Slashdot Mirror
Young People Who Play Video Games Have Higher Moral Reasoning Skills (inews.co.uk)
An anonymous reader shares a report: Young people who play video games, including violent titles, display more developed moral reasoning skills than their non-gaming peers, a study has found. Researchers from Bournemouth University asked 166 adolescents aged between 11 and 18-years old about their video game habits and questions designed to measure their moral development -- the thought process behind determining what is right or wrong. The children and teenagers who said they played more video games from a wide variety of genres had increased moral reasoning scores, including titles containing violent content. Violent games were found to have a positive relationship with moral reasoning while mature content was more likely to produce a negative one, the report published in published in journal Frontiers in Psychology found.
Jack Thompson told me that video games turn kids into real-life killers!!! /s
[sarcasm indicator added due to ADA requirements for the sarcasm impaired]
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
They have to learn a lot of mental gymnastics to justify pirating all those games.
I just ran this guy down in my 1969 Mustang. Should I steal his stuff and finish him off, or give him a Med Pack and send him on his way.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Subscription required to actually, you know, read the article. So I didn't bother.
But you can bet I have a very strong opinion on the contents!
And gamers especially like being able to help NPCs for some reason.
of the "domestic disturbances" broadcast on Twitch when the S.O. interrupts the guy's Fortnight game?
Anyone who has played this game to completion (with DLC's) will have downloaded a full update to their moral radar.
So violent video games lead to higher moral reasoning skills, but mature (by this they mean 'M' rated games) games don't. However, you look at their own study data (full study here) in particular Table B1, they show that there's a nearly perfect correlation (.98) between violent and mature. I don't think I've ever seen a correlation that high in any study, but it's besides the point. Since they're that strongly correlated how do they get the result as stated in the summary?
Maybe I just need to read the whole study instead of skimming through it, but the results seem strange to me. I think that this is obviously a study that would benefit from multiple repetitions and with a larger sample size.
Comparing the two populations (gamers vs non-gamers) is only valid if they are similarly distributed with respect to other control variables that might influence moral reasoning. What if age, affluence, level of technological adoption and place of birth have an impact on morality, and are correlated with gaming as well?
Violent video games = better moral reasoning.
Adult content (which you have to assume means boobs or other non-covered naughty bits) = worthless dogshit scum of the earth.
Sounds like a right-wing justification piece to me.
Easy. You just don't lead them as much.
Aisle seat please.
He only surveyed 166 people? Really and you come to a conclusion with that few people, come on!
I mean those that depict the actual suffering, and the actual consequences that such actions would have in real life!
Because those are always conveniently left out.
I think people only treat it so casually, because we do that.
(Or you can take the other direction, where it is clear that it's basically just a game of dodge ball or tag or something similarly harmless, and you never act like it's meant to be realistic de-factor serial murdering.)
I think if we want to protect our children and raise them right, we should depict violence exactly as graphic as it is in real life. And have the consequences be the same too.
And we should trust them to make the right moral decisions, unless they actually aren't developed far enough to understand such a thing and parenting is required.
If we have violent content and we have mature content, does not mean that violent content is not for mature people, in other words, violence is for kids? Why don't we have much trouble showing kids violence (lego ninjago?), but showing sex or even naked books is off the limits?
What is mature content anyway? Larry games? Graphic porn games? Mahjong?
See subject: From DOS onward, it was about making your system as tightly optimized as possible (meant learning your OS) - then this led to securing OS (Windows ones mostly) & then, it was learning to code. This led to my career @ 1st as a techie, then as a network admin, then as a coder from then on circa 1994-2008.
* Changed everything for me... for the better.
APK
P.S.=> You'll only game so long (even my nephew @ Apple doing great heading into his 1st decade there now, tiger teams & all now (very proud of that here) who told me I was his inspiration to get into computing no less, said "Uncle Al, one day, you'll drop the gaming..." & above IS how it happened (1 thing led to another, a better other))... apk
If I'm going to get PK'd for my sneakers or iPhone, it won't be gamers, it will be the non moral reasoning, non-gamers?
I am trying to read https://www.frontiersin.org/ar... but for some reason I am not getting anything but a blank page. Do they define mature content as opposed to violent content ?
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
cut the power to the TVs of these high moral characters as they are in the middle of a game to hear a colorfully moral response
You don't understand the purpose of games. It's a fantasy, it is not supposed to be realistic.
Learning can occur with theory and models to build up experience and lead to further inquiry. Nobody makes the students drive the bus on their first day of school. It's amazing how pervasive is the idea that children are just little adults when it is so demonstrably wrong.
... less likely to be aware that cum hoc ergo propter hoc is a fallacy. Also, and even more importantly, this is a voluntary survey with no isolation of parameters.
Moving along, nothing to see here.
Correlation does not mean causation. It could be the case that more intelligent kids, that also have higher capacity for moral reasoning, are attracted to video games.
This is the state of the art in social science research; have a few passers-by fill out a 'survey,' interpret the results and crunch the numbers through standard statistical software, then publish the results.
Who needs a reasonable sample size; who needs a representative sample; who needs a control group or a structured methodology; we must publish or die.
Now if only Slashdot editors could filter these useless studies out of their feeds...
Combined with the opportunity to behave any way you like, the immediate feedback both for your own behavior and the behavior of others provides an ideal learning-by-trying environment. The result should not surprise anyone.
The study seems to say the kids who play violent video games are better at moral reasoning, but does that lead to more ethical behaviour? A person can be great at moral reasoning and still choose to make the immoral choice. Or are the kids reasoning through and then making better moral choices as a result?
People with books and a good education in past generations did what? Study? Publish?
Wealthy people with lots of books and a really good education? Support an author?
People with a few books and much less education who had to find work?
The sales of self improvement books?
Now lets try that with computer games?
Well educated with the free time and wealth to enjoy a lot of different computer games as they are published.
Paying full price and having the free time to enjoy the computer games.
Poor but decades later they collect classic computer games that are decades old?
Decades later they have the wealth and free time to enjoy a computer game hobby.
People who are poor and have hours to play computer games every day.
Inner city areas with lots of crime? Stay inside and play computer games?
Is the reasoning from the wealth, books, education? With computer games as a hobby?
The escape from the crime rate of an inner city by playing computer games places that person in a more moral place than many in the same generation?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
*knocks on forehead*
ANYBODY HOME? HUH? THINK MCFLY
*Shanghai flat affect*
*Bill explains that is his forehead, not actual house*
You po po fuck. Virtue depends on habit, not reasoning. Aristotle knew that. If you mean that "moral reasoning" does not engender virtue then what's so moral about it ? Oh I know ... gaffotizing Trotsky-sluts want blo-jobbing your students to be an aspect of post-mod virtue. Gotterdamerung
... is a chicken and egg question. Are mature games more likely to reduce your moral common sense, or are those lacking moral common sense more likely to be drawn to smutty games?
People do not generally agree as to what is "moral" and what is "immoral",
so the idea that there could exist a test that can measure "moral development"
is the kind of social-science bullshit that keeps cropping up here.