Poll: Do Video Games cause violent behavior?

[babinro]

Definitely Maybe.

I don't feel that video games have any more impact than television, movies, or internet videos would towards violent behavior. Removing only one of these sources would barely have any impact as an individual is often exposed to several if not all of these.

If all of these sources were removed and thus you had an Amish-like community...would violent behavior be reduced? Maybe. Can't say I've known the Amish to be as violent as everyday individuals.

Finally, this board is extremely biased for polls...but I'm sure you know that. Post this same question on a highly conservative religious based forum and you'd probably get a very different sample.

 

[SpaceSalmon]

I voted no.
I wouldn't say that games make me a violent person. However, I've only had my consoles for a few years now and I've found that since I got them my thoughts when people annoy me are more along the lines of "if this was fallout 3, you would be dead by now" than they were before.
But I don't act on them.

 

[Vortigar]

Yes.

And so does playing with legos.

Digging through your sandbox.

Playing tag.

Building treehouses.

Or anything else you can get up to.

Including any type of work you care to mention.

Well, maybe not testing beds.

No, you could get in a fight over who gets to test the new one first.

 

[ayailla]

I voted maybe for a simple reason. There will always be some impressionable idiots wanting to emulate what they see. As a gamer, my gut wants me to vote no, but I just can't. Impressionable idiots will always exist, and always have. I will say that, in some cases, video games can cause violent behaviour, but so can TV and movies. If you are impressionable, you can blame anything for your actions and it will be technically true. If you are copying something from a game, the game is partially to blame, but the individual is mostly to blame. I'd say the game was only about 2% to blame, but the blame is still there.

Let's face it. The people who play GTA and then steal a car to run over pedestrians are the same people who watch Wrestling and then decide to choke slam their little brothers, or watch Hannibal and decide that cutting of their face and feeding it to the dog is a good idea.

This has all probably been said before but hey, it's a long thread. And I'm only on a break... I should get back to work.

 

[Front Row]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

this question always makes me so angry i want to kill people

Agree !

Do "Do Video Games cause violent behavior?" Polls cause violent behavior ?

YES !

 

[n19h7m4r3]

I had to do similar project when Studying Psycology, most scientific studies are inconclusive.

Some rare ones proving it does, some proven it doesn't.

If by some chance they do, when TV and Movies would have a far greater impact considering they are far more realistic.

 

[joshuaayt]

Not of themselves, no. Has a person, at some point, performed a criminal act inspired by one in a videogame? Sure, but it's not the fault of the medium- television is just as bad an 'offender'.

It is not the videogames, but the mindset of those playing them.

Of course, I'm just restating the argument that is presented every time this question is asked.

 

[Propergood]

Of course they cause violent behaviour because they are a source of frustration; I batter my poor controller into a sad pile of plastic and silicone shards with every misplaced cross on FIFA... If I had a wife she'd probably receive the same treatment. And I do.

 

[Koroviev]

I haven't seen a study that established anything other than a correlation, and then, I didn't have a chance to look over the methodology of said study. And even if they can prove a statistically significant relationship between video games and violent behavior, that does not necessarily translate to practical significance. It simply means that there is a link, and that the link did not appear as a result of some sampling error.

The reality is that video games probably aren't much different than books and movies. Are they more interactive? Yes, they are. But that is not to say that books and movies don't offer their share of interactivity, as they do. If a movie was good, chances are we think about it later, talk about it, perhaps even write about it and see it again. That movie might be violent, or it might not be. The important thing is that the viewer in question has the capacity to distinguish between fiction and reality.

And there lies a big difference between children and adults. Up until a certain age, most children struggle to separate reality from fantasy, fact from fiction. Kids at this age tell lies not out of malicious intent, but because they literally can't grasp the difference between what they said and what actually happened. And hence why it is logical to withhold video games of a certain bent.

However, most adults have the ability to tell fact and fiction apart. In other words, watching a violent film, or even ten violent films, will not turn the average adult into a savage beast. But of course, that is what the media would like for us to think, and so they fall back on the fallacy of positive instances. Who cares about all the occasions on which serial killers were found to have hobbies other than gaming? As far as the media and the moral "majority" is concerned, only those instances which prove their point stand to be judged, even if they only make up an insignificant minority.

 

[Spinozaad]

No.

While some people might kill after Catcher in the Rye, while some might slaughter others after listening to Burzum (or, rather, are Burzum), while some might kill people in sewers after playing Advanced Dungeons and Dragons or after playing Counter-Strike; the very fact that millions upon millions of people who participate in the same activities do not kill should be evidence enough.

Correlation does not imply causation, especially if the causality is utterly crushed by a counter-example.

 

[Tenkage]

No.

While some people might kill after Catcher in the Rye, while some might slaughter others after listening to Burzum (or, rather, are Burzum), while some might kill people in sewers after playing Advanced Dungeons and Dragons or after playing Counter-Strike; the very fact that millions upon millions of people who participate in the same activities do not kill should be evidence enough.

Correlation does not imply causation, especially if the causality is utterly crushed by a counter-example.

did you just do a Monster and Mazes Reference?

 

[misterv]

I think it depends on the kid. If it's a kid who is easily impressed upon for instance then it's more likely they will become violent. On the other hand if the kid is a logical thinker or simply has a good understanding of video games then probably not (80% of gamers are the second though).

 

[Tanner The Monotone]

Most of the studies I've seen have been inconclusive or have said that it dosen't cause a drastic change in behavior (this was 2 years ago, so some new results may have have been discoverd). Here's a fun fact, A hard-core game has the reflexive skills of a vetern fighter pilot, but the respitory system of a 60 year old chain smoker.

 

[Spinozaad]

No.

While some people might kill after Catcher in the Rye, while some might slaughter others after listening to Burzum (or, rather, are Burzum), while some might kill people in sewers after playing Advanced Dungeons and Dragons or after playing Counter-Strike; the very fact that millions upon millions of people who participate in the same activities do not kill should be evidence enough.

Correlation does not imply causation, especially if the causality is utterly crushed by a counter-example.

did you just do a Monster and Mazes Reference?

That I did. Wonderful acting by Tom Hanks.

 

[Tenkage]

No.

While some people might kill after Catcher in the Rye, while some might slaughter others after listening to Burzum (or, rather, are Burzum), while some might kill people in sewers after playing Advanced Dungeons and Dragons or after playing Counter-Strike; the very fact that millions upon millions of people who participate in the same activities do not kill should be evidence enough.

Correlation does not imply causation, especially if the causality is utterly crushed by a counter-example.

did you just do a Monster and Mazes Reference?

That I did. Wonderful acting by Tom Hanks.

too bad the movie was trying to destroy D&D

 

[Kortney]

Yes, if there is a major pre-disposition beforehand. Movies have spurred psycho's into violent action, as have songs and I'm sure video games have too.

 

[Xyliss]

Now, considering I do statistics I'm going to say three things. Firstly, you shouldn't tell us which side you are supporting, secondly, a more open question would help your results as having closed questions means we have to choose a straight yes or no asnwer, which distorts the results, and finally this is a completely biased sample of people you are asking. However, considering it is an English assignment and not a statistical one, you should be fine as you will be focusing on a completely different part of the study.

Now that that's out of the way, I'm all for you writing the paper and (hopefully) showing that video games do not cause violent behaviour as it would 'help our case' as it were and show the world (well your English teacher) that video games aren't as bad as many suspect

 

[Wintermoot]

maybe since no research has been done we cant prove nor disprove it

 

[Deviltongue]

The only violence videogames cause is Nerd Rage and that is usually directed at inanimate objects like controllers or TVs or Keyboards. Rarely people.

 

[StarStruckStrumpets]

Of course they do!

If I struggle on a boss and fail 200-odd times, I get pissed off and punch my bed or something. (F-you Elder Wyrm). The question you should really be asking is, do video games cause violent behaviour that has a substantial effect on society?

In which case, the answer would certainly be a resounding no.