Violent Video Games -- Do They Harm Our Youth?

[Midtowner]

Grand Theft Auto IV was recently released. According to press releases, it was solely responsible for $400 million in sales in its first week out. If you're not familiar with the Grand Theft Auto franchise, it's essentially the classic cops 'n robbers storyline with a little twist -- you're the robber.

Of course, besides just stealing, you kill -- a lot -- prostitutes, police officers, random civilians. You get around (as the title suggests) by stealing cars.

The game features graphic violence and general mayhem, strong language, etc.

Some object to titles such as this because of the perceived effect they may have on the children playing them. Some studies suggest that young people who play these games are more prone to violence than those who don't -- others dispute that claim as being baseless or based upon "junk science."

What are your views OKC? Are our children doomed?

[lpecan]

Not that my opinion should really matter, I tend to view such studies as junk science and pandering to conservatives. They seem to show correlation rather than causality in the few that I've seen. An admittedly strawman argument that seems rather persuasive to me is that fantasy games, books etc. do not cloud the grasp of reality among those who participate, yet we suggest that GTA users will shape their moral compass on the basis of a video game.

I think many ppeople's views on the matter are colored by the fear that, if true, we do the world great harm. But that does not on its own show causation.

[mecarr]

It probably makes people a little more prone to violence. By the way, OKC Metro may not be the most appropriate forum for this conversation. I'd consider relocating it to "current events" or "faith & values"

[OKCCrime]

Yes - here is a review worth reading.

Gentile, D.A., & Anderson, C.A. (2006). Violent Video Games: Effects on Youth and Public Policy Implications. Chapter in N. Dowd, D. G. Singer, & R. F. Wilson (Eds.), Handbook of Children, Culture, and Violence (pp. 225-246). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


"The apparent lack of parental concern about media violence is particularly perplexing given the clear research on the negative effects of such violence and the strong critique of such violence by pediatricians. The most recent comprehensive review of the literature on media violence effects— coauthored by eight leading media violence researchers—documents the “unequivocal evidence that media violence increases the likelihood of aggressive and violent behavior in both immediate and long-term contexts” (Anderson et al., 2003, p. 81). In a 2004 survey of pediatricians, over 98% believe that the media affect childhood aggression (Gentile et al., 2004). Somehow, this message has failed to be delivered successfully to the average American parent.
Although there is a large and impressive body of research on the effects of violent television and film on aggressive behavior, there is less research on the effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior. The research that does exist, however, suggests an equally strong connection to negative effects on children."

[OKCCrime]

I tend to view such studies as junk science and pandering to conservatives. They seem to show correlation rather than causality in the few that I've seen.

The review that I mention above discusses correlational, experimental, longitudinal and meta-analytic studies. It would be hard to call all of these studies junk science or pure pandering.

[Karried]

This has been a concern of mine since I had children. I was incredibly diligent with my first son, he went to a small sheltered Christian pre-school and then to a small Christian private school for years. We sheltered him very much until about age 10 or so and then slowly started letting him watch things that we hadn't before and playing games that we hadn't allowed before.

We transitioned with no problems and so far, he's still the mellow, easy going kid he always was.

One thing to keep in mind is the spacing of your children. Mine are five years apart so it's really hard not to let the youngest one do things the older one does. He was raised a little differently, public schools etc, etc.. saw and played games I never would have let my first. Still, he's a great kid too, smart, easy going, mellow... I got really incredibly lucky with these boys.. knock on wood, they are such good kids.

Some of my friends didn't let their kids watch anything, no video games, controlled every aspect, constant church.... so very sad to me that once these kids got one iota of freedom, they revolted, rebelled, and went crazy.. pot smoking, swearing, getting horrible grades.. on and on. I honestly cannot even believe how far they have turned from how they were raised.

So, long story short, everything in moderation.. don't make things so unattainable that it is all the kids want to have (since they can't)... don't forbid everything, don't over control.. pick your battles, etc etc. Teach them right from wrong through example ... they'll take that over what they see on a video game.

And yeah, we have Grand Theft Auto IV.

[soonerguru]

Of course our children are doomed -- but not because of Grand Theft Auto. Seriously, I played that once for three hours and then when I got behind the wheel of a real-life automobile, I was looking for wary pedestrians to run down.

[Karried]

tee hee, I do that without playing the game.. if I see one more mom not using her turn signal in our school parking lot, I'm opening a can of whoop *&( !

Thank God, my kids are too young to drive yet!

[Midtowner]

I read the original Anderson study. It was actually junk science. At the time, Anderson was a professor at Iowa State University. The methodology used was to allow individuals to play violent video games, then present them with hypothetical situations and gauge the violence of their responses. On two levels, the study looked flawed -- first, the test was only administered on college students at ISU taking intro to psychology classes, so you have a poor sample there. Second, the test only measured violence in response to hypothetical situations -- i.e., situations not unlike those which the subjects had just been exposed to in the violent video games they had been playing prior to the questioning. That crap study is still the only experimental study mentioned in the article.

I wasn't too impressed with the correlational studies or longitudinal studies either. The article fails to discuss those flaws or any counterarguments (as a good article generally would).

What I see here is someone who had a conclusion and then went out looking for experiments to prove his hypothesis correct.

Here's a correlational stat for you: The sales of violent video games are at record levels. Since the early 90's when we first saw true video game violence, i.e. Double Dragon or Mortal Kombat, we have seen two figures with inversely proportional relationships -- while the number of violent video games sold over the years has skyrocketed, the rate of violence has decreased rapidly. In fact, if you want to look at murder rates since 1992, we're currently at nearly half that rate.

Video games are now more widespread and realistic than ever and yet every year, the crime rate, i.e., the violence rate has decreased. How can that be true if these video games are supposed to spur violent behavior?

[Architect2010]

I'm actually playing that game now on my PS3. I'm 17 days from being 16, so I think I'm a good candidate for this conversation.

I think all this media about violent games causing evil little children to have extreme temper tantrums, lol, has been blown way out of control. If you are worried about your kid playing video games and then going to kill some prostitutes, then you need to do something with your child because obviously something is wrong with them. FYI it is a 17+ game but kids still get a hold of it...why? Adults...salespersons, other kids parents, older siblings, and parents themselves. It really is ridiculous. This game has no affect on me or my friends but I suppose thats because we know whats right and whats stupid and we know that killing someone because you did it on a game = mental problems.

Thats my opinion, I'm just defending this game which is actually probably the best game I have ever played. I think it just comes down to...Is your kid sane enough to notice the difference between reality and virtual reality. And even if they can't, they really shouldn't be playing this game anyways unless the parent knows exactly what game they are giving their child.

[Blazerfan11]

I think the games like World of Warcraft that people play 60 hrs a week are more harmful

[Midtowner]

Yeah, but those folks aren't really dangerous, they're just absent.

I agree WoW is a scourge and it needs to be stopped

[Blazerfan11]

Well, people play games like that SO SO much. And there are so many other things they could do to contribute to society...I guess. I dunno, maybe they'd just be watching tv if it weren't for those games. I'm just a financial adviser not a sociologist or Mickey Hepner LOL!!!!

[bombermwc]

Here's my humble reply:

These games follow the same idea television should. If you don't want your child to play the game, don't buy it for them. Don't allow them to own it. Don't have it in your house. Same for TV, if you don't want them watching a show, don't let them....how about doing some parenting? We have so many parents that want to blame their kid's problems on anything but their lack of parenting. It drives me absolutely bonkers. If those crazy folks would spend half their effort parenting instead of going on missions against these "evil" corporations, maybe their kids wouldn't have issues.

GTA 4 is a game. It's not reality, and if you're old enough to play the game, then you're only enough to know the difference. Yes there are always going to be weirdos that get ideas to do some really stupid things from it, but hey guess what, NEWS FLASH - people have been doing that for all time. Just because they are playing a game instead of reading it in a book, does that make it worse? I don't think so. Music, TV, Books, Games, whatever....it's all the same. You as a parent decide what your child is allowed to have. You know whether or not your child SHOULD have the items...not just if they want them. Make an adult decision and then make rules about it. If you get the game, then tell them they can only play it for so much time in a day. Make them get off their duff and do some physical activity as well.

[PLANSIT]

Yes, I continually see myself becoming more violent, just like the video games I play:

- I break bricks by smashing them into my head, resulting in monetary gain.
- I eat mushrooms that make me bigger and flowers that allow me to shoot fire.
- I shoot shells at highway traffic, allowing me to get home sooner.
- I randomly scream "It's a me, MARIO! " at the grocery store.

Look, the real problem here is that video games are used as baby sitters. Parents need to find time to play with their children. Games like GTA are not for the young. Like others have said, if you don't like it, don't buy it or allow it in your home. Get off your ass and go play catch.

[Richard at Remax]

Here is my two cents on the subject. Being that I am 24 and have grown up with video games.

You have to start comparing video games to movies now. In terms of how in debth they can be with the story and emotion.

THESE VIDEO GAMES HAVE RATINGS FOR A REASON. This is where it gets me. The same parents who are throwing hissy fits over these games are the same ones who are buying them thinkings "oh it's just a video game."

A Mature Ranking = Rated R. I know places like gamestop and walmart will not sell it to you if you are under 17. So how are these children getting it?

I have played all the Grand Theft Auto games and I have never been inclines to go steal or commit violence.

Parents need to pay more attention and get more involved. Thats all I have. Thoughts?

[Karried]

I almost think that some games can help relieve stress and aggressive feelings .. for example, I play Halo 2 Team Swat Live a lot... and it helps me release feelings of aggression I might feel in the real world, on the other team - in a virtual setting.

No harm, no foul.

And I play with the kids too. so we get in family time - not your typical Scrabble game but I have two boys.. they like video games, I like video games, what's not to love?

They're not simple minded idiots, they understand very clearly the difference between a video game and reality.. and what they can and can't do, should or shouldn't, and if they didn't, they'd wouldn't be playing video games.

And I agree, moderation with everything.

We all adhere to the idea that games are fun but we have to get out of the house, swim, play frisbee, do yardwork, exercise etc.

How do you explain violence in a society lacking video games? Where 12 year olds carry real uzis.

[Kerry]

Does art imitate life or does life imitate art? It is a little of both. Art takes the fringes of our society and makes it mainstream. However, once the moral fiber of the society is gone the fringes are no longer the fringe and things are mainstreamed faster.

[darnell]

i'd say bad parenting is the culpret to most bad kids.

you have to be 17 to buy it anyway. too embarrassing to see politicians pander to this so-called "videogame violence" to potential voters. it's been going on for some time.

[BDP]

I actually think that romantic comedies do much more harm on society that any violent video games. There is probably no doubt in most players minds that these games and movies like them are pure fantasy. However, there are lot of people who watch romantic comedies as if they are some sort of attainable reality. Then they live their life every day thinking that they will not only end up in this perfect relationship, but that it will happen in an amusing way in a beautiful setting. Then it's these people who actually go crazy and then drive the rest of us crazy. At which point all of these people need games like GTA, so they don't actually go out and kill prostitutes to resolve the anger and depression caused by John Cusacks and Hugh Grant movies.

[Midtowner]

you have to be 17 to buy it anyway.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's just a voluntary thing some stores do. I sort of recall some law about that being struck down as unconstitutional.

There are places that would have no qualms selling GTA IV to a 6-year-old if he had the cash.

[OKCCrime]

I almost think that some games can help relieve stress and aggressive feelings .. it helps me release feelings of aggression I might feel in the real world, on the other team - in a virtual setting. No harm, no foul.

Where have I heard that argument before? Oh yeah -- pedophiles claiming child porn relieves their sexual desires. At least we now know that kind of argument is a load of horse hockey. If anything, violent games will tend to increase the chance that you will result to violence in say for example, parking lots.

if I see one more mom not using her turn signal in our school parking lot, I'm opening a can of whoop *&( !

[OKCCrime]

the study looked flawed -- first, the test was only administered on college students at ISU taking intro to psychology classes - so you have a poor sample there.

Yeah, sure, not a relevant population at all - college students never play violent video games in real life - never play counter-strike all night in dorm LAN parties - never make college selection based the number of warcraft players, or ever go on to commit violent acts in school.

the test only measured violence in response to hypothetical situations

A little thing known as ethics gets in the way of experimentally studying violence in actual situations. I guess that is something that Dr. Anderson understands and is reflected in his 'junk science'.

What I see here is someone who had a conclusion and then went out looking for experiments to prove his hypothesis correct.

You weren't wearing rose-colored glasses by chance were you when you read the article?

Video games are now more widespread and realistic than ever and yet every year, the crime rate, i.e., the violence rate has decreased. How can that be true if these video games are supposed to spur violent behavior?

Violent crimes have decreased because
1) US population is aging (baby boomers are getting older and older people commit fewer crimes)
2) there has been efforts to stiffen sentencing, especially for repeat violent offenders
3) there has been increased police enforcement and effectiveness (just watch CSI sometime- they always catch the bad guy)
NOT because of the increase in video game sales

BTW, How can you criticize correlational approaches and then turn around and bite from the serpent's apple?

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

I actually think that romantic comedies do much more harm on society that any violent video games. There is probably no doubt in most players minds that these games and movies like them are pure fantasy. However, there are lot of people who watch romantic comedies as if they are some sort of attainable reality. Then they live their life every day thinking that they will not only end up in this perfect relationship, but that it will happen in an amusing way in a beautiful setting. Then it's these people who actually go crazy and then drive the rest of us crazy. At which point all of these people need games like GTA, so they don't actually go out and kill prostitutes to resolve the anger and depression caused by John Cusacks and Hugh Grant movies.

LMAO

*shakes tiny internet fists of rage against John Cusack*

Where have I heard that argument before? Oh yeah -- pedophiles claiming child porn relieves their sexual desires. At least we now know that kind of argument is a load of horse hockey. If anything, violent games will tend to increase the chance that you will result to violence in say for example, parking lots.

Comparing a mother that interacts and plays with her children to pedophiles? Smoooooth. Nice strawman. You lose 10 logic points.

[lpecan]

2) there has been efforts to stiffen sentencing, especially for repeat violent offenders

I would love to see some proof of that. Admittedly, I am a physicist by trade, and not a criminologist, but it seems that a deterrent theory of incarceration has sort of gone by the wayside.

In any case, OKCCrime, you confuse flaws in methodology with reasonable efforts. Just because its not reasonable (or ethical) to measure actual violence by encouraging it, it does not make it any more predictive when the study pretty much assumes what it is trying to prove... Think about it. -->

Study is showing that fantasy violence causes real violence (essentially)

Subject engage in fantasy violence

Subjects given opportunity to engage in fantasy violence again

Subjects engage in such fantasy violency, and conclusion is reality violence is caused by fantasy violence.


Forgive me if I've oversimplified this, but I have read that study before and it doesn't tell me anything.

The only ethical way to do the study would take 20 years, (and I hope they are doing so)


Take a 100 person control group and a 100 person experimental group, making sure to have kids of similar socioeconomic backgrounds, and only let half of them play GTA4 for 5 years.... see where the end up.

The problem is such studies are not really feasible, because you cannot control a g roup that long. Also, studies which look retrospectively at those who play violent video games ignore the HUGE possibility of a single factor (or multiple) which causes the individual to both play violent video games AND be violent. Doesn't that make sense? If I am a violent person, would I not be more likely to play Whack a Cop than My Little Pony?