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.