Swedish Study Says Videogames Do Not Cause Aggression

[Realitycrash]

Arguing that violent video games lead to real-world violence uses the same logic as arguing that elevated ice cream sales lead to shark attacks.

Wow, you really have no idea how an analogy works, do you?

On the contrary, I know how they work quite well. The case at hand and the example I gave are both fallacies of correlation.

That's..A really, really poor comparison. Several mediums, when exposed to it, mentally alter your behavior in some subtle way. Point is that it isn't enough to go from violence in videogames = violence in real life, but that doesn't mean that violence in videogames = no change at all. We have age-ratings for a reason, you know.

Mhm. ESRB, correct? Pardon my skepticism, but their roots are practically the same as that of the Motion Picture Production Code [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Production_Code], a panicked response to a new medium of entertainment. Ever actually perused the ESRB website? The descriptions of the rating conditions [http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_guide.jsp] are particularly entertaining, and they've got delightful parallels to stuff found in the MPPC (or Hayes Code, as it's better known).

So, your theory is that "several mediums," one of which I assume is video games, can "mentally alter your behavior in some subtle way." In other words, "A fair sized group of factors can affect your brain in ways that are too minor to detect or prove scientifically," and this is why we have an organization as laughably Puritan as the ESRB?

For your own good, don't make such a logic-leap again, especially not with a flawed comparison like that. You'll probably get pounced on the internet by far ruder people than me (and I have no intent of being rude) in an instance if made at the wrong time, in the wrong place.
Cheers.

Let me break that previous point down:

-Correlation is not the same as causation, ie, just because two things happen at once doesn't mean one caused the other and vise versa.

-I've yet to see arguments about video games causing real-world violence that can't be explained by existing mental instability, and what remain are simply cases where police found a copy of Doom or something in the room of a crazed gunman.

-I stated that using correlation to claim that violent video games are responsible for violent behavior is like claiming ice cream sales cause an increase in shark attacks.

-I didn't invent that example. it's been used [http://intergalacticwritersinc.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/ice-cream-consumption-linked-to-shark-attacks/] many times [http://pineda-krch.com/2008/09/03/causal-basis-of-the-ice-cream-shark-correlation-fallacy/] before I said it here [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7592579.stm]. There's a few examples for you.

-The basic idea of the aforementioned ice cream/shark attack 'study' is that both ice cream sales and shark attacks actually do rise at the same time as one another, but only a monumental idiot would think that they were actually causal of one another. In real examples, it's not always so obvious.

Did you really think I picked those two things at random? Or were you just so eager to flaunt your perceived intellectual victory that you didn't stop to think about it?

Hahahahahahhaha. Did you just spend half an hour writing that up?
Yes, I did think you took those two completely at random. I got a few reason as to why such an anology is silly stillo, but I CBA to write half a thesis-paper on a forum.
Did you think I honestly would, or do you just want to flaunt your preceived intellectual superiority by posting an overly long explanation that is mostly beside the point?
Still, don't even answer. Have a nice day.

 

[JesterRaiin]

(snip)
The reason I feel that your post isn't quite correct is that you are suggesting that there isn't any evidence/ it isn't likely that games cause violence.

Nope.
I merely observe that "causality" in this special case may or may not exist, however until we find solid proof nobody should use this assumption as a valid argument in discussions.

Also, i'm more than sure that even if it will be proven beyond any doubt, some people will still accuse videogaming of being responsible for all Mankind's sins. Yep. Some people need to hate something.

 

[AbstractStream]

This is going to be one of those never-ending arguments, huh?
Well at least gamers aren't being blamed this time around.

 

[Scars Unseen]

fact is, you get infinitely more time with your child than anyone else

Fun fact: the above statement was probably true... in the 50s. I see my daughter for an hour while I get her up and ready for day care, and then for twenty minutes after I get home from work before she goes to bed. And that's if I don't have to be at work early(then I don't see her in the morning) or have class that day(then I don't see her at night). Also, I work 2 out of 3 weekends, so I don't see her but for a few hours then either. I still don't blame others for any problems my daughter might have(she's a bit behind on language development because she hears Japanese at day care and English at home), but don't assume you know anything about any given family. In a world where 2 incomes is mandatory for most people, the time just isn't there.

 

[Simon Pettersson]

At the height of it's socialist policies the country almost imploded, and that was 1991-ish.

Actually that happened when we had an right wing goverment ....
They tried to do what they did now but a bit too fast. The man in charge of it is even in goverment right now not as primeminister tho thank god ....

 

[Dastardly]

fact is, you get infinitely more time with your child than anyone else

Fun fact: the above statement was probably true... in the 50s. I see my daughter for an hour while I get her up and ready for day care, and then for twenty minutes after I get home from work before she goes to bed. And that's if I don't have to be at work early(then I don't see her in the morning) or have class that day(then I don't see her at night). Also, I work 2 out of 3 weekends, so I don't see her but for a few hours then either. I still don't blame others for any problems my daughter might have(she's a bit behind on language development because she hears Japanese at day care and English at home), but don't assume you know anything about any given family. In a world where 2 incomes is mandatory for most people, the time just isn't there.

I'm not saying you have "all the time you want." I'm saying you have "more time than any other individual does." I'm not talking just hang-out time or anything, either -- or even time spent directly talking/playing/instructing with the child. The time a child spends sleeping? That counts, too -- parents have a lot of control over that environment. Parents are responsible for more hours than any other individual.

A lot of kids, for instance, come to school tired and grouchy and unable to focus because 1. their parents don't enforce a reasonable bed time, 2. the bed/room is not suitable for comfortable sleep, 3. the home environment is so stressful that the child isn't able to get restful sleep, 4. the child isn't well-fed, and a hungry body can't get quality sleep. (Yet when the kid performs poorly in school, they look at the teachers.)

My point here is that parents often attribute far more influence to other areas because it appears they spend "most of their time" there. Let's look at school, for instance. From birth to 18, a child has 157,788 hours in his/her life. 20,160 are spent in school (including an average 1 year of pre-school). That's assuming a full 8 hours per day, which is usually not the case (but we're allowing for after-school activites, too). That's 13% of a child's life at school. That's including lunch, bathroom, recess, lockers... And that 13% is usually split among as many as 40 different teachers.

By contrast, they spend (if we assume 8 hours of sleep) 52,596 hours sleeping. There's 33%, or over twice what they spend in school. That's time spent in the home environment, so there's a lot of influence there even though it's not active "parent time."

What's the point of all these numbers? That parents have absolute control over every minute? No. Just that they have more time in which they are the primary influence over their child's life than anyone else. They have more "hours of influence" than they choose to recognize. Whether or not all of them use that time correctly doesn't change the fact that it's there. And a parent can influence their children even when they're at work, by the way they establish routines and the home environment.

 

[Fearzone]

We all learn that correlation does not prove causation in undergrad, then for some reason that gets totally forgotten when people earn their PhD degree in politically-motivated psychology research.

 

[Baresark]

At the height of it's socialist policies the country almost imploded, and that was 1991-ish.

Actually that happened when we had an right wing goverment ....
They tried to do what they did now but a bit too fast. The man in charge of it is even in goverment right now not as primeminister tho thank god ....

You call it a right wing problem, but it was a problem with the socialist policies. The policies that cost too much money to uphold and your taking everything you can. It was the deregulation at the time and the lowering of the corporate tax levels that spared it. It kept businesses there and provided jobs to people.

 

[BrotherRool]

(snip)
The reason I feel that your post isn't quite correct is that you are suggesting that there isn't any evidence/ it isn't likely that games cause violence.

Nope.
I merely observe that "causality" in this special case may or may not exist, however until we find solid proof nobody should use this assumption as a valid argument in discussions.

Also, i'm more than sure that even if it will be proven beyond any doubt, some people will still accuse videogaming of being responsible for all Mankind's sins. Yep. Some people need to hate something.

Okay that's fair enough, yeah definitely can't be taken as fact until much more research

 

[TheMatsjo]

Sadly we aren't socialists anymore.

*Sad face*

OT: Hooray for Swedish research, but boo on the title of this piece Andy, misleading. Saying there is no evidence of causation =/= there is no causation.

 

[Dutch 924]

Here's some more evidence

 

[Zen Toombs]

Swedish Study Says Videogames Do Not Cause Aggression

Excellent! Now I've got to show this to my Social Psychology teacher....

 

[Char-Nobyl]

Hahahahahahhaha. Did you just spend half an hour writing that up?

I always love when people try and mock me for writing longer-than-average posts in short periods of time. It reminds me of how good I am at writing when people exclaim "There's no way you could have done this in less than X amount of time!"

Yes, I did think you took those two completely at random. I got a few reason as to why such an anology is silly stillo, but I CBA to write half a thesis-paper on a forum.

Oh, yes, "half a thesis-paper." Let's see what Microsoft Word says about the length...apparently, I wrote 353 words, which to you is "half a thesis-paper." Boy, are you in for a rude surprise when you get to university.

Also, love the rebuttal: it takes a certain something to think yourself victorious when you only respond with "I have plenty of counter-arguments, but I'm not going to write any of them."

Did you think I honestly would, or do you just want to flaunt your preceived intellectual superiority by posting an overly long explanation that is mostly beside the point?

Actually, I was wondering that same thing. Did you actually expect me to respond? Because your post is practically screaming "Oh God, I'm in over my head. Damage control!" The only thing left is for you to try and nervously deliver a "Yeah, and don't come back!" line in the hopes that I'll wander off on my own volition and you can delude yourself into counting this is as a victory.

Still, don't even answer. Have a nice day.

Ah, nevermind. There it is.

 

[MonkeyPunch]

I thought that was common knowledge. It is to me

Recently on TV I saw an interview with an old media celebrity (I can't remember exactly who now, but I can remember being surprised that this was coming from their mouth) and even they said something to the extent of "...and then I go play a couple rounds of Modern Warfare to get rid of some of that aggression...".

If anything I think (and always have) that violent video games can be a great outlet.
Taking it out on virtual entities is always better than taking out on your real immediate environment.