Slashdot Mirror
Games Lead To Violence and Drugs?
A joint University of California, SFO/University of Pittsburgh study has been released which finds "playing violent videogames can lead young men to believe it is acceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol", Gamasutra reports. Reuters is also carrying the story, with some information about methodology available in that piece. From the article: "Brady and Matthews had a group of 100 male undergraduates aged 18 to 21 play either Grand Theft Auto III or The Simpsons: Hit and Run. In the Simpsons game, players took the role of Homer Simpson and their task was to deliver daughter Lisa's science project to school before it could be marked late. In Grand Theft Auto III, players took the role of a criminal, and were instructed by the Mafia to beat up a drug dealer with a baseball bat."
smells like a hidden agenda...to JESUS!!
I have a feeling that it's probably the other way around: people who don't like drinking and marijuana in real life probably will be less likely to play GTA.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
and play Kirbys Avalanche. OH NOES, puzzle games lead to selling yourself for smack. Totally.
"Something's wrong with you...and I hope we never do meet again." - Deftones When Girls Telephone Boys
correlation != causation
Someone please mod this article +5 flamebait.
How many "studies" are we going to read on this? How often are we getting told "games make you violent"? How often are we going to say "bullshit"?
It doesn't accumulate more truth by saying it more often. Games make you as violent as D&D did in the 80s, TV did in the 60s, radio did in the 30s and books did before that. It's the same "old generation who don't know jack about X blames it for the problems created by the way people are" shit we've been seeing for centuries now.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Ahem, I would like to testify that I have played GTA and other violent video games.
I do not believe it to be legal (in the US. This anwser is subject to change in other countries.) or responsible for teenagers (like me) to use marijuana or alcohol.
Finaly I would like to add that I understand a datum does not a study make and that correlation!=causation.
If this signature is witty enough, maybe somebody will like me.
This is a very small trial -- only 50 people in each group. I wonder how significant the results are, and if they would still exist in a larger trial (my guess is most of the effects would disappear). While I can certainly believe blood pressure increases and other physiological effects, I'm very skeptical that a short time playing a violent videogame would somehow change your attitude towards marijuana.
It's not impossible, of course, I just want to see the results validated in a larger trial. At the very least I want to see the numbers from this trial -- I suspect that the effects are very small and just on the edge of statistical significance.
ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
If you read the link about their methodology, it becomes clear that the study is crap. According to Reuters:
"Regardless of whether they grew up in a violent environment, the researchers found, young men who had played the violent game were less cooperative and more competitive in completing an assigned task with another person, compared to those who played the Simpsons game. They were also more likely to have permissive attitudes toward alcohol and marijuana use."
How exactly does one get from "have a more permissive attitude" to "more likely to use drugs/drink"? Fucks sake, I've got a completely permissive attitude to other people's bad habits, but that doesn't mean I'd like to share them. If you spun this study the other way, it'd be saying "gamers more permissive, less likely to force their views on other people".
Either the study itself is politically funded crap, or the spin being put on it is.
Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
Adventure turned me into the depraved shell of a man that I am today. But the colors...
I started with nothing and have most of it left.
can lead young men to believe it is acceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol"
I thought it was acceptable long before I first played Doom back in the day.
Trolling is a art,
They asked college guys if they liked drugs and alcohol after playing GTA?
They probably liked them before GTA!
Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
It amazes me that any news group or individual is willing to place the equivalent of 'blind faith' in these purported studies. How were the test subjects selected? Was there a control group? Do young men in general believe that it is OK to smoke marajuana and drink alcohol? Was the study designed to prove this particular outcome, or did it stumble upon this while 100 guys were playing GTA? Anyone who knows anything about statistics can see that information in such studies is warped or misrepresented in an attempt to prove/disprove some widely contended POV (i.e. video games made me do it). The only reason this study is "controversial": there is no scientific blueprint listed for this study. Take any new statistics with a grain of salt... everyone has an agenda.
"Bad times have a scientific value. These are occasions a good learner would not miss." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
I can remember many a chilled out evening at college smoking a joint and playing DKC - especially the underwater levels that game was well trippy!
...comic books, the Waltz (no kidding, look it up!) and Rock & Roll.
Left 4 Dead Gaming Group - http://www.l4dgg.com
Effects of Media Violence on Health-Related Outcomes Among Young Men
Sonya S. Brady, PhD; Karen A. Matthews, PhD
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160:341-347.
Objective To test the effects of media violence exposure on blood pressure, negative affect, hostile social information processing, uncooperative behavior, and attitudes toward health risk behaviors among young men varying in lifetime violence exposure within the home and community.
Design Experimental laboratory study.
Setting University campus situated within an urban environment.
Participants One hundred male undergraduates aged 18 to 21 years.
Intervention Men who had previously reported differing amounts of lifetime home and community violence were randomly assigned to play The Simpsons: Hit and Run (low-violence condition) or Grand Theft Auto III (high-violence condition).
Main Outcome Measures Systolic and diastolic blood pressure; negative affect; hostile social information processing; uncooperative behavior; and permissive attitudes toward violence, alcohol use, marijuana use, and sexual activity without condom use.
Results Men randomly assigned to play Grand Theft Auto III exhibited greater increases in diastolic blood pressure from a baseline rest period to game play, greater negative affect, more permissive attitudes toward using alcohol and marijuana, and more uncooperative behavior in comparison with men randomly assigned to play The Simpsons. Only among participants with greater exposure to home and community violence, play of Grand Theft Auto III led to elevated systolic blood pressure in comparison with play of The Simpsons (mean, 13 vs 5 mm Hg).
Conclusions Media violence exposure may play a role in the development of negative attitudes and behaviors related to health. Although youth growing up in violent homes and communities may become more physiologically aroused by media violence exposure, all youth appear to be at risk for potentially negative outcomes.
Author Affiliations: University of Pittsburgh (Drs Brady and Matthews), Pittsburgh, Pa. Dr Brady is now a postdoctoral fellow in the Health Psychology Program at the University of California, San Francisco.
First the violence arrives as I die yet again at the end of level. I get so mad I smash my console. Then the drugs as I consume copious amounts of alcohol to forget that I just smashed my gaming system. I buy a replacement and the vicious cycle starts all over again. "Hello, my name is B|nky and I am an addict." :(
Well I knida agree with this. Think back with the NES. Super Mario brothers. You play and italian plumber who eats mushrooms to save the princess. HELLO. I mean come on.
My parents don't smoke and do not drink. All of my relatives do. Alcoholism runs in the family. Neither my sister nor I drink. I have never been drunk. I am 23 years old.
I play MANY hours of violent video games. I love GTA 3 and getting drunk in games like WoW. But back in the real world, I never do either of this. Why? Because of the influence my parents had on me. By setting them selves as a role model that didn't promote drinking, I was never even tempted to do it.
Many things can influence people in our lives.. But it's the parents job to be the counter balance to these distractions.
It does work.
If only we never invented video games, teenagers would have never gotten interested in rebelling.
"when life gets complicated, I like to take a nap in a tree and wait for dinner" - Hobbes.
believe it is acceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol
It is acceptable to drink alcohol, in fact if you're old enough, you can even purchase it! Or did I wake up in 1920?
Here's a more NPOV to put the study's findings: "A joint University of California, SFO/University of Pittsburgh study has been released which finds those who play video games are statistically more likely to be socially liberal."
"playing violent videogames can lead young men to believe it is acceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol"
If this also works on older men, I'd be willing to give my copy of GTA3 to a Senator or Representative in the hopes that it would change their minds about smoking marijuana and drinking alcohol, to make it legally acceptable.
It's the use of alcohol and marijuana that leads to the use of violent video games.
Not only that, but political decision makers will then get tons of complaints from these parents...look to these studies to pull some numbers from to make their arguments...and pass legislation that is unjust, asinine, and just plain ignorant.
Also thought I'd include a nice analysis of this "study" that tears it apart. Read it here.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
[P]laying violent videogames can lead young men to believe it is acceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol.
What the hell? Are they saying it isn't?? What else am I supposed to with my evenings?
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
Is the fact that these "kids" play GTA because they are already inclined to activities that are illegal in their legal system OR does the game make them inclined?
Simply put, do violent games make people aggresive OR do aggresive people play violent games.
The problem is that "violent game" is such a vague term. Almost all games are violent but 99% of the time you are the good guy fighting the legions of evil.
GTA San Andreas has you drowning a rapper and his girlfriend because your mate didn't get his rap accepted.
What is worse, I even seen a GTA fan applaud the game for giving you a more clearcut hero. Right, massmurder because some untalented prick is upset about being rejected is a rolemodel.
If you then tell me that violent nutters play GTA and GTA makes violent nutters I can see how you could reach that conclusion.
Most people probably play the game the same way as they watch a over the top hong kong violent movie. They know it is totally fake mindless entertainment with no basis in real life.
Then again there are always a few who can't seperate real life from fiction. Who think that what happens in movies, books and games is real or at least a rolemodel for real life.
Take the movie "fight club". Some see it as a fun movie, some see it as the best of movies but some see it as a good idea.
But is it the movie that made them that way OR is it just an outlet?
Frankly I don't know. The "easiest" and favored by slashdot is that it is unrelated. I think at minimum you could diagnose a violent person by the amount of violent media they consume.
The media loves to claim the other extreme that violent games make a non-violent person violent.
The truth may be the horrible notion that violent games or movies or books are the catalyst for violent behaviour. Not so much creating violent people but setting them off. Pushing them just over the edge.
But what can we do? We can offcourse ban violent products but where do you draw the line? You can bet that the moment you agree a line must be drawn you will then be constantly fighting a battle over where to draw it with constant pressure to ban more and more.
Perhaps what is needed is the far more difficult answer. That we accept that some people just don't "fit" and either need to be removed from this world (death/lockup) OR be "cured" to "fit".
I am currently doing work wich takes me out on the streets a lot and into contact with people at their houses. There are a lot of nutters about. People unable to cope with the world as it is. Some turn in on themselves and eventually are discovered as a rotting corpse in tons of filth (and I mean tons, metric) OR they turn violent and sooner or later are arrested, locked up for a short time and then released again only to get worse.
The last couple of decades the western world by and large has been scrimping and saving on social care while the pressures of living in the west have only increased. From my current work I really get the idea that things have been pushed to far and that we are sitting on a timebomb of mentally unstable people who just can't cope with live.
Does a mentally unstable person unable to control his temper living in a society unwilling to correct him with a firm hand REALLY need to play a video game that glorifies uncontrolled meaningless violence?
No the game did not make that person that way. We did. But you can't tell me that a game like GTA is helping.
Offcourse if you accept what I say as true then there is a problem. The solution is gonna cost lots of money (tax payers money) and doesn't have a handy scapegoat (well the taxpayer who preffered to get meaningless taxcutts over providing aid to mentally unstable people).
Far easier just to cry "GTA makes killers" and for the gamers to cry "no it doesn't". No massive social aid needed to get unstable people readjusted. Just good headlines that sell ads while the timebomb i
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Shouldn't it be correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation?
Because correlation != causation would mean correlation does not equal causation, which may or may not be true.
Or am I wrong?
I played F-Zero on some very good acid once - does this count?
It's true. It's been proven again and again that reading the Bible makes people violent, so uncontrollably violent in fact that they'll set bombs in women's health clinics, blow up federal buildings, hang minorities from trees, invade foreign countries and start bloody wars full of rape and pillage.
Oh but we haven't found a way to use video games to make people fuck each other over for a percentage so it's the video games that are evil.
Actually, while I'm on one of my favourite subjects (drugs and video games) who was it that said "If video games really influenced the youth then after Pac Man we would all have been running round in darkened rooms munching pills and listening to repetitive music". Genius.
I could argue that "Video games lead to better parenting" as those who played the Simpson's game instead were very interested in ensuring Lisa was able to turn her homework in on time.
Umm, so what I don't get is, how is this a bad thing? None of these things mentioned, alcohol use, marihuana or sex without a condom are a problem when used in an informed, smart way.
I don't get it.
That is like saying, reading href="http://www.intowine.com/">In to Wine causes people to want to use alcohol.
I mean come on!
Some say he is made with ascii, others that he is eyeballed daily by millions. All we know is, he is known as the Sig
The abstract makes me think this was a poorly conducted study. Where's the control group that played no games? What if playing games reduces these thoughts in a way that varies based on the game? You could also have gotten this result by baselining the attitudes of the subjects before the experiment, but then you also might have lost all the interesting quotes like "Media violence exposure may play a role in the development of negative attitudes and behaviors related to health."
They did find that blood pressure tends to go up while playing games. In addition, those with exposure to home and community violence had a more sigificant blood pressure change with the violent game than with the other game. I think they might have just verified post-traumatic stress disorder.
Obligatory quote: "If Pacman had affected us as kids we'd be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music."
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
The results of a related study:
Doing stupid studies can lead young men to believe it is unacceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol.
Of course, it is no good idea to drink/smoke too much or to do it and drive afterwards, but as long as it happens within acceptable limits, I see no problem.
...can lead young men to believe it is acceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol
:)
:)
But it is acceptable! Nothing wrong with either of those activities, as long as you do so responsibly
Besides that... aren't those 2 activities (and playing video games) the primary activities for most college-aged males? Sure was when I was in college
Place sig here.
Or at least the summary. This isn't a study where the gathered some people who like GTA and people who don't and compared the two groups' behavior. Half the sample group was RANDOMLY ASSIGNED to play GTA, the other half to play the Simpsons game. If the GTA crowd acted more violent and drug-friendly after some time played, then I really don't see how correlation WOULDN'T indicate causation in this case. Unless they randomly selected the GTA players with a beer bong or something.
If you're gonna criticize this study, I'd aim for the small sample size and their extrapolations from the data recorded. The correlation/causation point is moot here.
I've seen a lot more people that would sit around, get high, and then sit their lazy asses around and say something to the extent of
P1: What do you wanna do
P2: I dunno
P1: Wanna go out somewhere
P2: Nah, I'm comfortable
P1: Wanna watch some TV and play videogames
P2: Yeah sure, that's cool
So with their lazy asses is parked on the couch, smoking a roach, they play games. Note that the roach was there before the games, and the games are a by-product of their lack of willpower to move their sodden butts.
I've seen more people decide to play a game while stoned than suddenly interrupt the game for a few puffs of the bowl.
I would bet my next paycheck that a good, solid study could find a correlation that watching daytime soaps and prime-time drama leads people in their 20's and 30's to getting the idea that infidelity is normal and then proceeding to emulate their TV drama stars and be unfaithful themselves. Gee -- there's a shocker.
Yet, do you see the Family Values people lobbying daytime television producers to clean up their shows? It probably would help imrpove the state of the American family if we weren't bombarded by perfectly beautiful, young, cheating couples on 95% of the programs being shown. But mo, they'd never attack an entrenched mainstream form of entertainmens. Ditto movies (except if it's wildly successful and has gay cowboys, then they'll attack it). Or how about the violence of professional sports? Isn't Superbowl Sunday reportedly one of the worst days of the year when it comes to wife abuse?
Such double standards.
I think regulation of expression is a last-resort option. People are free to take their own actions, for better or for worse. I however think that we should address all forms of entertainment with a similar statndard. Well, except for porn -- that's a slightly different can of worms.
Method of processing duck feet
I dont need a video game to tell me its ok to drink alcohol and smoke marijuana... I would think that most college aged people (18-21) also dont need a video game to tell them its ok to smoke and drink...
i guess DARE was wrong... its not the need to be accepted by your peers that drive one to drugs and alcohol, its ones need for their XBox to love them back.
the xbox commands me!
-Boycot shampoo! demand real poo!
Forget GTA3, Heck I've been eating every leaf I find to fly since SMB3! I'm also highly violent to flying turtles and fire spiting plants. Now excuse me while I watch a harmless episode of Sopranos...
i blame the rise in drug use and lawlessness on the teletubbies. have you ever SEEN the baby-faced sun? if that's not a drug-inspired and -inspiring image, i don't know what is.
as an aside, claiming that GTA:SA encourages drug use is silly. everyone knows GTA:SA encourages wreckless driving, beating hookers, assassination, and theft.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
As a child of the '70s I found that drugs lead to gaming so there! =)
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
I checked first to make sure - nothing worse than a redundant post.
Oh come on, can anyone here say with any honestly that they've never smoked a bowl and went for a cruise Los Santos? Video games and weed go hand in hand like "white on rice". Now get out there OG and bust some caps! =)
Thanks, Tetris.
All scientific studies are observing something. What, exactly do you mean by "Observational Study" and how does it relate to circumstantial evidence.
So, they say "playing violent videogames can lead young men to believe it is acceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol."
Let me rewrite this: "playing violent videogames can lead young men to believe that the government does not have the right to forbid you from consuming mild mind-altering substances, as long as your actions do not harm others' lives."
Sounds pretty good to me.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Yo! GTA: SA is crazy wack! It's jus' a game yo. I be like playin' the mother f***er like every f***ing day and it ain't change me. I'm keepin' it real b**ch!
I still goes out and slap da b**ches and smack dem h**s! I be like makin' crazy bejamins! I'm the real OG Playa! So, if you ain't down, then you need to step off mother f***er!!!!
Peace out!
How well did the scientists do at establishing the people's beliefs pre-game. The people may be more guarded in revealing their true feelings before game than after they've played. There's the whole notion of "acceptable" What I feel is acceptable and what I percieve various elements of society are two different things.
Which games I have just got done playing would affect which thoughts are foremost in my mind, and thus which interpretation of my beliefs I would share.
Also, the more time I spend with other people the more my answer to what is "acceptable" becomes colored with my personal ideas as to what is acceptable and less what I think various elements of society deem acceptable.
Lastly, after playing a given game for a study, my perceptions of what the element of society the study givers are from is colored by the game and my answer to what is "acceptable" would be skewed towards what I want people of that element of society to hear.
Well, I think the group size is really too small, and thus trying to measure changes in sex and drugs habits for such a small population is pretty ridiculous, but they did choose an interesting comparison in games.
In a study like this, it's really difficult to avoid comparing apples and oranges. And really, the only way I can think of doing that is to compare a violent game and one of those made-for-Walmart special versions of the game, which I don't even know exist anymore. However, Gamespot's review of The Simpsons: Hit & Run mentions that the game's pretty much a cartoon, less violent GTA, so I've definitely seen worse comparisons when videogames are involved.
That being said, their measurements are still pretty crappy. Homer drinks tons of beer, whether characters in GTA games use condoms or not isn't really explicit, and there are times in Tetris where I'm sure my blood pressure would be higher than in either of these two games...
"Games Lead To Violence and Drugs?"
Hey! I'm not violent!
Young men weren't drinking and smoking weed before videogames were invented!
From the article and abstract, the study takes a few things like
1. Being exposed to images of violence *temporarily* increases blood pressure, competitiveness, and paranoia, i.e. things they knew would happen *before* the study was conducted.
2. Concludes that violent video games cause violence in real life, fosters drug use, and brings general anarchy.
2 clearly does not follow from 1. 1 is a natural and healthy response to danger... 1 is adrenaline and is something they should take pains to *factor our* of their study to make it anything more than pseudo science. I would like to know, for one, how long *after* playing video games they waited before gathering behavioral data, but I didn't see that anywhere in the article and abstract.
The only meaningful conclusions about video game's effect on violence would have to be discovered by paying some people (who would not otherwise) play violent video games over a long period of several years, then seeing if they had increased criminal activity over a control group. This would be a more expensive study... but frankly, people like this who aren't willing to do real science, shouldn't be doing science at all.
Furthermore, it is a widely held belief among the elderly in our culture is the belief that drug use and violence is up in the current generation. This is a belief which is, of course, patently false, and has more grounding in pre-enlightenment religious that the world is in a constant state of rot and decay than actual fact.
In actuality, violent crime is down *quite a lot* over the part few decades. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm
People will sometimes quote you "crime is up 1 million percent from 1960 to 1991" or whatever, but you have to ask yourself, why did they pick those particular years, and are they talking about *violent crime* or are they talking about things like *speeding tickets*, and violations of various nanny laws that have been passed recently... It is quite easy to distort the figures, but murder is most definitely *way down*.
Drug arrests do appear to be up... since we started the war on drugs and started arresting people in large numbers. A better question about drugs is, are they actually in wider use now then before? It was pretty hard for me to actually dig up that information... there's a lot of shock numbers out there about drug *arrents* (a number that raises and lowers with *enforcement* more than *use*) but info about how drug *use* is something that people don't always put out there.
http://oas.samhsa.gov/NHSDA/BabyBoom/chapter2.htm
This data seems do indicate that marijuana use peaked in 1978 and never got as high again (haha, little pun). The survey data doesn't seem to have all of the 90s in it though, and I think I've seen some other data that said that drug use may have gone up some during that time frame... alhough I'm not sure how much. Anecdotal experience suggests that programs like DARE were pretty effective. Actually and honestly telling people what kind of health side effects various drugs have, has been shown to be pretty effective. Most people are not self destructive. Policies of making claims about the connection between drug use and crime (essentially telling people they will become felons if they start smoking pot) have not been so effective, as people generally consider themselves in control of their own actions.
Also, I suspect the large numbers of arrests have been mostly a public relations maneuver by the government, and has done little to decrease drug use. I suppose it may have increased the street price of various drugs (would anyone with knowledge care to comment?), but I wonder if it's really worked as a deterrent to users?
Anyway, when people make claims about crime, drug use, and terrorism, always consider the source and look at the data for *yourself*. There are a lot of people in this country who imagine
It is important that we continue to research things such as this, and many other things that tell us more about human nature, using proper scientific methodology. We should not be afraid of the results if they are unbiased, accurate, reproducible, and properly reported without sensationalism in a peer-reviewed journal.
/actual/ paper, and make their own judgment. Any media article without reference to the actual study, with at least some clue of where it was published such that it can be looked up is immediately dismissed by me when I see it.
The problem in the recent months and years is the media taking snippets of different (often unpublished) studies, and sensationalizing them with headlines, and writing up articles based on assumptions and hearsay to draw public ire, and sell papers.
Anyone with any common sense and an understanding of the purpose of and methods of scientific research studies will look at these articles, and then go look up the
The rest is just hype. Next it will be "Video Games Make Kids Into Terrorists!". It's all just journalistic tactics we've seen for the past couple hundred years on any topic that makes people nervous.
If playing violent video games made people violent, with the sheer amount of video games being sold around the world. wouldn't there are *a lot* more violent crime?
Essentially, the state of the world is a rather large counter-example to this so-called conclusion.
If you read the original paper, participants played for 10 minutes and immediately filled out a questionnaire, rating how bad they thought marijuana and alcohol were towards their health. Participants who played GTA for 10 minutes didn't think smoking marijuana or drinking alcohol were as bad for you as participants who played the Simpsons game.
Is this phenomena unique to video games, or are other media outlets (*cough*television*cough*hollywood*cough*) being ignored to focus on "Satan's Own?"
How do we not know that the group who played GTA has fairly 'normal' responses, but that the group who played Simpsons: Hit and Run actually had their emotions and attitudes calmed as a result of playing the game?
Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
Anyone that has played through San Andreas can tell you that crack is bad for you. That's the basis of the games entire story.
I don't think it's made me more violent, but Duke Nukem Forever has certainly made me procrastinate more.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
there actually exists some people in college who believe it is unacceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol.
What an amazing discovery? This is Nobel prize material, no doubt.
Screw cancer, let's work on the evil video game industry.
How does beating up a drug dealer in a game cause people to use drugs? Wouldn't that, if anything, cause people to go around beating up drug dealers?
So... umm... Exercise leads to violence and risky behavior?
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
Well, for a short time it might. Or, to be more precise, if you were calmly sitting on a couch for a bit, and somebody asked you about some risky behaviour, you'd be more likely to examine the issue than if you'd just be jogging for awhile.
So, as I said in an earlier post... Exercise leads to violence & risky behaviours!
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
The violence and drugs part is good and all, but I really wish my l33t skillz would get me the l8dez. :-(
I go to college with a bunch of non-gamers who think it's ok to smoke pot and drink alcohol!
This sig is false.
If they could only connect video games to pedophilia, they'd have the trifecta.
Zero tolerance equals zero intelligence
There were two questions these "researchers" forgot to look into before jumping to their conclusion:
1) What were the numbers looking like about two hours after the kids finished playing their games? Were the effects of playing GTA 3 simply temporary, meaning that playing this game is likely not the cause of kids going on murderous, drug-induced rampages and the like?
2) How do the effects of playing GTA compare with the effects of watching the violence on the evening news? If I'm correct in my assumption, I'd love to see the Fox news-loving, anti-video game lobby try to explain why the numbers are so similar.
And, by the way, how do you measure the effect of playing GTA 3 on condom use during sex, as the abstract claimed they did? I mean, does it go something like: "Now that you've played GTA 3, do you want to f*ck a whore without protection?"
"I just played a comedy game featuring drug dealers! It was fun! Drug dealers are fun! I've got nothing against drug dealers, I guess drugs are OK."
Yeah, this study needs more work, i.e. testing several different violent and non-violent games, plus not playing at all. Plus, they note the physiological effects - could it simply be that adrenaline makes you more permissive? Sounds odd, but who knows.
Sometimes you've gotta' burn a bitch out her crib?
Or beat a fucking Hollywood pacifist drug-running sonofabitch with a ball-bat.
Or slide the entire godam Hayward fault off into the Pacific Ocean.
Or secure the border and make all the Mexican and Columbia drug cartels go through Canada to get their drugs into New York and Hollywood, thus giving those fucking Canadian pussies a taste of Real Life.
There's lots of games that need playing. GTA is just one of those "in between" games...
How many "studies" are we going to read on this? How often are we getting told "games make you violent"? How often are we going to say "bullshit"?
What evidence do you need? Is there no experimental test that could convince you?
How is your counterargument any different from people sitting around saying "Global warming? Who cares about the science, it's bullshit!" or "Evolution? No way, only idiots believe in that crap!"
Is there nothing that could possibly get through to you and make you consider that your preconception just might be wrong?
If you want to disagree with the methods of the study, go right ahead. But you should judge it based on its scientific merits, not on whether you happen to already disagree with its conclusion!
Shall we ban the book along with the video game?
Perhaps the movie should be first?
The world will not get better through technology. We must seek to be better people.
Perhaps the correlation here is not that gaming leads to teenagers thinking marijuana and alcohol use is ok but that those teenagers who think marijuana and alcohol use is ok tend to be gamers/like playing video games.
As per the violence issue, it's utter rubbish.
These meaningless debates/theories will continue ad nauseum until someone can completely explain why people do everything they do. In order to do that, you will have to take into account how their brain works, the individual experiences of the person in question and completely understand/explain the psyche.
Let's just be honest and admit that we can't explain why some people do some of the things they do. And when/if we ever can, it most likely won't be one single cause.
For instance, last night I smoked a joint, killed a hooker, shot a dozen cops, stole cars from people driving the motorway. Real life GTA all the way!
Morons.
Yessir, I done fooked dem hoors, aye, maybe capped some nigga, soma spigga, maybe a Whitey too. "Two?" "As in T-W-O-, numero Deuco, sic 2 mofo." "Well, aside from all this hoor-rah, all this ballyhoo, how do you feel?" "Bally-hoo your fucking ass." "Come now, Billy, we can hardly communicate if you regress into gangsta chat." "Chat me, ass-muncher rough-golf south-rider; chat me up, motherfucker." "The references escape me, but the hostility, young man, is entirely uncalled-for." "You're just a fuck who hasn't fucked yet." Before the old man could ever consider Billy's words - and indeed, how accuare they were - he was suddenly concerned with a 3" blade stabbed into his aortic regiona. You try to help. Do your best. Singular intentions Dwindle Under the bloodflow. I guess The point is We don't want any psycho-genius fucks on the Open Source road.
"believe it is acceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol"
Since when was it not acceptable to drink alcohol?? OK - I know they're a bit funny about it in the states but here in the UK it's hard to walk down a street without seeing a pub or 2.
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. - Douglas Adams
.. it *is* acceptable to drink alcohol and smoke marijuana.
> ... believe it is acceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol
Drinking alcohol is acceptable in most social groups, and smoking cannabis is acceptable in lots of social groups.
Surely these activities being acceptable, and often expected, is more likely to be the cause than some game. Not drinking has quite a social stigma, and people frequently try to convince non-drinkers to drink.
Everyone knows video games lead to behavior in real life.
Microsoft Flight Simulator made me get my pilot's license.
Sim City drove me to get a master's in urban planning.
Civ II inspired me to travel back in time to the dawn of man and take control of a group of wandering settlers, start a city, and grow my civilization through thousands of years.
Oh yeah, and the Grand Theft Auto series reminds me to lock my doors when driving my car.
The Internet is generally stupid
I'm sure it has the "potential" to cause it to happen when there are many extenuating factors. Factors such as parents who pay no attention, depression, a myriad of other mental problems etc., etc. However, even with that, how do you gauge how messed up a person has to be for something like a video game to affect you so openly? You would not only have to be depressed and mentally sick but you would also have to be socially isolated so that you have no idea how social interactions work and don't get to experience living in the real world whatsoever. All jokes about Slashdotters aside, it would have to be much worse than your average or geeky teenager. Let's also not forget that they are doing this test on 18-20 yr olds. At this age, the brain is more set and more unlikely to react to something such as a video game trying to change it.
Since when has it been unacceptable for young men to "smoke marijuana and drink alcohol"?
...It's called having a life (my apologies to most here then :) ).
How many young men have actually never smoked marijuana and drunken alcohol before?
My father (who is always reminding me of the dangers of abusing these two substances) admits it was the same when he was young also.
The relgious conservatives need to jump forward several hundred years, get with the times and realise America isn't a few colonies full of relgious wackos anymore.
Well, this certainly explains why teenage gamers are losing interest in playing games. Another Slashdot mystery solved!
"A joint University of California, SFO/University of Pittsburgh study has been released which finds"
:)
Wait, wait, you lost me at "joint." What?!? you don't actually have a joint, well fuck you then I'll kill you!
Poor choice of wording? Subliminal message? You decide
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
It made me reconsider. Now I'm actually angry at my parents.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
Since when do teenagers need encouragement to procure and consume alcohol and marijuana? I'm sure the same study could be used to link video games to mood swings, dancing, and chronic masturbation.
and the third group staring at a blank screen - let me guess their blood pressure was the lowest of all the groups....ffs
I've played both games - one I found exciting, one I didn't. Nothing really to do with the content. I'm sure if they'd given another group DanceDanceRevolution they'd have pegged J-Pop as a greater threat to the US way of life than GTA.
Ah well - no point banging on about this here - I know I'm amongst friends.
I actually performed an experiment like this for an undergrad psych stats project. We used different types of video games, Puzzle oriented (tetris), physically oriented (DDR), and an FPS (halo). We used the BDHI (buss-durkee hostility inventory) to get a baseline score. We then subjected the control group (tetris) to their treatment, and the other two groups to theirs. The end result? Nothing significant. Standard deviations were all over the place and it all ended up meaning rubbish. I got a C on that project.
It seems funny that correlations between games and violence seem to pop up all over, but when you actually use a true experiment they seem to dissapear.
...portraying men as beer-drinking sports maniacs are encouraging that type of behavior as well... Movies reduce our sensitivity to violence... Running lab tests on rats causes cancer... You get the idea.
I prefer to smoke a spliff before playing a game like GTA. Does that suggest that for some, the converse of the study is true. ie: smoking marijuana leads to violent video games?
-Turkey
> It doesn't accumulate more truth by saying it more often. Games make you as violent as D&D did
> in the 80s, TV did in the 60s, radio did in the 30s and books did before that.
It's not that simple.
While I don't believe that video games make people more violent, human-motion visual stimuli like video games and TV are indeed qualitatively different from things like D&D, rock music, or radio. Human brains have what are known as "mirror neurons", which essentially allow us to recognize actions that other people are performing. The key is that we do this in large part by triggering the brain activity that would be required to perform those actions ourselves. If we see someone pick up an apple, for example, our brain fires much the same neurons as would be required to pick up the apple ourselves, although the action is suppressed. Basically, we can rapidly and accurately figure out what other people are doing because we simulate it internally.
The problem, then, is watching a human being violent triggers the neural pathways that would be used by performing those violent actions ourselves. Watching lots of human violence on TV or in movies or games will tend to stimulate these circuits much more than would occur otherwise. The argument, then, is that since neural pathways can be strengthened by repeeated use, watching violence leads to more-entrenched pathways for performing violence leads to greater likelihood for actually being violent.
Based on the anecdotal evidence of myself and my friends, I don't believe this hypothesis is correct, and I don't believe that there is a causative relation between adults watching humans being violent and being violent themselves. The hypothesis is not completely nonsensical, though, due to the manner in which human brains are believed to function.
That we have strong opinions on a question should not make us attack those who honestly try to gather data on that question, and that many people spread FUD on this topic does not mean that all people who disagree with us are doing so.
(quote by Aaron Sorkin, The West Wing (1999))
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
It IS acceptable to smoke marijuana and drink alcohol in this and many modernized societies. It's of course how you conduct yourself on these substances that leads to judgement. And for a study to claim that videogames cause affect unrelated behaviors is much too vague. I think that the study should focus on something more detailed if they want to have a fruitful study.
> Even with the small sample size and completely nonrandom sample, where's the hard data
> on how MUCH more likely they are to be "permissive" in their attitudes?
That's what the study is about.
Take a group, randomly split that group into two, subject the two halves to different stimuli, and measure the differences in the group. Since the two halves were selected randomly, only random chance or the differing stimuli will account for inter-group differences. Random chance can be accounted for using statistical analysis, meaning that a statistically significant difference is (with high probability) indicative of a difference caused by the differing stimuli.
This is the basic idea of how all studies of this sort work, and I humbly submit that you are largely clueless about how to conduct an effective user study, and that most people here are only complaining because they don't like the results of the study.
If the study had exactly the same methodology but found there to be no difference, would you complain about it as much? Or would you hold it up as evidence that your pre-determined answer to the question being examined is correct? I don't believe that video games cause violence, but I do believe that the kind of irrational knee-jerk bashing going on here is exactly the same kind of head-in-the-sand moaning that people always (rightly) slam Creation Science folks for.
Science doesn't always give you the answer you want. Being a rational, modern human requires accepting that fact.
I usually smoke marijuana and drink prior to playing a violent game. Or any game. Or any activity. Like sleeping, or eating, or going to school, or masturbating. In fact, I usually smoke marijuana and drink prior to smoking marijuana and drinking. Also, drinking may lead to violent behavior, but it's unlikely that marijuana leads to violent behavior. A high person (not me, of course) is more likely to play GTA, though in the game a high person is more likely to drive around and listen to the radio. Therefore, smoking marijuana won't even lead to simulated violence.
I'd formulate a response to this gibberish, but I'm far too stoned and drunk; and Oblivion is calling.
I know of a 17 year old male who has ADHD and goes to a special school. He has played video games most of his life and is currently into the PS2 version of GTA III and the Godfather. Although he talks non-stop about the games, he hasn't exibited violent tendencies. This type of person would be the poster child for violence. However, he's pretty level headed.
No one can make anyone become violent unless that person chooses to be violent. That's true for anyone, games or no games.
Thanks,
John
The Latino Edge
http://cyniclook.blogspot.com/
The Latino Edge http://cyniclook.blogspot.com
As odd as it may sound, not everyone's parents smoked up when they were teenagers. Heck, my dad skipped out on an invitation to head off to Woodstock because the law school was holding an interesting seminar that week. Personally, I still have trouble telling the smell of low quality pot from the smells of burning plastic or dead skunk. *shrug* Different olfactory sensitivities, I guess.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
See there you are, knowing nothing of the actual nature of things (Ie: cult of 'wizards' - you couldn't be more wrong) you leap to conclusions. Thank you for proving my point that people have stupid prejudices that they will act upon without due research.
Dude, calm yourself. Your father was concerned before because he'd received bad information regarding D&D. And you still feel the need to lash out at random people years later because he found you had an athame and were involved in an activity that, again, he had bad information on? Admittedly, it sounded like your dad reacted a bit drastically in terms of what he said, but you need to let go of your hostility there.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.