Research Finds Negative Effects in Violent Videogames

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

ZombieMonkey7:
Another garbage scientific research find to add to the list

You're aware that the longer that list becomes, the less valid your arguments become, right?

Olrod:

CommanderL:

Olrod:
Is it really because the specific games in the study were violent games, or because they were just games that use The Computer is a Cheating Bastard mechanics?

Those games are pretty much guaranteed to create an increase in my homicidal tendencies, regardless of the actual genre of game.

you asshole You linked to tv tropes have you no soul Its like rick rolling but your trapped all day
-just teasing-

The study looks dodgy the sample size seems to small

I know, I fell into my own trap. I just spent two hours on there after making that comment...

Only two hours that's kinda short but you reap what you sow

No shit, genius. If all I've seen of Private Whatever-His-Name-Is is killing Nazis then I'll obviously think of him killing Nazis, won't I?
If all I've seen Lewis Hamilton do is race, that's what I'll see him doing.
I honestly wonder how these people are still any kind of researcher.

This study DOES NOT implicate a tie between playing video games and violence - only video games and aggression. An important distinction.

Violent video games, over a period of time, make people more defensive and they expect others to be more aggressive - sound familiar, gamerbros?

It's important that we begin to develop more gaming interactions that revolve around violence - because gameplay does effect on who we are.

Which is not to say that aggression is unmanagable, or even bad!

Farther than stars:

ZombieMonkey7:
Another garbage scientific research find to add to the list

You're aware that the longer that list becomes, the less valid your arguments become, right?

I am not saying that I agree that this study is garbage, but 1,000 or 1,000,000 garbage studies prove nothing more than a single garbage study. If the study is carried out under improper conditions then the results are not valid. That is the complaint most often leveled against these studies, that they are done poorly and the results are therefore invalidated and should be ignored.

GenderNeutralOctopus:
This study DOES NOT implicate a tie between playing video games and violence - only video games and aggression. An important distinction.

I would say it doesn't even really implicate that- it only really implicates a set of three games with the tendency to imagine aggressive responses to imaginary scenarios.

I hate these studies, and for a very simple reason.

None of the researchers seem to have a personal relationship with the gaming scene. They don't seem willing or able to understand that any source of frustration in any shape or form will make people aggressive. I've seen my father come home from work looking like he was about ready to chew a baby's head off, and I've seen my mother drink herself to sleep in order to cope with the sometimes awful reality of working in a nursing home.

I'm a gamer, and I have access to something my parents don't, in this respect. That's a sense of distance between me and games as a source of frustration. It's not because I can't get past this or that stage that my day is ruined. I don't need to put anyone through a couple hours of me being grumpy because I keep getting fragged or stun-locked or whatever. I am not what I do while playing games. In most other avenues of life, however, things *are* taken personally. I *am* my thesis. I *am* my currently shitty job. I *am* my own lack of enthusiasm for Christmas.

What these studies show is that some people, sometimes, are unable to make that distinction. So a noob-tuber destroyed you in BlOps. Does that entirely define who you are? Does that negate everything else you're good at? Of course not. Get over it, and consider that the noob tube is there *specifically* for the task of evening out the playing field between new players and veterans.

It's off-topic, I know, but that's something that bugs me a lot. Competitive CoD types seem to consider that their poison of choice has nothing *but* competitive mechanics. Anybody who tries to fit in who can't level out with that expected competition is a parasite, according to these gamers.

Everyone's been a newbie once before. I wish some of the more passionate types in the FPS crowd would remember that.

DrOswald:

Farther than stars:

ZombieMonkey7:
Another garbage scientific research find to add to the list

You're aware that the longer that list becomes, the less valid your arguments become, right?

I am not saying that I agree that this study is garbage, but 1,000 or 1,000,000 garbage studies prove nothing more than a single garbage study. If the study is carried out under improper conditions then the results are not valid. That is the complaint most often leveled against these studies, that they are done poorly and the results are therefore invalidated and should be ignored.

My point is that if there are a million studies out there that suggest the same link, they're a lot less garbage than any unscientifically founded arguments, because they have an academic community backing them up.

Lawyer105:
I wonder how many studies have been done on whether action/horror movies make people more violent and/or aggressive. Or *gasp* whether action/horror NOVELS make people more violent and/or aggressive.

Probably not... those are respectable media, not like this modern trash you get today. Oh wait... it's EXACTLY the same for anyone who isn't an idiot. Too bad so many people are idiots.

No, those studies happened. Every new medium or genre that becomes popular with the younger generations tends to be feared by their elders. It happened with novels, with theatre, with jazz, with rock and roll, it upturned the comic book industry, it happened with goth culture, with heavy metal, with rap, with Dungeons & Dragons, with 80s action films, with 80s horror films--video games are just the latest target of those busybodies who squeal, "think of the children!"

TVTropes even has a trope for it.

You guys, I studied 70 people at a retirement home over a couple evenings. And I now have data that suggests that without canes, walkers and wheel chairs, movement everyone in the world would not be able to move around without falling over. It is imperative that we all buy walkers for ourselves lest we collapse under our own weight.

5 minutes of I wanna be the guy = me in a violent rage ready to strangle kittens.

6 hours of Planetside 2 = me in a coma from boredom.

I think your study should have taken into account frustration. Cod 4 is known to create raving rage because of competition. Condemned is more a game that makes you shit your pants out of fear raving hobo's will attack you from behind.

Andy Chalk:
In another test, those who played violent games subjected hidden opponents in a multiplayer game (who didn't actually exist) to increasingly longer and louder blasts of unpleasant noise each time they "won," while those who played non-violent games maintained their victory noise at a relatively constant level and duration throughout the period of the study.

Yeah, that makes sense ... although I expect that's less to do with the violence itself, and more to do with aggressive competition. You get that effect in sports too, except it's called "team spirit".

Farther than stars:

DrOswald:

Farther than stars:

You're aware that the longer that list becomes, the less valid your arguments become, right?

I am not saying that I agree that this study is garbage, but 1,000 or 1,000,000 garbage studies prove nothing more than a single garbage study. If the study is carried out under improper conditions then the results are not valid. That is the complaint most often leveled against these studies, that they are done poorly and the results are therefore invalidated and should be ignored.

My point is that if there are a million studies out there that suggest the same link, they're a lot less garbage than any unscientifically founded arguments, because they have an academic community backing them up.

And my point is that a million points of data that were each obtained through faulty experiments will lead to an incorrect conclusion. Bad data is bad and should be thrown out. Having a great deal of bad data does not somehow make it good data.

Maybe those who prefer violent and aggressive video games are already more aggressive and confrontational in nature then those who prefer sports and non-violent games?????

Can we just stop with these articles? Every single time something like this gets posted it's always by some university saying the exact same thing every single time. Then, all the comments just turn into a giant circlejerk about how video games don't cause violence any more than other media and blah blah. It's getting kind of annoying seeing this content consistenly rehashed on this site, there has to be something more interesting to report on.

Mycroft Holmes:
You guys, I studied 70 people at a retirement home over a couple evenings. And I now have data that suggests that without canes, walkers and wheel chairs, movement everyone in the world would not be able to move around without falling over. It is imperative that we all buy walkers for ourselves lest we collapse under our own weight.

This isn't really a very valid criticism of the study. There is an obvious reason why a study limited to people in a retirement home would skew results pertaining to their ability to walk unassisted. There isn't an obvious reason why a study limited to university students would automatically skew results pertaining to their aggressive responses to video games. If you can see a methodological flaw, feel free to point it out (I certainly did) but snarky sarcasm doesn't serve science any better than the blind alarmism that has motivated some (not necessarily this) anti-game studies.

I mean...okay?

The first study just shows that humans will draw creative solutions from recent experiences. The second one makes perfect sense; violent content is more intense, so it will provoke a stronger response.

But I'm pretty sure you'd get extremely similar responses from, say, violent TV programs. There is yet to be any evidence that video games have a significantly greater effect on people than other violent media.

It's an interesting study, but doesn't condemn video games at all.

AGAIN, a scientific "research" done by a biased group, who would probably rather chisel onto their computer screens rather than use them.

When are we going to see the day that these people look away from a violent persons OUTLETS and start looking at the person? Each person is going to have a unique background, ethnic culture & upbringing, and these are all going to be factors in how a person reacts to violence in a video game. But no, these people have to give results based on a generalised test with random people. We weren't even told about their backgrounds, they could have been prisoners for all we know. I know that's a bit over the top, but my point is that aggressive people are going to react to aggressive things, the game has next to nothing to do with it.

I like how they decided to name it as "Disturbing" when they asked questions directly after the gaming, when the scenarios within the game are still fresh in their mind and obviously going to affect their thinking process. What about giving them a few hours, hey?

I'd probably be inclined to agree with this, had they not already been trying to make us think like this for the last few decades. Next, they'll be waving a cross at GTAV, stating that this is the cause of increased road rage in america. Again, look at the people. Not their outlets.

One thing people In this medium don't consider is what if they're right? what if people playing violent video games does cause some form of anger/aggregation/violence. We gamers are to quick to stand up and defend our medium, but truthfully there really hasn't been enough research into this area and for people to make sweeping statements such as "this is just another bullshit study" this doesn't encourage them to study further. A good analogy here is with cigarettes, for years people smoked and either Ignored medical research or continued to smoke anyway. I will admit that I am not an expert on any of this research but if you ignore every study that goes against what you want to find then you are no better than fox news.

New research shows that everything is bad for everyone.

Hmmm

*reads study

Hmmm

>_>

oookk.....

so .. what?.. I don't get it..

This doesn't mean anything at all. It's like saying a Hockey game makes fans more aggressive after the game.

So much anger. Wow.

The study is a small focus group. The sampling could be bigger. What are the quantitative results? Don't know..I don't want to pay to actually download the study from Scopus. And yes, there are seemingly presumptuous conclusions without basis in the article printed here. But...

Why is it so hard for everyone to believe that video games can affect your behavior? The study doesn't say you are going to act out the things you saw in a violent game. It says there is evidence that they influence behavior. If the study said video games about selfless acts inspire people to volunteer in their community, would there be this uproar of dissent?

Your brain is a very complicated thing. It is influenced by everything you take in and not all of it on a conscious level. Your super-ego is always there, putting the stop limits on your actions and filtering incoming information to fit your belief system. But that underlying id shifts its boundaries around based on the environment it experiences.

For Example: I did a couple long days of Saints Row 3 a while back. Afterwards, I didn't want to whip out The Penetrator for any beatdowns. But I do remember that my driving was actually more reckless for a bit. I pulled into a parking spot way to fast and came really close to the side of another car. That was the way I had been driving for the past few days in game. The reckless driving style was becoming an unconscious competent act (see: The 4 Stages of Learning) and I had to do a conscious mental "reset" to get back into the right mindset. I'm 43. And I slipped into a recent, abnormal behavior during a normal unconscious act. Is the game to blame? Hell no--I am the only one accountable for my actions. But, my short-lived behavior change was a direct result of my gaming experience.

What a crock of shit I play nothing but violent video games my whole life from Mortal Kombat to Gears of War and I've never hurt anyone who didn't have it coming

DrOswald:

Farther than stars:

DrOswald:

I am not saying that I agree that this study is garbage, but 1,000 or 1,000,000 garbage studies prove nothing more than a single garbage study. If the study is carried out under improper conditions then the results are not valid. That is the complaint most often leveled against these studies, that they are done poorly and the results are therefore invalidated and should be ignored.

My point is that if there are a million studies out there that suggest the same link, they're a lot less garbage than any unscientifically founded arguments, because they have an academic community backing them up.

And my point is that a million points of data that were each obtained through faulty experiments will lead to an incorrect conclusion. Bad data is bad and should be thrown out. Having a great deal of bad data does not somehow make it good data.

No, but the fact that there are large quantities of data means that the accumulative chances of it being faulty fall under the fault margin. Or is scientific consensus something that's now on trial here?

This shouldn't come as much of a shocker. Most anything violent, whether fake or not, is going to affect people in some way or fashion. It'll vary on the person and how suggestible they are. How many people join the army or whatever because they played Call of Duty?

Sample size is way too small, choosing from university students is not a representative sample, wasn't double blind(which probably means the stories read to the violent games group were read in a more aggressive tone), expectation of violence in media does not equate to expectation of violence in real life, expectation of violence does not equate to violent behavior or tendencies in the subject, this is not even close to being something that you can reasonably draw a conclusion from.

I have a feeling that there's a lot that's not mentioned here OR on the Ohio State site... mostly because Andy lifted the article in its entirety(sans Wikipedia links to most of the games).

Given the fact that more and more people are long term gamers now that when I was a kid leads me to believe that there isn't really a link between even the increased aggression and actual increases in violence.

so play less voilen video games sometimes

no sh**

So you're telling me that after playing a war game a work of FICTION, when people were presented with other works of fiction that they referred to the other and most recent work of fiction.

If you've just finished watching 300, and I ask you to think of a color, are you more likely to say florescent pink or crimson red?

I don't see how this proves anything.

I've played video games since the Atari 2600. The only offense I've ever committed was a moving violation 20 years ago (and no I don't play racing sims). Either the world is sitting on a powder-keg of violent videogamers ready to go ape-shit at the slightest provocation, or people are just looking for a scapegoat.

Cryo84R:
As much as I may dislike the findings, we must go with the best available data we have when forming conclusions. Is this study comprehensive or authoritative? No, but it's data appears to be valid and scientific. As honest intellectual individuals, we must set aside our personal beliefs when confronted with evidence and question not only the evidence, but our beliefs. The mark of a good scientist is the ability to toss out long held, even intimate and personal beliefs when presented with contradictory data.

Again, I'm not saying this is authoritative by any means, but please keep an open mind to all sources of valid data, regardless of conclusion.

EDIT: That being said, I do some some holes in the study methodology.

I know you gave the disclaimer about the methodology, but i can only speak from personal experience and my post was based on such.

Im 20 years playing violent video games. I volunteer at my local search and rescue unit, im a corporal in the army reserve, i do a shit load of charity work as an actor (my main job), the only altercations i have ever been involved in has been to defend someone,and i have no criminal record and one citizenship award

I watch violent movies too.

I pay my taxes, do right by my neighbours, I vote and take a principled stand when i need to.

I also have an MA from a university.

Im not perfect, but i do alright by people. Im certainly no genius, what i have noticed however in my time in university is that Academics will and quite happily shit on anyone and anything if it gets them a thesis.

These guys admitted to a limited scope of study and they found results.... fine. Results are results, but insinuating conclusions out of this is a betrayal of the academic and research principle these guys are hiding behind. From my own perspective and using my own personal experience as a flimsical authority in this matter, i think these guys are not only stretching, but also attention seeking.

sethisjimmy:
Not only does this study not prove that violent video games make people commit more violence, but it also does not prove that violent video games even make people more aggressive. Unless you consider writing violent stories correlates into you being an aggressive person, which I think is silly.

Thank you, I'm always effected in my writing by any media I've recently consumed. It is part of the reason why when I sit down to write a particular Genre I put myself on a genre ban of that particular genre.

I don't want my work to seem overly derivative or be overly influenced by other media in that genre. So say I'm writing a fantasy story, I don't play any fantasy games, watch any fantasy movies etc. Because if I do elements of them will find their way into my writing and it will greatly distract me and generally stop my flow.

Farther than stars:

DrOswald:

Farther than stars:

My point is that if there are a million studies out there that suggest the same link, they're a lot less garbage than any unscientifically founded arguments, because they have an academic community backing them up.

And my point is that a million points of data that were each obtained through faulty experiments will lead to an incorrect conclusion. Bad data is bad and should be thrown out. Having a great deal of bad data does not somehow make it good data.

No, but the fact that there are large quantities of data means that the accumulative chances of it being faulty fall under the fault margin. Or is scientific consensus something that's now on trial here?

This is exactly what I was talking about when I said that having a large amount of bad data does not make it good data.

Imagine that 10,000 different experiments are performed. The objective of these experiments are to determine which value is larger: A or B. 9900 of the experiments come to the conclusion that A is larger than B, while only 100 of the experiments state that B is the greater value.

According to your logic the 9900 experiments are more likely to be true, and this is the important part, even if many or most of them can be proven to be experimentally unsound. Simply because there are more of them.

Moving on. After the 10000 experiments are performed and we check the methodology of each, it turns out that 99% of the results favoring A were based on faulty experiments, while only 1% of the results favoring B were based on faulty experiments. This means that there were only 198 valid experiments, with 99 results in favor of A being larger and 99 results in favor of B being larger.

While this is an extreme example, it demonstrates that faulty data (data obtained through flawed experiments) should be ignored entirely. They should have no bearing on our conclusion at all. Valid conclusions can only be drawn from good data, and a valid scientific consensus can only be reached using good data.

Which means that if this is indeed a garbage study, then it should put in the list of experiment to be ignored entirely. It does not matter if that list has 5 items or 1,000,000 items. All of them should be ignored completely.

They must have a TARDIS to be able to see "Long term effects" in a three day span.

Honestly.. what a bunch of rubbish, you can't test the long term effects of ANYTHING in a short period of time, that's completely against the definition of LONG TERM

*looks at captcha*

I'm Batman? well that's one way to calm me down after getting slightly worked up haha

It didn't accept my answer of "This city's full of people, WILLING TO BELIEVE IN GOOD"
I'm sad now.

medv4380:

Aureliano:
Brilliant! So that's why violent crime has been on the rise for the last 20 years--Oh, er, wait. Sorry. Apparently violent crime has been on a massive decline since the early '90s. Huh. That one period of time where people have been playing craploads more video games than ever before.

Anyway, there definitely couldn't be an inverse relationship between people getting out their rage fake murdering people and the rate of frustrated people getting guns and regular murdering people. That would be silly.

You have a point but you're missing some data. Things that affect violent crime in youth typically take 20 years for it to be seen in statistics. The book Freakanomics has a good argument that shows the logic behind it. So if you use Mortal Kombat as the start of Violent video games then there should have been an uptick in violence in 2011. And since games only got more violent you'd expect the next 10 years to have a substantial increase in Violent Crime. However, we're still in a decrease in violent crime.

This. I feel like this study made a few leaps in conclusions without fully testing them. Either way, I have yet to kill or want to kill anyone, so *shrugs* I don't know.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here