Former FBI Profiler Says Games Don't Cause Violence

[Andy Chalk]

Former FBI Profiler Says Games Don't Cause Violence

The Parents Television Council claims a new report demonstrates a "strong correlation" between violent media and violent behavior, but the Federal Bureau of Investigation doesn't seem to agree.

"A comprehensive review of more than 381 effects from studies involving more than 130,000 participants around the world shows that violent videogames increases aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, physiological arousal (eg., heart rate, blood pressure), and aggressive behavior," states the recently-released report Youth Violence: What We Need to Know. "A meta-analysis of 26 studies involving 13,661 participants found that violent media exposure is also significantly linked to violent behavior (eg., punching, beating, choking others), although the effects are smaller than for aggressive behavior."

Neither that introduction nor the report's conclusions - such as, "Some research has shown that the gorier the videogame, the larger the effects [on players]" - are terribly surprising, given that the subcommittee that wrote the report is co-chaired by Brad Bushman, a longtime critic of videogame violence, and cites his work several times. Nor is it a big shock that the Parents Television Council, which has previously accused the Supreme Court of the United States of being in the thrall of the videogame industry [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111306-Parents-Group-Denounces-Supreme-Court-Decision], is standing firmly behind it.

"Once again we are faced with evidence showing a strong correlation between violent media and an child's increase in aggressive thoughts and behavior, as well as a decrease in empathy for others," the PTC said in a statement following the release of the report. "If we strive for a less-violent society, then we must address the root causes of our violent culture. The entertainment media's obsession with graphic violence is one of the root causes."

But speaking on Face the Nation, former FBI profiler Mary Ellen O'Toole said she, and the FBI, don't agree with that position. "It's my experience that videogames do not cause violence. However, it is one of the risk variables when we do a threat assessment for the risk to act out violently," she said. O'Toole explained that the FBI looks at gaming habits in conjunction with other factors, including isolation and the exclusion of other activities, when making its assessments of the likelihood of violent behavior.

"But again, it's important that I point out as a threat assessment and as a former FBI profiler, we don't see these as the cause of violence," she added. "We see them as sources of fueling ideation that's already there."

In the same segment, Texas A&M Professor Christopher Ferguson also noted that research on the impact of violent media has been "inconsistent and in many cases methodologically flawed," and also pointed out that societal data over the past few decades, during which time videogames have grown increasingly more popular and graphic, shows that youth violence in the U.S. has fallen to its lowest point in 40 years.

Source: Parents Television Council [http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/24/former-fbi-profiler-video-games-do-not-cause-violence/]



Permalink

 

[Denamic]

It's no use; they are impervious to data that disagrees with them.

 

[Zulnam]

I'm sorry, but somebody has to do it:

http://www.socialsmiling.com/image/asset/1388_yeah-science-bitch_460-418.jpg


Also, is this topic going to ever end? At this point, it just seems like information without subject. It doesn't matter. And on that point, why can't adults make a Quality Product Council, so that they can pick on something that really needs picking, like trash TV or shitty games.

Capcha: hard and fast

I shit you not.

 

[Doclector]

An FBI profiler. Someone who does little else but study the minds of serial killers among other criminals. I'd say nobody else is better qualified to say what does and does not make someone pick up a gun, walk into school, and blast little timmy and friends away.

But of course...nobody's gonna listen to him. Especially not this "parents television council" which sounds like a bunch of right wing old ladies screaming "Won't somebody think of the children!?" every time someone says the word "damn".

 

[Flatfrog]

"A comprehensive review of more than 381 effects from studies involving more than 130,000 participants around the world shows that violent videogames increases aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, physiological arousal (eg., heart rate, blood pressure), and aggressive behavior," states the recently-released report Youth Violence: What We Need to Know. "A meta-analysis of 26 studies involving 13,661 participants found that violent media exposure is also significantly linked to violent behavior (eg., punching, beating, choking others), although the effects are smaller than for aggressive behavior."

I wonder how much more of a correlation they'd find of these things with a nice healthy game of football.

 

[Rellik San]

I have never been to a gaming session where one guy has hit another guy over the head with a glass bottle and tried to slash his face open.

I work in a pub, I see it all the time during sports matches... but Vidjageamz are evil and sport is a good wholesome activity.

The cause isn't violent media, but rather supposedly "healthy" competition.

 

[tmande2nd]

?It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.? ? Sherlock Holmes, A Scandal in Bohemia

I get the feeling that many people who do these experiments simply want to say games cause violence, and twist their data and tests to do so.
I doubt most of them would publish anything if their experiments did not align with their world views.

 

[Erttheking]

I'm sorry, but somebody has to do it:

http://www.socialsmiling.com/image/asset/1388_yeah-science-bitch_460-418.jpg


Also, is this topic going to ever end? At this point, it just seems like information without subject. It doesn't matter. And on that point, why can't adults make a Quality Product Council, so that they can pick on something that really needs picking, like trash TV or shitty games.

Capcha: hard and fast

I shit you not.

.....That is the best meme ever and you have done mankind a great service by sharing it.

What Jessie said. Science *****.

 

[major_chaos]

"A comprehensive review of more than 381 effects from studies involving more than 130,000 participants around the world shows that violent videogames increases aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, physiological arousal (eg., heart rate, blood pressure), and aggressive behavior," states the recently-released report Youth Violence: What We Need to Know. "A meta-analysis of 26 studies involving 13,661 participants found that violent media exposure is also significantly linked to violent behavior (eg., punching, beating, choking others), although the effects are smaller than for aggressive behavior."

I wonder how much more of a correlation they'd find of these things with a nice healthy game of football.

Or chess for that matter. I know I certainly feel more inclined to violence after a board game than I do after a video game.

 

[Jamieson 90]

You know it always frustrates me when people say violent video games make gamers angry/frustrated/more violent, because people tend to do those things when they do any activity that involves a challenge or competition. For example if I can't do a puzzle I get frustrated, and if I lose a football game I might get mad and upset, just like you might get frustrated when playing a video game which you can't beat, and take your anger our by hitting something or if a console gamer throwing your pad.

 

[hentropy]

To be fair, an "ex-FBI profiler" doesn't necessarily speak authoritatively for the current FBI as a whole. Basically, it's not a surprise that playing games might make someone more aggressive while they're playing the game or for a short period of time after, the question becomes whether or not it has any lasting effects or whether avid gamers are more "desensitized" to actual, real-life events of violence or death that happen in front of them- an impossible question to answer, really.

And to be fair again, gamers are just as dismissive of any study that does suggest that perhaps it does negatively affect the psyche of kids or the mentally unstable, the problem is that this presents a very narrow number of options for dealing with it. ~95% of all game sales are already regulated to make sure kids can't buy them and we're not going to do mental background checks on every game sold. So these results alone don't really mean much in terms of laws.

To be honest, I wouldn't mind if the industry voluntarily started moving back towards its roots; more creativity in games and less industry-wide focus on gritty, realistic, and ultra-violent games. We can still have them, but when every major best-selling game includes humans killing other humans, it's not wonder why people point the finger at it and why parents might be wary about letting their kids play games at all.

 

[rofltehcat]

Or chess for that matter. I know I certainly feel more inclined to violence after a board game than I do after a video game.

Oh boy, just think of Monopoly. If any board game deserves to be banned for violence, it is certainly Monopoly.
The data I carefully picked out of over 130000 reports from all over the world suggests that it destroyed more families than alcohol, poor education and tv combined!

 

[Lunar Templar]

and point to the FBI Profiler.

cause given that job, I trust what they have to say on this FAR MORE then some idiotic 'think of the children' group

 

[UberPubert]

"If we strive for a less-violent society, then we must address the root causes of our violent culture. The entertainment media's obsession with graphic violence is one of the root causes."

Out of all the parroted "think of the children" speeches this is the line that makes me flinch, because it is so very familiar. This line of thinking seems to permeate throughout every moral watchdog group I've ever known, as if violence/teen pregnancy/drunk driving/obesity/sick people didn't exist before the advent of whatever the medias newest punching bag is, they just *have* to be foreign influences trying to drag our imperfect society down.

 

[Baresark]

You mean an organization that has aimed its sights at videogames found studies corroborating their belief? Never had that happen before. Now that I have gotten the sarcasm out of the way. Are people familiar with first impressions (The lack of question mark means it's rhetorical). It is very much in human nature that when a person or people have a first impression of something, all evidence there after will on go towards reinforcing that first impression. It's a horrible vicious cycle that can be broken, but it takes more will power (ie. individual will power vs group will power) to overcome that first impression.

Also, as I'm sure 0 of the people that are part of the above mentioned organization have ever touched video games. This goes to whole back and forth with gun vs videogames in this debate that so many gamers fall into. All the gun folks (who are dominantly non violent) generally don't play videogames, so they can easily see how videogames cause violent behavior (it is a group that exists outside a group they know to be non violent in nature). Likewise,the majority of gamers (a group that is dominantly non-violent) have little to know experience with firearms, therefore they can easily see how gun owners are a violent part of society and can, by extension, blame guns.

Haha, people, I love people.

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

?It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.? ? Sherlock Holmes, A Scandal in Bohemia

I get the feeling that many people who do these experiments simply want to say games cause violence, and twist their data and tests to do so.
I doubt most of them would publish anything if their experiments did not align with their world views.

Two things:

A) That Sherlock quote is dead on.

B) The issue with these studies is that it goes both ways. The only people who are interested in performing these studies are doing so to prove who's viewpoint is right. There simply is too much bias going on in these studies that's constantly ruining the validity of the results, and to find someone who would be willing to do this kind of research without having a previous opinion on the subject is seemingly nigh-impossible.