The presentation's now out of the way, so I can now comment on how I feel it went.
As ever, I was somewhat nervous and stuttery as I stood before the lecture hall, which was probably my largest audience for any presentation I have ever done... despite it being at least a third empty. But thanks to my own mental preparation, I think this time I handled it suprisingly well. Being quiet by nature, having a microphone in front of me helped to make me loud and clear to the audience, and in some cases I interacted with and shared some humour with the audience, getting good responses from that.
Normally when giving presentations, the actual slideshow itself is displayed behind me, so oftentimes I'd find myself turning to the projector to help me remember information. This time however, I had both the laptop in front of me, as well as my cue cards to aid me in presenting my information, and stopped me from having to turn around all the time - although there were some cases where I turned around in order to point certain things out. As far as the cue cards, I don't think I actually read from them too much. At one point, I went to look down to see what information I had to give for a certain slide, and it turned out that I hadn't even been swapping them out.
Along with the improvements I made, there were still a small few scuff-ups. I think due in part to my nervousness, there was some key information that I forgot to mention, such as the functionality of the DS (Wireless, Microphone, more detail about the Touch Screen atc), and there was also at least one occasion where I stuttered, which was more to do with trying to find the right words, so I had to stop and start again. I think generally in some cases, my delivery of the information may have been a bit awkward.
Overall, I'm very happy with the improvements I have made in terms of giving presentations. Having other group members with good presentation skills also helped to give me a confidence boost. Again, having a microphone in front of me also helped greatly, as everyone was able to hear my voice for a change.
In future, whenever I am required to do another presentation - as much as I'd rather never have to do them again - I think I can look back at this one, and continue to develop my skills from what I have learnt from giving this presentation, as well as improve on the general mistakes I still make.
Tuesday, 8 December 2009
Monday, 7 December 2009
Group Presentation - Formation and Preparation
During the time in which we were writing our reports, teams were formed to create group presentations based on any one of the following three subjects:
The three products we chose to cover were the iPod, the Thermos Flask, and the Nintendo DS, the latter of which was to be researched by me.
After a week of researching, we arranged a meeting in which we would give each other feedback, make improvements to our own parts of the presentation and then merge them all into one. The way we laid out the information on the slides was consistent throughout, giving our presentation a nice clean look.
Normally I am quite nervous and stuttery when it comes to presentations, and since this was being presented in front of a large group of people, I needed plenty of mental preparation. I wrote cue cards to help me remember important details that I didn't cover in any of the slides, rehearsed in front of family members, and even imagined how the presentation would go in my head - I think all of this preparation has paid off, and I will cover my thoughts in my next entry.
- Three iconic CD/LP covers
- Three product designs which have had an impact on society
- Three videogames which have influenced games design
The three products we chose to cover were the iPod, the Thermos Flask, and the Nintendo DS, the latter of which was to be researched by me.
After a week of researching, we arranged a meeting in which we would give each other feedback, make improvements to our own parts of the presentation and then merge them all into one. The way we laid out the information on the slides was consistent throughout, giving our presentation a nice clean look.
Normally I am quite nervous and stuttery when it comes to presentations, and since this was being presented in front of a large group of people, I needed plenty of mental preparation. I wrote cue cards to help me remember important details that I didn't cover in any of the slides, rehearsed in front of family members, and even imagined how the presentation would go in my head - I think all of this preparation has paid off, and I will cover my thoughts in my next entry.
Monday, 16 November 2009
Conclusion/Abstract/Introduction
Conclusion
With so many mixed research results, it is difficult to determine if and how exactly violent videogames are affecting the behaviours of their players, therefore it can be concluded that there is still no solid proof. However, parents do need to keep an eye on what their children are playing, and pay careful attention if they appear to be playing the game obsessively.
Abstract
For the past three decades, videogames have been both an important part of our culture, and a source of controversy. Among the many videogames available today, there are some with bloody, violent content which is said to cause their players to commit violent crimes such as school shootings in real life.
This report was written as a means of investigating whether these games are in fact causing people to become violent and aggressive as a result of playing these games, or if this is merely speculation, and that the videogames by themselves are not a direct cause, but other external influences.
It was concluded that there is no real proof of games causing real life violence, and that parents should pay attention to the rating on the box.
Introduction
Violence in videogames is a prominent and highly controversial subject in the media today. There are many topics brought up such as robbery and school shootings that are supposedly being caused by the playing of violent videogames, such as the notorious Manhunt and Grand Theft Auto videogame series. However, some research claims the opposite point of view: that the games being played are not the direct cause of the violent behaviour, but rather an unhappy upbringing by ignorant parents. Notably, there is also a strong bias in the media, with very little mention of whether parents are in control of what types of games their children play, and with a strong intent of making the games as controversial as possible.
This report is being written in order to investigate if violent videogames are really a cause of real life violence – whether players are really mimicking actions previously played in a videogame, or if it is actually the fault of ignorant and delinquent parents.
With so many mixed research results, it is difficult to determine if and how exactly violent videogames are affecting the behaviours of their players, therefore it can be concluded that there is still no solid proof. However, parents do need to keep an eye on what their children are playing, and pay careful attention if they appear to be playing the game obsessively.
Abstract
For the past three decades, videogames have been both an important part of our culture, and a source of controversy. Among the many videogames available today, there are some with bloody, violent content which is said to cause their players to commit violent crimes such as school shootings in real life.
This report was written as a means of investigating whether these games are in fact causing people to become violent and aggressive as a result of playing these games, or if this is merely speculation, and that the videogames by themselves are not a direct cause, but other external influences.
It was concluded that there is no real proof of games causing real life violence, and that parents should pay attention to the rating on the box.
Introduction
Violence in videogames is a prominent and highly controversial subject in the media today. There are many topics brought up such as robbery and school shootings that are supposedly being caused by the playing of violent videogames, such as the notorious Manhunt and Grand Theft Auto videogame series. However, some research claims the opposite point of view: that the games being played are not the direct cause of the violent behaviour, but rather an unhappy upbringing by ignorant parents. Notably, there is also a strong bias in the media, with very little mention of whether parents are in control of what types of games their children play, and with a strong intent of making the games as controversial as possible.
This report is being written in order to investigate if violent videogames are really a cause of real life violence – whether players are really mimicking actions previously played in a videogame, or if it is actually the fault of ignorant and delinquent parents.
Evaluation of Results
As the information gathered above shows, while there is research and some very strong opinions on violence in videogames causing real life crimes, there is just as much research and opinions suggesting exactly the opposite.
Critics against the games do however make a fair point, it does seem to make sense that people playing these games might be inspired by them, and thus imitate them in real life by committing serious crimes such as school shootings, bank robberies, etc.
However, other research and opinions show that videogames are not to blame for violent crimes, but that there are other triggers such as delinquent parents that are largely ignored by the media, and what they never mention are the parents of the children committing the crimes: who bought the games for them? Why are they allowed to own and play these games, despite the fact that a ratings system is in place in order to prevent minors from buying and owning these games?
It is possible that higher levels of aggression may have an effect on a person’s favourite videogame genres: people who aren’t aggressive by nature may prefer more light hearted and traditional videogames like the Super Mario series, while people who feel the need to “take their anger out” more often may instead prefer violent and gory games such as Manhunt.
Videogames, in theory, should not really have anything to do with real life violence, however it is possible that the people committing the crimes are either blaming the games as a way of finding an excuse, or there are psychologically vulnerable people playing these games, with their own problems and their obsession with the violent games building up to a point where they feel an impulsive need to commit an act that would be considered a crime.
But, as mentioned before, some of these people have had their parents or legal guardians buying the games for them, because they are not old enough to play them. The issue of parents not paying attention to age and content ratings appears to be common, and if the violent videogames are in fact having effect on the minds of the players, then this would most likely be the root of the problem: not the games themselves, but the ignorant parents.
Critics against the games do however make a fair point, it does seem to make sense that people playing these games might be inspired by them, and thus imitate them in real life by committing serious crimes such as school shootings, bank robberies, etc.
However, other research and opinions show that videogames are not to blame for violent crimes, but that there are other triggers such as delinquent parents that are largely ignored by the media, and what they never mention are the parents of the children committing the crimes: who bought the games for them? Why are they allowed to own and play these games, despite the fact that a ratings system is in place in order to prevent minors from buying and owning these games?
It is possible that higher levels of aggression may have an effect on a person’s favourite videogame genres: people who aren’t aggressive by nature may prefer more light hearted and traditional videogames like the Super Mario series, while people who feel the need to “take their anger out” more often may instead prefer violent and gory games such as Manhunt.
Videogames, in theory, should not really have anything to do with real life violence, however it is possible that the people committing the crimes are either blaming the games as a way of finding an excuse, or there are psychologically vulnerable people playing these games, with their own problems and their obsession with the violent games building up to a point where they feel an impulsive need to commit an act that would be considered a crime.
But, as mentioned before, some of these people have had their parents or legal guardians buying the games for them, because they are not old enough to play them. The issue of parents not paying attention to age and content ratings appears to be common, and if the violent videogames are in fact having effect on the minds of the players, then this would most likely be the root of the problem: not the games themselves, but the ignorant parents.
Bulk of Essay/Research Results
There appears to be a common point of view in the media today that videogames centred around violent content are causing people who play these videogames to become violent themselves through imitative behaviour. However, the opposite point of view suggests that there is no real proof, and that perhaps there is a general bias in the media, and from people who have never played a videogame.
Research has been undertaken in order to figure out if, why and how violent content in games is causing aggression in the players. For example, Anderson and Dill (2000) undertook two studies to examine the effects of violent videogames on aggression-related variables. In the first study, they found that the playing of violent games was positively related to both aggressive behaviour and delinquency, while in the second study they discovered that laboratory exposure to graphically violent content in videogames increased aggressive thoughts and behaviour. They later concluded that because of the interactive nature of videogames, they are potentially more dangerous than other media such as film and television. However, earlier within the report (Anderson and Dill, 2000, pp.774) they seem to contradict their conclusion by claiming the following: “We do not, however, expect that playing violent videogames will routinely increase feelings of anger”, and “Playing a frustrating game is likely to increase anger. Violent content by itself, however, in the absence of another provocation, is likely to have little impact on affect.”
Jack Thompson, a notorious attorney who has for his behaviour and actions been disbarred, is an activist against videogames with violent and/or sexual content. He has been aggressively campaigning mainly against the controversial Grand Theft Auto series, which he claims are “murder simulators” that “train to kill” (Bradley, 2005, pp.1). After the occurrence of a shooting at Virginia Tech that took place on April 16th, 2007, Thompson immediately jumped to the conclusion that the killer was addicted to the game Counter-Strike, however it was later found that this was not the case, with nothing related to videogames being found (Hartlaub, 2007). More recently, at the SGC (ScrewAttack Gaming Convention) that took place in July 2009, he was invited to hold a Q&A session with the people – players of videogames – in attendance. He admitted that he himself has played the games that he has been critical of, but he also states “I’m not a gamer… it’s just not my thing.” He also says that as someone who has represented women who have been beaten and raped, his experience with Grand Theft Auto III was disturbing and that it made him feel ill (Screwattack.com, 2009).
While Jack Thompson believes that violent videogames are murder simulators, Prensky (2002), on the other hand, believes that videogames are highly valuable as a learning tool. He notes that there are five different stages involved, including Learning How, as in learning how to play the game and how the characters and in-game world work, and Learning What, for example the rules of the game being played. Rules such as whether a teammate can be shot in a shoot-em-up videogame or whether a simulation type of game allows the player to perform destructive acts can teach children valuable real life lessons: the players of these games can, for example, compare the in-game rules and physics to what they know and what is allowed in the real world.
Stogner (2007, pp.1), a mother of three children with whom she plays videogames, notes that while most videogames contain some form of violence, and while children are influenced by what they are exposed to, she does not feel that the games themselves cause violence. She states: “If a child has no natural violent tendencies, then playing a game should not cause violence,” and “If a child is already violent beyond normal measures, then perhaps their parents should be careful not to expose them to any more violence.” She also notes that all games have a visible rating system, and that it is ultimately the responsibility of parents to decide what games their children play. While Prensky (2002) says that the in-game rules and physics can be compared to real life, Stogner (2007, pp.2) similarly notes how parents need to ensure the children playing these games realise that “just because you can do it in a game doesn’t mean that it is okay to do it in real life.”
Ferguson (2008) of Texas A&M University has undertaken a number of studies related to violence in videogames, and youth aggression. In one study, he found “no significant relationship” between school shootings and playing violent videogames, and in another (Ferguson, 2007); he found that publication bias issues emerge for both experimental and non-experimental studies of aggressive behaviours, and there is also indication for publication bias in non-experimental studies of aggressive behaviours.
Youth Violence and videogame sales data (Ferguson, 2008). Note how Youth Violence has decreased over time despite the large increase of videogame sales.
In another study, Ferguson et al (2009) came to the conclusion that delinquent peer association, depression and psychological abuse by parents were key factors for youth violence and aggression, and not violent television or videogames.
Research has been undertaken in order to figure out if, why and how violent content in games is causing aggression in the players. For example, Anderson and Dill (2000) undertook two studies to examine the effects of violent videogames on aggression-related variables. In the first study, they found that the playing of violent games was positively related to both aggressive behaviour and delinquency, while in the second study they discovered that laboratory exposure to graphically violent content in videogames increased aggressive thoughts and behaviour. They later concluded that because of the interactive nature of videogames, they are potentially more dangerous than other media such as film and television. However, earlier within the report (Anderson and Dill, 2000, pp.774) they seem to contradict their conclusion by claiming the following: “We do not, however, expect that playing violent videogames will routinely increase feelings of anger”, and “Playing a frustrating game is likely to increase anger. Violent content by itself, however, in the absence of another provocation, is likely to have little impact on affect.”
Jack Thompson, a notorious attorney who has for his behaviour and actions been disbarred, is an activist against videogames with violent and/or sexual content. He has been aggressively campaigning mainly against the controversial Grand Theft Auto series, which he claims are “murder simulators” that “train to kill” (Bradley, 2005, pp.1). After the occurrence of a shooting at Virginia Tech that took place on April 16th, 2007, Thompson immediately jumped to the conclusion that the killer was addicted to the game Counter-Strike, however it was later found that this was not the case, with nothing related to videogames being found (Hartlaub, 2007). More recently, at the SGC (ScrewAttack Gaming Convention) that took place in July 2009, he was invited to hold a Q&A session with the people – players of videogames – in attendance. He admitted that he himself has played the games that he has been critical of, but he also states “I’m not a gamer… it’s just not my thing.” He also says that as someone who has represented women who have been beaten and raped, his experience with Grand Theft Auto III was disturbing and that it made him feel ill (Screwattack.com, 2009).
While Jack Thompson believes that violent videogames are murder simulators, Prensky (2002), on the other hand, believes that videogames are highly valuable as a learning tool. He notes that there are five different stages involved, including Learning How, as in learning how to play the game and how the characters and in-game world work, and Learning What, for example the rules of the game being played. Rules such as whether a teammate can be shot in a shoot-em-up videogame or whether a simulation type of game allows the player to perform destructive acts can teach children valuable real life lessons: the players of these games can, for example, compare the in-game rules and physics to what they know and what is allowed in the real world.
Stogner (2007, pp.1), a mother of three children with whom she plays videogames, notes that while most videogames contain some form of violence, and while children are influenced by what they are exposed to, she does not feel that the games themselves cause violence. She states: “If a child has no natural violent tendencies, then playing a game should not cause violence,” and “If a child is already violent beyond normal measures, then perhaps their parents should be careful not to expose them to any more violence.” She also notes that all games have a visible rating system, and that it is ultimately the responsibility of parents to decide what games their children play. While Prensky (2002) says that the in-game rules and physics can be compared to real life, Stogner (2007, pp.2) similarly notes how parents need to ensure the children playing these games realise that “just because you can do it in a game doesn’t mean that it is okay to do it in real life.”
Ferguson (2008) of Texas A&M University has undertaken a number of studies related to violence in videogames, and youth aggression. In one study, he found “no significant relationship” between school shootings and playing violent videogames, and in another (Ferguson, 2007); he found that publication bias issues emerge for both experimental and non-experimental studies of aggressive behaviours, and there is also indication for publication bias in non-experimental studies of aggressive behaviours.
Youth Violence and videogame sales data (Ferguson, 2008). Note how Youth Violence has decreased over time despite the large increase of videogame sales.In another study, Ferguson et al (2009) came to the conclusion that delinquent peer association, depression and psychological abuse by parents were key factors for youth violence and aggression, and not violent television or videogames.
Methodology
In order to gather information for this report, the research method will be to simply use readily available materials, such as news articles, the library and the internet.
One reason for using this method is because other research methods such as questionnaires would be difficult to produce and undertake within the timescales available. The use of readily available media has proved useful thus far, and as stated by Glaser and Strauss (1967, pp.163), “These (Library) materials are as potentially valuable for generating theory as our observations and interviews”.
The information being gathered can be considered to be qualitative data, since it is mostly descriptive in words, whether it’s research that has been written, a news report, or in some cases an opinion. No numerical data for the topic seems to exist, with the only numerical data available for videogames being the number of units sold, which will not necessarily reflect how much violence is supposedly caused by these games in real life.
With the various information that will be gathered, it will be easier to come to a conclusion as to whether videogames really are a cause of violent crimes in real life. Any other data such as graphs collected will also be included within the report.
One reason for using this method is because other research methods such as questionnaires would be difficult to produce and undertake within the timescales available. The use of readily available media has proved useful thus far, and as stated by Glaser and Strauss (1967, pp.163), “These (Library) materials are as potentially valuable for generating theory as our observations and interviews”.
The information being gathered can be considered to be qualitative data, since it is mostly descriptive in words, whether it’s research that has been written, a news report, or in some cases an opinion. No numerical data for the topic seems to exist, with the only numerical data available for videogames being the number of units sold, which will not necessarily reflect how much violence is supposedly caused by these games in real life.
With the various information that will be gathered, it will be easier to come to a conclusion as to whether videogames really are a cause of violent crimes in real life. Any other data such as graphs collected will also be included within the report.
Friday, 30 October 2009
Literature Review
A strong supporter of this view is disbarred attorney Jack Thompson, an anti-videogame activist, who believes that game series such as, most notably, Grand Theft Auto are “murder simulators” that “train (the players) to kill” (Bradley, 2005).
Anderson and Dill (2000) undertook two studies, with results showing that the playing of violent videogames showed a clear relationship to aggressive behaviour and delinquency, with the relationship being stronger for men, and individuals who are characteristically aggressive.
On the other hand, Prensky (2002) argues that videogames are a valuable learning tool, perhaps even the most powerful learning mechanism ever known. He believes that a great deal of useful learning goes on, despite or in addition to the game’s content, something that he feels is largely ignored by critics.
Ferguson (2009) of Texas A&M International University found “no significant relationship” between a school shooting and violent videogames. It was found through further research that youth violence is related to depression caused by delinquent parents. By contrast, exposure to violence in videogames and on television had little or nothing to do with youth violence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)