don't want any monster inside me at all. That's the description of the life mission I follow. --To hunt down all darkness and annihilate it within the self. If I can walk into a room and interact with anybody, shine brightly, comfortably and with grace so that every person I touch also finds a way to glow, then I am approaching the best version of myself. If I have a little monster wh
Re: (Score:2)
Humanity is anger and an internal desire to express violent thoughts? Hm. Interesting definition. Are you sure you've not been lied to?
I very much doubt that humanity can be stripped away by avoiding TV and video games, or by focusing on positive experiences. I might venture to say that the opposite is true. But I'd be wrong. Humanity is that which is human; we all get to define it as we go.
So I'l
Ob. quote (Score:1)
Out of the mouths of babes... (Score:5, Interesting)
I learned this 15 years ago when I turned my then-four-year-old son loose on an early copy of Wolfenstein 3D.
After a long session of him gleefully shooting everything that moved (In god mode, of course), I decided to test the idea that violent games produced violent children. "Wouldn't it be nice if you could shoot people like that in real life?" I asked.
He looked at me, utterly shocked. "No! Why would I want to do that?"
"You enjoyed shooting people in Wolfenstein, didn't you?" I offered, "Why not for real?"
I swear, my 4 year old son looked at me with pity in his eyes. "It's only a game , Dad!
After that I decided not to worry about kids playing violent video games any more. They are a lot more aware than most folks realize... and a lot smarter than most anti-games crusaders!
Re: (Score:1)
At least he's smarter than all those retards with the Bobo Doll [evergreen.edu]. Yeah, those kids, you know the ones -- the ones that watched the video of a doll being beaten up and then imitated that behavior. Those kids, or about 88% or them, anyway. Hey, did you know that after 8 months during followup studies 40% of those kids beat the shit out of the Bobo doll again? 8 MONTHS later 40% of these children who saw th
Re: (Score:2)
That aggressive behavior being the bludgeoning of the Bobo Doll, which is of course what they were shown that the dolls were for.
I bet the GP's kid still liked killing Nazis in Wolfenstein 8 months later too!
Holy fuck, how retarded do you have to be to think that continued violence against a toy that was shown to be an outlet for aggression actually means anything about agression in general?
Ne
Video games don't cause violence. (Score:1)
They don't cause violence.
And I'll kill any man who says otherwise!