Researcher Links Media and Violence
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Cyrus Hanley said:
You guys are awesome. I am absolutely sick of the knee-jerk response that many gamers have to instantly assume that any study on violence in media is specifically attacking games or agenda driven or that this is no possible way for video games, just like every other single piece of media, could possible have an effect on someone, positive or negative.8bitlove2a03 said:
It's like the internet doesn't have any reading comprehension. I swear, if this sort of knee-jerk reactioners had to take the TAKS test (Texas Assesment of Knowledge and Skills, it's a hilariously easy standardized test down here), they'd completely bomb the reading portion of that test. And nobody takes it seriously.
I suggest you read the entire article and the study, then, considering that's exactly what the study was about.MegaManOfNumbers said:
Scientifically speaking, you don't even need to bring media into the picture to understand what is happening. The effect is already known as desensitization and it happens in all walks of life. People that live in the suburbs are completely shocked at the way people in a ghetto live every day. People that work on farms or in slaughterhouses are completely desensitized to what it takes to get meat to market. In some parts of the world it is still unthinkable for Gay and Interracial marriage to exist. The more exposure we have to something the less we feel shocked by it. I'll go with that, but I'm still not convinced that being desensitized to violence leads to acts of violence or acceptance of violence.
Being exposed to violence will desensitize you to it. That's a fact just about everyone can agree on. I feel these violence linking studies need to go a bit deeper. I would hypothesize that people with less control over their emotions are less likely to be able to control their emotions if stimulated in any circumstance - love, sad, happy, angry...
The fault is always with the person, not the media.
OP, I like to keep seeing this kind of thing because the debate interests me greatly. Thank you for sharing the article.
Being exposed to violence will desensitize you to it. That's a fact just about everyone can agree on. I feel these violence linking studies need to go a bit deeper. I would hypothesize that people with less control over their emotions are less likely to be able to control their emotions if stimulated in any circumstance - love, sad, happy, angry...
The fault is always with the person, not the media.
OP, I like to keep seeing this kind of thing because the debate interests me greatly. Thank you for sharing the article.
The funny thing is, fatty food in itself is not nessecarily bad, it's whether you're ingesting foods that rank high on the glycemic index... After all, having your blood sugar spike too much causes an overproduction of insulin which will cause your fat cells to store energy and swell at a much greater rate, due to the effect of overstorage causing your body to not use the energy it consumes, which will in turn cause your energy level to drop as your metabolism slows due to all that insulin forcing the energy that would normally go to your organs and muscles to be used to go into fat storage instead, which compounds intoa near never ending cycle of lazyness, hunger that really shouldn't exist(mis representation of signals from the body telling your brain that you are hungry, when it's really just your body processing the food you have eaten incorrectly) therefor overeating, therefor overloading with nonessencial calories, and making you fat and tired.
When you eat at a fast food place, it's not the burger that's doing the damage, it's the sugary soft drink and the processed simple carbohydrate rich fries that do it, not the fat...
but I can see how someone who's studying the effects of media violence might not exactly know much about nutrition or biology... so it can be forgiven to some extent.
I would just think that it might be a little more poignant if he had referenced something he actually knew something about as an example, because as it stands, to people who know anything about either field, his statement seems to be rather a ploy to get funding from retarded govenment officials who already hate violent games, than an actual attempt at doing real research.
When you eat at a fast food place, it's not the burger that's doing the damage, it's the sugary soft drink and the processed simple carbohydrate rich fries that do it, not the fat...
but I can see how someone who's studying the effects of media violence might not exactly know much about nutrition or biology... so it can be forgiven to some extent.
I would just think that it might be a little more poignant if he had referenced something he actually knew something about as an example, because as it stands, to people who know anything about either field, his statement seems to be rather a ploy to get funding from retarded govenment officials who already hate violent games, than an actual attempt at doing real research.
There's a vast difference between causation and correlation that this researcher seems to be ignoring, on top of the vast distance from a finding of mri results and actual behavioral results. All this guy has is a correlation and it's a weak and undetailed correlation at that. I could just as accurately say that violent video games repress violence in youth since the rise of video games in our culture weakly correlates to a decrease in violent crime. If you can show me a randomly selected set of people who are made to play violent video games compared to a randomly selected set of people who are made not to play violent video games, and find that one group is more violent, you might have evidence worth bringing up. However, these studies allow you to read into them what you want to.
Sounds like he needs to grab a dictionary and look for the word "correlation".
Cor-re-la-tion: mutual relation of two or more things, parts, etc. The degree to which two or more attributes or measurements on the same group of elements show a tendency to vary together.
Example: There is a correlation between increased sales of videogames and decreased crimerate in inner cities. While not in itself a statement of proof, this supports the claim by many psychologists and mental health professionals that videogames are not the primary or secondary cause of violent behavior in youth and in fact focuses their aggression in a more constructive manner.
_1308754905.jpg)
Cor-re-la-tion: mutual relation of two or more things, parts, etc. The degree to which two or more attributes or measurements on the same group of elements show a tendency to vary together.
Example: There is a correlation between increased sales of videogames and decreased crimerate in inner cities. While not in itself a statement of proof, this supports the claim by many psychologists and mental health professionals that videogames are not the primary or secondary cause of violent behavior in youth and in fact focuses their aggression in a more constructive manner.
Yeah, and considering this guy wasn't talking about murder rates, but short-term behavioral traits along with some impact in long-term behavior, or specifically for video games for that matter, he would probably agree with you.algalon said:Sounds like he needs to grab a dictionary and look for the word "correlation".
Cor-re-la-tion: mutual relation of two or more things, parts, etc. The degree to which two or more attributes or measurements on the same group of elements show a tendency to vary together.
Example: There is a correlation between increased sales of videogames and decreased crimerate in inner cities. While not in itself a statement of proof, this supports the claim by many psychologists and mental health professionals that videogames are not the primary or secondary cause of violent behavior in youth and in fact focuses their aggression in a more constructive manner.
aaron552 said:
You live in a country where the ground itself is actively trying to kill you.
I know you consider having to kill three things on your way to breakfast normal, average routine, but for the rest of us living in a country where every blade of grass hides the next highest thing on the "World's Most Deadly Things" list is a wee bit.....insane.
I just don't get it...
This guy et. al, don't seem to understand the concept of 'cathartic release'. We all have pent up anger; it's natural to our species. It only depends on how we release this frustration, whether through a movie, book, or video game..
This guy et. al, don't seem to understand the concept of 'cathartic release'. We all have pent up anger; it's natural to our species. It only depends on how we release this frustration, whether through a movie, book, or video game..
If you don't raise you kids right and let the T.V. and internet do it for you, then I can see it having negative repercussions on the childs psyche... Same with letting your kid only read books that have mass violence, genocide, hate speeches, sexism, and etc. If you raise the kid to know right from wrong and that games, books, and all forms of entertainment is just for entertainment and not for you to reenact.. Also if you see a child getting highly aggravated to the point of throwing objects and effecting long term behavior then stop buying them violent games and take them outside to go fishing or something...
Watching to much media can effect ones behavior in my opinion, but if you are raised right and can form your own opinions and not be a mindless drone, then you should be able to ignore it, shrug it off, check the facts... or just not watch T.V., play games, read books, and go into a cave and cover your ears and close your eyes... Also why not ban the main news channels for they are huge perpetrators of fear and hate mongering to increase ratings...
Watching to much media can effect ones behavior in my opinion, but if you are raised right and can form your own opinions and not be a mindless drone, then you should be able to ignore it, shrug it off, check the facts... or just not watch T.V., play games, read books, and go into a cave and cover your ears and close your eyes... Also why not ban the main news channels for they are huge perpetrators of fear and hate mongering to increase ratings...
Clear proof indeed. And when you add in all the violence seen in people over the past 2000 years we can definetly see that media influences children to grow up and be more violent. It completely explains all the wars, roving bands of bandits, the violent oppression, all the murders, rapes, and assaults. Just think of how peaceful history would have been had all those children not been subjected to all the violent media.
Yet violent behavior is actually in decline in most of the world. What could that possibly mean?
Huh, I missed the part of the article that said "will always cause the very worst outcomes" and "is the only factor ever that can influence behavior."
That said, the claim of the world being more hostile etc. is curious, I be interested in seeing it more detailed (not that I'm going to look).
That said, the claim of the world being more hostile etc. is curious, I be interested in seeing it more detailed (not that I'm going to look
).
I'm not sure I agree with that 1st point about increased aggressive behaviour but the other 2 I would say yes. Remember all those old horror movies that scared you when you were younger and now you look back on them and see they are tame compared to todays standards.Andy Chalk said:
Still I would say most of these issues/non-issues could be solved by parents taking an interest in their children and NOT letting them play games, watch movies or read books that are rated above their age.
The same effect as real-world violence? No, I've seen real world violence, it is NOT the same as a video game. How many people walk away from their Xbox with PTSD?
Due to crap in my childhood, I always had anger issues, but I never had video games. Now, I have video games, but I almost never get angry. The only things that cause anger in me now are ignorant people, multiplayer(I hate multiplayer with a burning passion), and my printer.
Due to crap in my childhood, I always had anger issues, but I never had video games. Now, I have video games, but I almost never get angry. The only things that cause anger in me now are ignorant people, multiplayer(I hate multiplayer with a burning passion), and my printer.
So, this guy says that studies have shown that violent media (i.e.: not just video games) can have a noticeable temporary effect on children, with cumulative effects over time. He says that media is only one influence, and that there are plenty of things to do to take care of it, citing parenting first. He says that his book is ultimately to let other people judge for themselves.
The "gaming community" then responds with statements like:
"Violence has always existed." Which is not contrary to his statements.
"He shouldn't just pick on video games!" Which he didn't.
"We should focus on better parenting!" Which he suggested.
"He's shoving his pre-assumed ideals down our throats!" Which he is not.
I get it, "us" vs "them". Team mentality. Tribal warfare. Polarization. Groupthink. It is the most effective way to "protect" oneself. Of course, it assumes that we are all on different "teams" and need protection, instead of working together with an open discourse for the betterment of all.
Not everyone who has come forward indicating that exposure to violent media can affect violent behavior is saying that anyone who plays a violent video game is a murderer waiting to happen, or that all video games should be banned. All they are trying to say is that we should be aware of it and act accordingly. Responses like "videogames didn't turn me violent" and "another attempt at censorship" are ignoring the issue and aren't really helping anyone.
The "gaming community" then responds with statements like:
"Violence has always existed." Which is not contrary to his statements.
"He shouldn't just pick on video games!" Which he didn't.
"We should focus on better parenting!" Which he suggested.
"He's shoving his pre-assumed ideals down our throats!" Which he is not.
I get it, "us" vs "them". Team mentality. Tribal warfare. Polarization. Groupthink. It is the most effective way to "protect" oneself. Of course, it assumes that we are all on different "teams" and need protection, instead of working together with an open discourse for the betterment of all.
Not everyone who has come forward indicating that exposure to violent media can affect violent behavior is saying that anyone who plays a violent video game is a murderer waiting to happen, or that all video games should be banned. All they are trying to say is that we should be aware of it and act accordingly. Responses like "videogames didn't turn me violent" and "another attempt at censorship" are ignoring the issue and aren't really helping anyone.
Grey Carter said:Gamer Science
Slander versus Pander.
Read Full Article