Slashdot Mirror
Daily Dose of Violent Video Games Causes 'No Significant Changes' In Behavior, Study Finds (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A new, longer-term study of video game play from the Max Planck Institute for Human Development and Germany's University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf recently published in Molecular Psychiatry found that adults showed "no significant changes" on a wide variety of behavioral measures after two straight months of daily violent game play. Most scientific studies on the effects of video game violence measure participants right after the completion of a gameplay session, when the adrenaline prompted by the on-screen action is likely still pumping. Researcher Simone Kuhn and her co-authors argue that "effects observed only for a few minutes after short sessions of video gaming are not representative of what society at large is actually interested in, namely how habitual violent video game play affects behavior on a more long-term basis." To correct for the "priming" effects inherent in these other studies, researchers had 90 adult participants play either Grand Theft Auto V or The Sims 3 for at least 30 minutes every day over eight weeks (a control group played no games during the testing period). The adults chosen, who ranged from 18 to 45 years old, reported little to no video game play in the previous six months and were screened for pre-existing psychological problems before the tests. Over 208 separate comparisons (52 tests; violent vs. non-violent and control groups; pre- vs. post- and two-months-later tests), only three subjects showed a statistically significant effect of the violent gameplay at a 95 percent confidence level. Pure chance would predict more than 10 of the 208 comparisons would be significant at that level, leading the researchers to conclude "that there were no detrimental effects of violent video game play."
Isn't this the same thing gamers have been saying for years? Nice to finally have a study to back it up.
participants play either Grand Theft Auto V or The Sims 3 for at least 30 minutes every day
I wouldn't be surprised if the people forced to play "the sims" exhibited slightly more violent tendencies immediately after playing compared to GTA... that game just pisses me off.
Yes. It's guns. Access to guns. Also, not having proper mental health evaluation prior to allowing a person the privilege of buying a firearm to go form their militia.
Don't believe people who say that the purpose of guns is "intimidation". That's horseshit. The only purpose for guns is to kill or maim.
Q: How do you get a conservative to care about using proper pronouns? A: Call an AR-15 an "automatic".
There was another story just this day about a gamer trying to kill another gamer with a samurai sword. The World Health Organization considers excessive gaming a disorder. "Swatting" is a thing where gamers try and use SWAT teams to kill other gamers.
You're going to tell me that violent video games have no effect?
Bullshit.
on behavior...but after observing some of my friends' children who appear to be gaming 4+ hours per day, I wonder. I mean, these kids' brains are still developing and the constant repetitive cycle of violent actions being rewarded with dopamine (or whatever) in their brains day in and day out? Seems like it would have to havesome effect. - and not a good one.
I've got sims that died, in a fire, repeatedly fixing a TV, in the sun, ranting about death, trying to steal a drink, drowning in a very indoor pool, looking for a meal, and more
I didn't read TFA so this may be more of a critique of the summary.
3 adult subjects showed statistically significant effect from violent gameplay after 8 weeks of 30m per day. 90 subjects with presumably 45 of them playing a violent game and 3 of those 45 showed statistically significant effects? And the conclusion is "that there were no detrimental effects of violent video game play".. other than the 6% of test subjects that showed statistically significant effects?
I am forever inexplicably compelled to organize falling objects as they land, stomp on turtles and eat mushrooms to grow after touched me and caused me to shrink, jump up to and down from various surfaces, kick walls to climb them, stand still while being attacked until it's my turn at which point I will swing a giant sword around, run into the streets and jack people's cars and then purposefully crash into other cars, shoot people in the face and squat on their head, and rob the same bank over and over and over and over and over... but I cannot...
captcha: repress
As we see some of the far left "journalists" in the gaming scene having become so puritanical the past 3 or 4 years, that they themselves have been claiming violence in video games does or can cause violence, now they're having mental breakdowns because they are arguably in agreement with Trump, causing all kinds of problems.
If you're looking to be offended, all the damn time, this is what you get.
Or maybe, just maybe, many of them were only offended because it got them more retweets, youtube videos watched and patreon bucks?
Now that that's cleared up, we can get back to blaming the NRA and scary looking guns.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Video games cause school shootings.
The United States is running a trade deficit with Canada.
Global warming is not happening.
There was no collusion between my campaign and the Russians.
How many things can Trump get dead wrong?
Following a month's worth of the Daily Dose, subjects displayed an aversion to the colors green and purple.
Daily grinding for hours on violent video game doesn't affect people but 30 second adverts go for thousands of dollars and a few posts on Faceplant can change the outcome of an election? Something doesn't add up.
Is the way women are portrayed in video games, as tight-bodied heroines rather than frumpy average women with cat-eye glasses.
From adolescence, it was clear to me on the order of crystal that Wile E. Coyote repeatedly surviving misadventure had no bearing on reality and my belief in my own survival of the cliff fall, the rocket malfunction, or the fake tunnel collision.
That said, when it wasn't clearly a cartoon, I noticed different levels of lingering behavior modification. Following the first couple of Rocky movies, every boy under 18 leaving the theater felt compelled to display their boxing skills whether they actually existed or not.
It would be inane to purport the same tendencies affect a grown person, yet dismissing the effect on underdeveloped minds seems a bit premature.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
You only care now because Trump brought it up.
but now we're discussion violent video games instead of gun control. Mission Accomplished.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Violence in games are the same as violence in saturday morning cartoons. Watch tha wascal wabbit get creamed.
Fucktards.
If we look at truly disturbed people (such as those committing mass shootings or school shootings, etc), there are very very few of these people in a country of 350,000,000. Now this research could be entirely accurate when applying conclusions to your average 18-34 year old. But that doesn't necessarily mean that mentally disturbed people (if given the same daily exposure to video games as the test subjects) wouldn't be negatively impacted.
It's very possible that there is an effect, it's just a broad effect. Most people who try drugs don't get addicted to them: But those who are genetically predisposed to addiction will are much more likely to get addicted. (This is backed up by seeing that alcoholism is partially inherited).
I'm not proposing a policy change, or any changes in video games. But what would be interesting is to identify at-risk individuals (broken homes, lower IQ, prone to violence, lack of self-control) and measure the effects of daily violent game play vs what this test did, and measured average individuals.
After the release of this game there has been a fair amount of incidents of bald people getting slapped in the park
The arguments, at times, escalate to absurd levels since the players are (usually) shielded by the protection of anonymity. Pity the game servers that leak client information to cobble together a real-life profile or, more likely, the gamer who posts self-identifying information and then goes on to grief someone.
He loves to watch ghost videos
He is addicted to ghost videos
He searches for ghost videos online and watch them
He has been doing that for years
After all the ghost videos he has watched, he hasn't turned into a ghost, yet
If your going to make a study about violent video games, then use violent video games. (The Sims 3?)
While GTA V is a bit violent, it's not the same as a Call of Duty game, which is where you will find more representative base of people trending towards violence.
As it'a really kill another person game.
I think the study is correct, as I have been playing all video games all my life and I am not prone to any violent behavior, but i'm older and have been playing and developing them for a long time, I do play Call of duty WW2 and GTA V.
I also think that if your are prone to violence, then video game or not your going to do something.
But they should extend this to include more violent first person games.
Worth noting: they studied only non-gamers adults, and if I understand correctly, not just after gameplay.
These types of studies do little to actually tell us anything. Behavior is a very difficult thing to study. So difficult, I would argue, that the vast majority of psychological studies cannot be taken seriously. What would be more interesting is to see how video games affect neurology. I'm willing to bet that neurologically there are many similarities between heavy video game players and gambling addicts.
When it comes to violence and trying to prevent it, I think we should be asking cultural questions rather than psychological ones. We call these mass shooters "disturbed" and assume their crimes are proof of psychological disease, but this probably isn't true. How many of these shooters have disorders that can be traced back to the neurological level, such as the various diseases we call "schizophrenia?" When it comes to depression, there's always a chicken and egg problem. Is the depression the cause of the neurological symptoms or is a neurological imbalance the cause of the depression. The answer isn't the same for all people.
I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of mass shooters are technically sane (both in the clinical and legal sense). The fact that these shootings occur disproportionately in the United States seems to confirm that culture, not psychology or video games, is the main culprit. It's not possible to make wholesale cultural changes, but it is possible to restructure schools. Our schools, with the K-12 structure, shuffles kids along and organizes them by age rather than ability. Schools are primarily a social structure where we allow the kids to create their own social hierarchies and cliques and we need to radically restructure schools. We bitch and moan about bullying and shootings, but we never address that it's the archaic school systems that most likely drive the very problems that plague them.
Other countries have video games and don't have mass shootings. What they don't have is a school system that was designed over a hundred years ago and has never really changed. Our schools are culturally toxic and need to be radically modified.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
30 minutes is hardly enough to be called an addiction ergo at addiction levels, behavior changes.
They keep doing studies on this and they keep finding the same thing ... no impact on the person. This is the same as my Dad and his 4 brothers paying cowboys and Indians growing up, they killed each other violently thousands of times, (in the game of course they killed each other). All of them became college educated, several became college professors, all raised families and never hurt anyone.
Of course games and movies could not have any substantial impact due to obviously artificial, imaginary context. This is indeed the same context of play as a necessary training - even cats and dogs play violence. Is there any study that playing makes cats more violent? But there are facts, that restricted animals do not accuire catching skills.
To the contrary, the imagination and planning agency in humans are by no means a play and primed by propaganda and hate speeches indeed make people crazy. Look at these meme-propaganda brainwashed low IQ Russians.
The devil is in the details.
Tldr but my personal (therefore potentially worthless) impression is the main impact of violent video games are likely:
- Immediate term: potential physical impact on preexisting heart or epileptic condition and psychological stress for those without militaristic mindset who mightbe forced to play. Combined with euphoeia / self actualization for most players.
- Long term: Reinforcement of militaristic outlook and interest in violent resolution scenarios. Combined with heightened or maintained support for military and weapons manufacturers since games allow you to play with guns without fatalities.
So it might be interesting to look at whether there is evidence in the data to support these hypotheses.
In my experience it rewires the way I think. I am from earth, human body so it is likely that other people also get their mind rewired by GTA.
I live in Germany and I love killing Nazis. Not every day, but often.
Of course, I need to use a VPN service to play these games, as Nazi symbolism and likeness is illegal here for.. reasons.
There are still really Nazis here and amazingly, it has never occurred to me to go on a real life killing spree.
I mean, these are the guys that tried to take over the world TWICE! I think maybe they're already fairly violent.
It was GTA5 vs Sims 3. Not exactly violent games.
Sims 3 is non violent on purpose (Gives a point of comparison)
On the other hand, GAT5 back at its time has been controversial (as is the case with other games in the serie).
Its just that, by the time the study gets designed approved financed and finally launched, the game technology has progressed.
They should be studying modern, violent & hyper competitive games.
Which again, by the time the study gets designed approved financed and finally launched, will have been forgotten.
It's almost a case of "{new technology that I haven't grown up with} will cause the end of civilisation as we know it ! ".
See Douglas Adams's quote from Salmon of Doubt about "Rule of reaction to technology".
You know; the ones where abuse is rampant & swatting occurs at the extremes.
One should make a distinction between toxic culture of some assholes playing games, and the game themselves.
This study partially attempts to solve it by - on purpose - using non-gamers. I.e.: people how aren't part of the "twictch.tv-swearing-and-swatting" scene and see how they react.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
No significant effect on behavior after 30 minutes a day over eight weeks for psychology healthy individuals? Amazing! I'm not going to send my autistic spectrum kids to play 10 hours a day for years in end! Excellent!
no one conducting the study is old enough to know that road rage and incredibly aggressive and stupid driving is not normal.
Remember, the key concept in doublethink is to hold two opposite conclusions as fact at the same time.
If you can believe both of these things at the same time, you already love Big Brother and always have. Double plus good for you!
These studies never address the CULTURAL change in thought and behavior that takes place over decades. And movies are the greater threat there.
E Proelio Veritas.
If it weren't for violent video games I would have gone postal numerous times by now.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
What about female nipples? Because a lot of people seem to think they are not intended for little children. What about sex? Advertising?
I find it hard to believe that when we look at one thing, it does have no significant impact on us and when we look at something else, it does.
"But we know that violence in a game is fake and violence in reality is bad, because of outside influences." Good, I do think that we can make good judgement about female nipples as well.So we should allow that on daytime tv, right? And the same can be said about marketing, so all the marketing companies in the world can close shop.
Because I really can not believe that it works on just violence we see, but not on anything else. If violence does not create violent people then rape-porn (Yes, I wen there.) will not create rapists and a female nipple on TV will not cause the destruction of humanity.Either that, or violent games DO influence people. It is either both or neither. Can't have the cake and eat it, too.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
It definitely has been, and still is. For years the left has been claiming video games cause violence, sexism, racism and whatever else they can think of.
They are saying that some games ARE violent, sexist, racist... not that it CAUSES this. The modern left has had a hate-boner for VIOLENT, SEXIST, RACIST games for a long time... not ALL video games. Sorry it's not... "LOOK OUT!! THE LEFT IS COMING TO TAKE ALL YOUR VIDEO GAMES!!!" The Left just wants games that are less violent, sexist, racist.
Wow, congrats, you've achieved /. inception. I never questioned the validity or usefulness of the study (you calling that into question is the straw man you've set up). I questioned why to public at large is spending time discussing an issue already settled in the public discourse. Do all the studies you want on video game violence. Go nuts. But how about lifting the ban on gun violence studies? Or even talking about it. No?
Also you're sig is dumb. Given immortality those millions could find what to do on a rainy Sunday afternoon. I know it's a silly thing to get annoyed by but it's so profoundly ignorant it just bugs me. Take it off. How about a nice quote from Stephen Colbert
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Then why do I have this insatiable desire to hurl fireballs at shelled creatures?
Or is the USA already saturated in violence, so the games are only un-measurable noise.
Gaming keeps you busy and off my lawn. And if you do get out and about then get in my face, your atrophied muscles will ensure your physical humiliation.
What about the 10-18 age range? Since brains are under their most rapid developmental phases between those ages, shouldn't those be the focus of these kinds of studies?
Organization? You must be joking..
I just completed my own study. I examined the behaviors of avid gamers Dylan Roof, Adam Lanza, Nicholas Cruz, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, and concluded there is a link. So there.
Seriously though, most (99.95% maybe) well adjusted individuals will not turn in to a murderer because they play Call of Duty. However, those with mental issues who are being treated with psychotropic medication clearly are at risk from excessive violent video game exposure. The evidence shows us this. To try and sweep it under the rug is ridiculous.
All the shooters were very young and all of them play violent shooting video games, hours upon hours. That single fact they can not refute. Nickolas Cruz is been said would play them 15 hours straight.
The fact that we even need studies like this to show to some politicians and people is just ridiculous, but it does show the ignorant age we're living in...
Dude, it's been at least a couple of decades now that we have violent games, and not only several of the most successful franchises in existence could be considered violent games, the gaming industry itself has been the biggest among entertainment industries for quite a while now.
We're talking about hundreds of millions of gamers in the US alone, going well above billions worldwide.
A fairly significant share of those are playing supposedly violent games.
If those have any significant effects in behaviour, we'd be living something close to Mad Max these days.
You have to quite frankly be a moron and completely ignorant on the subject these days to think violent games would make people violent.
A whole ton of the most notorious shooting cases and terrorist attacks are completely disconnected with games, and the few that are never implied that violent games were the cause - it was usually psychological disorders tied to bullying, paranoia or depression.
As most should know, correlation does not mean causation. If you are violent yourself and you play violent games, that does not mean the game is producing that violence, it just means that violent people might prefer playing violent games, which is only logical. Not that the games causes violent behaviour, not that games have some magical behavioural transforming power, not that violent games are only liked by violent people. There are tons and tons and tons of people (including myself) who have played 200+ hours of games like Counter Strike and whatnot, who would never want to shoot someone else, or even want to own a gun.
And yet, we need studies to prove some morons who don't know what they are talking about that violent games is not the root cause for violence in real life. It's fucking amazing. Having to waste all this time and money because of such ignorance.