Slashdot Mirror
New Study Finds No Link Between Violent Video Games and Behavior (dailydot.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Daily Dot: Scientists have been investigating the impact of violent video games on behavior for more than two decades, and the results are still being debated. In a 2015 resolution on games, the American Psychological Association reported that multiple studies found a link between violent game exposure and aggressive behavior, though critics at the time questioned the findings. Now, a new study published by researchers at the University of York in the journal Computers in Human Behavior further challenges the connection.
It has long been theorized that exposure to in-game concepts like violence has a "priming" effect on players that ultimately impacts behavior, leading scientists to believe that a player exposed to in-game violence will be more susceptible to displaying such violence in real life. The new study found the exact opposite to be true in some instances. In a series of experiments with a little over 3,000 participants (more than any past study to date), university researchers found that exposure to video game concepts like violence won't necessarily impact behavior. It also found that increasing the realism of violent video games does mean aggressive behavior in gamers will increase.
It has long been theorized that exposure to in-game concepts like violence has a "priming" effect on players that ultimately impacts behavior, leading scientists to believe that a player exposed to in-game violence will be more susceptible to displaying such violence in real life. The new study found the exact opposite to be true in some instances. In a series of experiments with a little over 3,000 participants (more than any past study to date), university researchers found that exposure to video game concepts like violence won't necessarily impact behavior. It also found that increasing the realism of violent video games does mean aggressive behavior in gamers will increase.
When you're sitting on the couch in your underwear playing video games 10 hours a day.
Of violence against bald men in the park ever since the release of this game
This is not true. Ever since playing Super Mario I've had a strong tendency to hurl fireballs at anyone that crosses my path.
I don't think we need any additional proof that social science is mostly junk science. Priming, intersectionality, trigger warnings all brought to you by these clowns.
The Russians didn't hypnotize people into voting for Trump.
Oh, there is no link between advertising and sales either. McMann and Tate can shut its doors.
But aren't all scientists untrusworthy bastards part of a global conspiracy of evil to suck always more grant money from not-at-all-evil governements ?
If you don't trust scientists when they tell you that global warming is caused by human activity, or that diversity of life on earth is the product of evolution through natural selection, or that the universe is 15 billion years old and not six thousand, or that vaccines don't cause autism, then why would you trust them when they tell you that there is no link between violent video games and violent behavior ?
They interfered with the investigation for more than two decades, changing the outcome. Source: faux news
It also found that increasing the realism of violent video games does mean aggressive behavior in gamers will increase.
This error is in the article as well, but reading on makes it clear that this sentence is missing a 'not'. To wit:
it was expected that those exposed to the more realistic game would choose more violent words. Surprisingly, the researchers found no significant difference between the word choices of players exposed to either game.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
For years we've been bombarded by press releases that say video games cause violent behaviour, followed by studies that say "nuh uh" So what changed? Did someone actually posit video games cause violent behaviour, then run a study that disproved the hypothesis?
See also: Comic Books. Nekkid wemmin in magazines. TV. Rock music. Marijuana. Abortion.
"Violent video games don't promote violence"
"Sexist video games promote sexism"
Pick one.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
I find playing an FPS helps burn off some pent up aggression.
Also playing against other really skilled players gives you a great big reality check as to how far you can get with a gun and willpower alone.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This study has a few problems. For one, the participants were all adults; the argument is usually that violent video games have a harmful effect on children whose minds are still developing, and these experiments don't assess that. Furthermore, several studies found that short-term aggression was increased by playing violent video games, but there was a lack of evidence for any long-term effects. This experiment didn't study long-term effects, either.
IMO the theories on how violent video games might mentally harm children approach Intelligent Design levels of pseudoscience, pushed by moral guardians who have a knee-jerk "think of the children!" reaction. I've played lots of violent video games, and the ones that most realistically depict violence are pretty disturbing; they make me less likely to want to employ violence, if anything.
What I'd REALLY like to see is if a VR game where you use motion controllers to punch people makes the players more likely to employ punches in real life afterward (in say some roleplay with a dummy where a punch, kick, or handshake can be employed.) I wonder if muscle memory (pressing a button on a Dualshock is nothing like throwing an actual punch) and feeling that the game isn't real (VR takes this away) are the main things stopping a connection between in-game violence and real-life aggressive tendencies. However, there's a big difference between "I'm curious if" and "I'm certain, therefore it must be made illegal immediately." I also chuckle at the idea that 'ragdoll physics' apparently equals 'realism' now; all those hours playing UT2003 and I never realized how REAL it was.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
It seems like a study is done every 7 years saying the same thing since the 80s?
Before that it was cartoons...
Have they listened in on voice chats in multiplayer console games?
Literal violence against women, lgbtq and minorities.
It's disgusting that this study downplays this.
This study uses proxies. Finding no link between a proxy an violent video games does not disprove that it affects violent behavior.
Apples to oranges.
(Not that I support banning violent videogames, but this headline is junk. typical slashdot trash...)
Look, the question is not that hard to do. You want to find out if violent video games have an effect? Do this:
1) Pick one of the worst schools in the nation - one where half the kids end up in jail rather than graduating. Chances are the kids are poor and will make step 2 easier.
2) Get permission from the parents.
3) Split the incoming class into two groups, a control and a violent video game group.
3) Each day, let the kids in the control play for one hour, a non-violent video game, such as Tetris, Angry Birds, Bejewelled, etc. Let the kids in the violent game group play anything with an "Adults Only" ESRB rating, (eliminate the sex based ones).
4) In 4 years, look and see which kids went to jail for violent acts. Given that we picked one of the worst schools, chances are that some students in both group got convicted.
But they don't do that. Why? Because the smart people know the video games don't do anything REAL. Instead they pretend that fake 'violence' such as violent thoughts, pushing, cursing, etc. are someone indicators of real violence.
We don't need to use these fake indicators, we can use actual criminal convictions. If you don't bother using REAL indicators, you are cheating.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
In case that was being implied.
Shooting at blinky dots or a full avatar rendering is nothing more than target practice.
On the other hand, incitement to hate is always a bad thing and can definitely boil over into real and dreadful actions ... so it depends on how the story is presented rather than the topic itself.
I never felt like committing violent acts as the result of playing video games, even violent video games. I have had violent urges happen as the result of an OCD micromanaging, stand over your shoulder for 3 hours supervisor who had daddy issues and would say things like, 'you know how I treated you yesterday, that was over the top, but it's my time of the month'. Yeah, its usually things like that that make me start feeling violent, not video games.
Faith: Belief in Truth. Superstition: Belief in Falsehood.
NRA financed study... Can't imagine any person pulling the trigger countless times mowing down people and creating blood baths doesn't get visually and mentally desensitized.
Maybe that state may not be violent but insensible to well, ending a human life by applying deadly force.
When you play a video game, doesn't need to be a violent one, your brain goes into a state of hyper-arousal. Some games are more intense then others, depends on how long you have been doing it, your age, and if its a new game.
But right after you finish playing, for example GTA, your driving around with a car and not really obeying street laws.
Right when you get done, don't go out and drive a real car, take a few minutes to get back to reality.
This looks like one instance of a field where the same question gets alternating yes/no answers periodically. It seems that in such a situation looking at the latest study is worthless, and one instead needs to study all the studies in order to draw valid conclusions.
Here's my experience.
When some of my friends were frequently talking about their twice-weekly poker game, I heard them several times and starting thinking about if I might like to play poker. I ended up playing poker with them, twice a week.
Later, was flying home from a business trip in Vegas and wanted something to read on the flight. I ended up with three poker books. Later I put them in my reading room (bathroom). I was always reading *something*, and that month I read about poker. While driving or whatever, I'd think about what I read - think about poker. I ended up writing a poker- playing bot, spending quite a bit of time analyzing poker as I created software that played poker.
I doubt I would have spent thousands of hours on poker had I never starting hearing about it from my friends. I wouldn't have written poker software if I had read model airplane books.
Whatever book I get, I spend several hours reading about it, and several more hours thinking about it. Whichever TV series I'm into, that's what's in my head.
As a teenager, I was into heavy metal music. I constantly had heavy metal themes pumped into my head, so a lot of my thoughts were around topics in the lyrics.
Later, I started listening to Christian music. I find that when I hear a song about forgiveness, I tend to think about forgiveness. When I'm thinking about forgiveness, I'm more likely to forgive. I'm also more likely to be grateful for the forgiveness I've received, if that's what I'm thinking about because that's what I'm hearing on my way to work.
From my experience, it seems obvious that whatever I'm exposed to a lot affects what I think about. What I think about a lot tends to affect what I do.
Does that mean that if I hear you say the words "eat cheese" I'm going to immediately run to go eat cheese? Of course not? But if people are constantly offering me different kinds of cheeses, talking about which cheese goes well with what, I just might try some cheese every so often.
If my mind is on violence several hours per day, sure whatever I think about a lot is going to tend effect what I'm more likely to do.
How else could the He-Man Woman Haters Club ever form? Video games, that's what.
those who spend huge amounts of time playing video games avoid personal growth and avoid connecting with the world.
Do you have any actual evidence for this? Or are you just spouting off the same "conventional wisdom" that is debunked by this study?
Sure, introverts may be socially isolated and play a lot of video games. But that doesn't imply that the games caused the isolation, nor does it imply that the isolation is actually harmful, to the introverts or to the rest of society.
When I was a kid, there were no video games (other than "Pong"), yet we still had socially isolated people, watching Star Trek on TV, reading SciFi, and playing D&D. So are interactive video games "worse" in some way compared to likely alternative activities? I have seen zero evidence for that.
Any valid theories?
New Study Finds No Link Between Video Games and Violent Behavior
That's why swatting is a thing, right? Gamers think it's all a game. It's just a joke. No one gets hurt. Just scared.
Some of these people have a hard time separating fiction from reality.
The idea that you will go out and be violent because you've seen, and been involved in violence in games is a flawed abstraction of the idea that you repeat what you are exposed to.
When people are exposed to violence, real or in games, the constant practiced activity between both situations is that it demands of them to observe the situation and then learn to change how they make decisions for a better outcome for themselves. They can either enforce their decisions on the others present, or find a solution that doesn't require that. When you are exposed to real violence, often there is no way to get a positive outcome for yourself without enforcing your decisions on others, this unfortunately when practiced becomes habit and leads to more violence. Video games have a fixed rule system, you cannot enforce any kind of logic of your own unless you cheat, and certainly not on other, real people who can argue back, so this negative re-enforcement cannot happen. Video games while in use, prevent the player from practicing learned behaviors that lead to violence.
It's hard to find time to be violent ... When you're sitting on the couch in your underwear playing video games 10 hours a day.
Very true, but you don't move very much while sitting on the couch for 10 hours a day, you eat unhealthy food which makes you grow obese, you have no girlfriend because real girls compare poorly to balloon titted porn stars, there is a big pile of used tissues next to your bed and you'd probably cut off your left hand with a piece of broken glass rather than have your browser history made public since it is choke full of links to very embarrassing Warcraft dryad porn. But on the plus side, the games don't make you violent ... although things might get a big rough when you finally lower your expectations, find a girlfriend and she punches your lights out after you suggest things might work better in the sex department if she'd just try wearing green body paint, pointy ear extensions and a dryad costume.
Odd that we don't see anyone suggesting we shut down churches because that's where a lot of violence seems to eminate from.
Everytime I play Street Fighter I have a strong desire of throw a hadouken in my brother!
OK, if there is no link between violent games and violence. How come we are not allowed to see female nipples on tv? Or cursing?
Is that different somehow? And if it is not, how come ads are effective?
People will be influenced by what they pick up. I am sure that violent games will not cause violence, but it might raise the bar a little bit on a much wider scale,
We think rape in prison is funny. Many believe that police violence is just a way to best solve things.
So what it might do is change the norm about violence.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I remember the first time I watched Smokey and the Bandit at the movies. When I got in my car, I wanted to speed all over the place.
But I didn't ... because I'm not stupid and know I could crash, kill someone or me, or at least get a ticket.
I'm sure violent video games can make violent people more likely to be violent.
That doesn't mean the other 99% (made up statistic) of society should be kept from playing them.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Just wondering.
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
There are still single player games?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
i jaywalk becuase of Frogger
If we're not infuenced by what we see, then how come adds work?
How about the flip argument. If video games can't influence us in a negative way (violence), then they can't influence us in a positive way as well.
Doesnt this last line of the article summary just null and void the headline?
"It also found that increasing the realism of violent video games does mean aggressive behavior in gamers will increase."
Wtf?
leading scientists to believe
I think you have scientists (evidence) confused with pastors (belief).
Especially when we are talking about belief that has been rebuked again and again over the last 20 years.
Violence is learned. Video games are a part of learning.
That may be. It doesn't follow from that that they would do those things if there were no video games. They might just watch a lot of TV instead.
... from essentially all modern media, you got nothin'.
How am I supposed to take any of these so called respected scientists seriously when they are studying this stuff. This is the kind of stuff that does not need to be peer reviewed and studied scientifically. This is the kind of thing that should be argued about at 2 am by drunks walking home from a bar. If you want people to stop hating science how about studying things such as how to make molybdenum 99 or how human digestion works. Nope we have the brightest minds of the age worrying about video games. Fuck Science
We have had proxy activities for competition, aggression, and violence since the dawn of history. Everything from boxing, rugby, and polo to swimming and track to Go and chess.
Video games are just a new spin on an ancient habit. We substitute relatively harmless activities as outlets for our less-than-friendly instincts. In this respect, we have reached a new zenith with the variety, ubiquity, and flexibility of computer games. Participation in previous sports or hobbies has never been as safe and widely appealing as video games.
I'm not surprised there is no link between video games and violent behavior; the games themselves are the outlet for the urges that lead to violence.
---
According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
"Do you have any actual evidence for this?"
About once a week for the last 3 years I've been around a group that plays Dungeons and Dragons. My impression from talking with them is that they have all had difficult childhoods. It's good that they have a group activity. But playing D&D does not give them any help in understanding how to recover from insufficient care.
Will they have limited social abilities their entire lives? It seems yes.
Want an example of people having limited social ability? Here is an example from this Slashdot story: "You're defending Nazi's Hal. You ought to share their fate." Someone is recommending murder in this Slashdot discussion! There are many other comments on this Slashdot story that are equally lacking in social ability.
Here is an example of the results of social acceptance of violence in the United States, from a few minutes ago: Kentucky school shooting: At least 5 shot at Marshall County High School - live updates.
Note that my original comment on this Slashdot discussion is modded "Score: 0, Troll". There are 12 comments below my comment.
Every year, US companies spend 180 BILLION dollars advertising, and most of those ads have no real substance, they just show the product logo and colors, in a positive, feel-good situation. There is a LOT of science around advertising; they know what they are doing, and do that because it works, on humans. Whether you like it or not, seeing the same thing repeatedly affects the human brain.
I'm from Ct, after the Sandy Hook killings, the State Troopers thought the murderer had military training, because of the way he handled his weapons. Which I will not go into here. He did not. He was an avid gamer. Conclusion was: Gaming will make you a "better" technical killer.
And as all meta studies have found as well.
No news here.
I, for one, don't act out video game violence unless I know where the respawn area is.
Going through life without a save game function really sucks.
Visualize that and then imagine how it might affect tendencies toward violence. Or archery.
I know that I for sure like nothing better than playing some Candy Crush and then going down the local boozer to whup some ass.
I did not read the article, but they always seem to miss one observation.
What if the violent video game is an outlet for the players? Take away the video game and they're more likely to "outlet" on others, rather than less likely to do so.
I've been a gamer for quite a while. I like jumping on TeamSpeak and running around shooting my friends in the face. That doesn't make me a violent person. That certainly doesn't make me want to go buy a gun and shoot someone in the face. It's much like the difference between cartoons and reality. There isn't any confusion or spill-over.
I refuse to sign
So I guess this disproves the effectiveness of any simulators that are used in training or practice in the workplace or other similar situations?
I would argue, at a minimum, it desensitizes one towards violence or the actions taken in the game.