Violence in Video Games Debate Continues to Rage

ubermiester writes "The Washington Post is reporting on a newly released study by the American Psychological Association, claiming that 'exposure to violence in video games increases aggressive thoughts, aggressive behavior and angry feelings among youth.' This partly contradicts another study released a week before by a University of Illinois Professor claiming that 'game violence does not prompt players to project violent tendencies into real life.'"

Comments

How about a study on the parents?

[bobsacks]

How about someone does a study on the parents of the kids who commit crimes that are supposedly caused by video games. I bet you would get some conclusive results from that one.

Re:How about a study on the parents?

[Crixus]

How about a general study on family environments?

  I used to be a very angry person, but due to an unusual epiphany 3 years ago, I've learned to deal with it. But what this experience taught me is that there are a LOT of angry people in this country.

    I think a better study would try to get to the bottom of that. I saw a film that touched on this topic briefly a year or two ago, but didn't delve deeply enough.

    That being said however:

    Angry people are going to commit acts of violence whether there are video games or not.

    This sounds like another time when we're treating the symptom, and not the disease.

Stats.

[Shky]

A further study, released some time ago, suggests that there are "Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

"Save our Children"

[MosesJones]

Back in the "old days" it was the Waltz, then there was the Tango, the Charleston and then...

1950s OH MY GOD THE WORLD IS OVER, Rock and Roll... our children are being corrupted
1960s OH MY GOD, ELVIS is such a good boy, but those BEATLES
1970s TV is KILLING my Children
1980s HORROR MOVIES are KILLING my Children
1990s NIVARNA are forcing Children to top themselves

And of course now its Video Games which are forcing Children into a life of violence.

This is just another great "Aunt Sally" for politicians and "academics" to debate and get money from. If it wasn't this they'd be battering on at Cartoons for glorifying violence (there is nothing in Doom III worse than the violence of Tom and Jerry or Roadrunner). The young are ALWAYS being corrupted in the minds of the elders, and what corrupted them in their youth is now seen as innocent.

And have you noticed... its always the over 40s who start wars... something must be making them do it.... I blame mugs of hot chocolate.

And lets not forget when Marge banned "Itchy and Scratchy"

Re:Yes, they keep saying this.

[Sycraft-fu]

True, but you are commiting even a worse scientific error, trying to use that to prove the negative.

The theory was that violent video games lead youth to be more violent. Ok, fine, now generally the first step when trying to support a theory is to find stastical evidence, generally a correlation. So we know that video games are getting more popular, and that there are more graphic ones available. This is a simple stastical matter. Thus, if there was a causal link between kids playing these violent video games and being more violent, we'd expect to see an increase in youth violent crime.

Well we don't, in fact we see the opposite trend. Well guess what? If you can't even find a weak correlation to support your theory, your theory is probably wrong. This isn't proof positive it's wrong, of course, but it's a serious blow. If the games cause children to be more violent, why don't we see the stastical effect of it?

Remember: Generally the first step is to show a correlation, then you go on to perform more robust tests to prove causation. If there's not a correlation, then you are probably not going to find what you are looking for. To say that X causes Y when there's not even an indication that X and Y are related is taking a long step on a thin limb.