If you're asking whether the movies were depicting things based on real events or fiction, it's mostly the latter. Our only major criterion for inclusion was that the scenes show violence that could theoretically happen in real life -- i.e. shooting, stabbing, etc. but no Alien v Predator or anything like that. We verified that having seen any of the clips before, i.e. in the subject's own movie-viewing life, did not have a confounding effect on the variables of interest. You can see screenshots from all of the movies we showed our subjects at the following link:
http://tinyurl.com/28fc3d
I'm the author of this paper from Columbia. I'm happy to answer any serious questions about it if people are interested. I can tell you a few things right off, though:
1) We are not advocating censorship of any kind, nor will we participate in any effort that does. This sort of research exists for the sake of being informed, as well as being educated about how the brain works.
2) If you read the paper, we clearly state that these changes in neural processing are not sufficient on their own to make a normal individual become a rabid killer. That would be absurd, and it would totally contradict everyday life. Without a doubt, the observed neural changes must interact with other factors and circumstances that are still being identified.
3) PLoS One is peer-reviewed (or, at least, we were), so I'm not sure where that comment came from suggesting that it wasn't.
4) I assure you that no money was taken away from cancer or dementia research for the sake of this study.
5) Although some people feel the conclusions are obvious (i.e. that the brain is affected by what it sees), assuming something is probably true does not equal scientific evidence.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're asking whether the movies were depicting things based on real events or fiction, it's mostly the latter. Our only major criterion for inclusion was that the scenes show violence that could theoretically happen in real life -- i.e. shooting, stabbing, etc. but no Alien v Predator or anything like that. We verified that having seen any of the clips before, i.e. in the subject's own movie-viewing life, did not have a confounding effect on the variables of interest. You can see screenshots from all of the movies we showed our subjects at the following link: http://tinyurl.com/28fc3d
I'm the author of this paper from Columbia. I'm happy to answer any serious questions about it if people are interested. I can tell you a few things right off, though: 1) We are not advocating censorship of any kind, nor will we participate in any effort that does. This sort of research exists for the sake of being informed, as well as being educated about how the brain works. 2) If you read the paper, we clearly state that these changes in neural processing are not sufficient on their own to make a normal individual become a rabid killer. That would be absurd, and it would totally contradict everyday life. Without a doubt, the observed neural changes must interact with other factors and circumstances that are still being identified. 3) PLoS One is peer-reviewed (or, at least, we were), so I'm not sure where that comment came from suggesting that it wasn't. 4) I assure you that no money was taken away from cancer or dementia research for the sake of this study. 5) Although some people feel the conclusions are obvious (i.e. that the brain is affected by what it sees), assuming something is probably true does not equal scientific evidence.