Answering A Question



                 
 Video Games and Violence: Next Great Social Dilemma or Political Hogwash


                Over the past few years, video games have become an increasingly popular choice in an ever-growing entertainment field.  Where before video games were considered to be solely the province of the nerds, geeks and disenfranchised; they have quickly become a viable entertainment alternative for all people regardless of social strata.  As a result of this shift, our children are becoming increasingly exposed to video games, and in particular, video games depicting different types of violent acts.  Video games as a whole have come under fire recently with people claiming that violent video games are causing our children to become more violent and aggressive.  Much of this outcry has stemmed from the fact that a large number of recent mass-shootings have been perpetrated by people who could be referred to as avid gamers (Ferguson, 770).  Given this outcry it is unsurprising the number of studies that have come out involving video games and their effects on our children.  As seen in the evidence provided by numerous research teams from universities all around the world, there is no conclusive evidence linking exposure to violent video games to changes in aggressive/anti-social or prosocial/civil behaviors.
                Professor Christopher J Ferguson, currently of Stetson University, noted in his article in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence, "Video Games and Youth Violence: A Prospective Analysis in Adolescents," there are three main theories being used to describe the potential relationship between video games and violence (379).  For ease of discussion I have named these views the casual view, the habitual view and the outside view.  The casual view is the theory that exposure to violent video games leads to serious aggression and violence in the players.  Most of the argument in today’s society involving video games stems from whether or not this theory is true.  The counterpoint to the casual view is the habitual view.  This theory states that prior aggressive tendencies leads to violent video game use and not the other way around.  This theory also goes on to explain that prior aggressive behavior is an indicator that such behavior has a likelier potential to continue regardless of outside stimuli.  The final view Ferguson talks about is the outside view.  This theory focuses on the fact that any correlation between video game violence and aggressive behaviors are by small in nature and are more likely the cause of underlying outside influences like gender and peer and family influences (Ferguson, 380).
One of the biggest charges laid against the video game industry is the thought that violent video games increase violence and aggression in their players, particularly children.   In a study conducted by a research group led by Christopher J Ferguson regarding the long term effects of violent video games and children it was found that there is no concrete evidence supporting a long term relationship between violent video games and aggression (Ferguson, 389).  This study also takes into account other outside variables including symptoms of depression in both the children and parents, gender of the child, prior aggressive behaviors, and family involvement and violence (Ferguson, 381).  It is interesting to note that of the participants in the study that showed behaviors of a more violent nature, the majority of them showed signs of depressive behaviors before the study began. 
                 Another study conducted by Ferguson and his research team in 2013 attempted to determine if there were any correlating behaviors, both good or bad, associated with long term exposure to violent video games.  As with his previous studies, Ferguson attempted to quantify and minimize the effects of outside influences, i.e. family attachment and violence, prior violent behaviors, and depression in both subjects and their parents.  As with his previous study, it found that there is no evidence supporting a direct correlation between violent video games and a proliferation of positive or negative behaviors (Ferguson, 120).   On an interesting side note, Ferguson expresses a belief that instead of looking for what video games are doing to our children we should instead look for what is causing them to make the choices that they do.  Ferguson also reiterates his findings from his previous studies that the effect of family attachment and violence has a higher impact on both positive and negative behaviors of children than violent video game exposure alone.
                On the other side of the video game argument is the theory that video games have a positive effect on children’s prosocial/civic minded behaviors.  These behaviors include everything from volunteering in the community to involvement in nation, state and local issues.  While many people look at these two issues as being inversely related, the prosocial effects of video games are infinitely more complex.  Many of the same video games that are described as violent and destructive have intricate team building exercises built in ranging from online team based multiplayer modes to immense raids and guilds where everyone has a job and is expected to do their job and help out everywhere they can.
                Professor Christopher J Ferguson and his research team have also studied this side of the social dichotomy of video games as well.  In 2010, Ferguson authored an article in Computers in Human Behavior titled "Call of (civic) duty: Action games and civic behavior in a large sample of youth.”  In this article Ferguson and his team studied the effects that playing violent video games has on a child’s positive social and civic behaviors as opposed to looking at it only from the negative aspect.  In support of his study, Ferguson quotes statistics that he obtained showing the decrease of violent crimes committed by children while the sale of video games as a whole increased over a 10 year time frame (Ferguson, 771).  As in each of Ferguson’s other studies, he attempts to minimize the effect of “third party” variables such as parental involvement and instead focus specifically on the effects of the video games themselves.  One interesting side note that Ferguson mentions however is the fact that parents that are more involved with their child’s video game experience tended to be more open and accepting of the game’s violence when compared to a parent with less involvement (Ferguson, 773).  Unlike many of Ferguson’s other studies, this one proved to show a direct correlation between violent video games and an increase in prosocial behavior observed in the subjects.  Ferguson theorizes that this effect is due to the fact that the majority of video games containing “violent” aspects also have a large team based aspect as well. 
            Another article written by Morgan Tear and Mark Nielsen from the University of Queensland, Australia covers research that was conducted by their team looking for a correlation between video games and prosocial behaviors.  The Australian team first sought to differentiate between types of violence in video games and whether the actions you commit are morally defensible or not.  They then sought to determine whether a violent video game with morally defensible actions had the same effect on people as a video game with more morally-indefensible actions (Tear, 2).  Tear’s team conducted their video game experiment three different times with differing groups of people in an attempt to find a correlation between video games and prosocial behaviors.  At the end of their experiment the team concluded that violent video games do not have a negative impact on prosocial behaviors and that any previously raised concerns may in fact be disproportionate to the actual effect that they might have.
            As video games continue to become an increasingly entrenched part of our daily lives, the content of those games will continue to be scrutinized by researchers and the government to ensure that we as a society are keeping on children safe from any negative influences.  As can be seen by the four previous studies, violent video game content alone will not transform your child from a mild mannered youth into a mass-murdering psychopath.  Parental involvement in their children’s lives, good role models and a good bit of common sense will see that the youth of today will grow to be strong leaders for tomorrow.

Works Cited
 
Ferguson, Christopher J., et al. "Not Worth the Fuss After All? Cross-sectional and Prospective Data on Violent Video Game Influences on Aggression, Visuospatial Cognition and Mathematics Ability in a Sample of Youth." Journal of Youth and Adolescence 42.1 (2013), 109 - 122. Web. 17 November 2013.
---"Video Games and Youth Violence: A Prospective Analysis in Adolescents." Journal of Youth & Adolescence 40.4 (2011), 377-391. Web. 17 November 2013.
---"Call of (civic) duty: Action games and civic behavior in a large sample of youth." Computers in Human Behavior 27.2 (2011), 770-775. We. 17 November 2013.
Tear, Morgan J. and Mark Nielsen. "Failure to Demonstrate That Playing Violent Video Games Diminishes Prosocial Behavior." PLoS ONE 8.7 (2013), 1-7. Web. 17 November 2013.



No comments:

Post a Comment