(Scott Wallace – Staff)
Violent video games – the myths and the facts
Surprising results from a new study about kids and video games.
By Yvonne Zipp| Correspondent for The Christian Science Monitor/June 2, 2008 edition
Reporter Yvonne Zipp discusses ways to deal with video games in your home.
Reporter Yvonne Zipp
True or false: Violent video games cause children to become more aggressive. Sorry, that was a trick question. Despite much bandying of statistics and loud talking by critics on both sides of the argument, the real answer is that there is no real answer – at least not one that’s been proved scientifically.
So say Cheryl Olson and Lawrence Kutner in their new book, “Grand Theft Childhood.” “In fact, much of the information in the popular press about the effects of violent video games is wrong,” write the husband and wife team, who direct the Center for Mental Health and Media at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.
That will, of course, be of tremendous comfort to concerned parents who find calculating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin simplicity itself compared with figuring out which video games, if any, to allow in their homes.
But the fact is, the research can’t be boiled down to a simple headline, however much politicians, experts, and the media might wish otherwise, say Drs. Kutner and Olson, who conducted a $1.5 million study funded by the US Department of Justice that looked at the effects of violent video games on 1,200 middle-school-age children.
That conclusion, say other experts, is what makes Kutner’s and Olson’s study so valuable.
“Looking at violent behavior is not a simplistic thing. There is no one thing that is going to cause a child to become violent,” says Kathryn Seifert of Salisbury, Md., who’s a forensic psychologist and an expert in assessing and treating children who are at risk of becoming violent. “It’s a great, great study. I think what they did is wonderful.”
Dr. Seifert’s main caveat is that she would like to see an additional study incorporating children who have been suspended from school or who are in detention centers or on the streets – kids who are more likely to become violent than children who are still in school.
Kutner and Olson became interested in the subject after watching their son, now 18, play video games. “For most kids and most parents,” they write, “the bottom-line results of our research can be summed up in a single word: relax.”
That’s not to say that middle-schoolers aren’t sneaking over to friends’ house to play the new “Grand Theft Auto.” Nor are Kutner and Olson apologists for the video-game industry. While they cite a 2001 FBI study that showed no link between violent video games and school shootings, their own research did show links between 12- to 14-year-olds who almost exclusively played rated-M (for mature) games and a much more common schoolyard problem: bullying. (This was among both boys and girls who played more than 15 hours a week, which Kutner and Olson note, is not the norm.)
Middle-schoolers in this category also were more likely to get into fights, destroy property, and argue with their teachers. However, Kutner and Olson are careful to point out that their study does not prove causality: It may be that more aggressive children are drawn to more violent games, and not that the games themselves are to blame. Researchers just don’t know yet.
But for parents who are contemplating throwing out their son’s Wii, wait a minute: The research showed that boys who don’t play video games at all were the most likely to engage in bullying and other antisocial behaviors. That may be because video games are such an important part of socializing for that age, Kutner and Olson say, that these boys are, by definition, “abnormal.” Here again, Kutner says, there’s no proof of causality. “[We’re not saying] ‘Oh just have a video game, and he’ll be fine.’ No, it doesn’t work that way.”
So, what can parents do, besides throw up their hands and grab the joystick? Actually, Kutner and Olson say that playing the games with your child is an excellent idea, for many reasons. For one, 12-year-olds love being able to trounce their parents at something.
For another, parent and child will be able to have meaningful conversation while playing – whether about video games or not. (Children at that age find it much easier to talk to a parent if they aren’t facing them.) And if a parent finds something that concerns him in the game, a child may listen more thoughtfully than if the parent just issues a blanket refusal to allow future playing, Olson says.
However, parents should be aware that not all video games are equal, and that ratings do not tell the whole story. Manhunt and Postal “are two games that no child should ever go near,” says Olson. And she views DefJam Vendetta, a T[een]-rated game, with a dim eye, because of its portrayal of women.
Finally, Kutner says, “We advise parents not to have [game] consoles in a child’s bedroom. You should be able to see what they’re doing; it should be in a public place. Plus, they’ll be able to sleep at night.” Nor should children have televisions in their room, they add.
In their book, Kutner and Olson compare video games to other juvenile media – such as comic books – that caused parents of earlier generations sleepless nights. Although, they note, because video games are nonlinear, parents can’t easily flip through to make sure a particular game is appropriate for their child. “It could take 15 hours of play” to vet a game, and you still might not find the one scene that might make your hair stand on end, Kutner says.
Other experts say that parents should feel free to go slow. “Why do you want something to be tested on your kid? There’s good reason for parents to be a little skeptical,” says Maria Krcmar, a professor of communication at Wake Forest University in North Carolina. She says the scientific community is about a decade away from conclusive understanding about the effects of video games on children.
“It might turn out that video games are completely fine,” Dr. Krcmar adds, although she doesn’t see that happening. If parents don’t let their child play them, “what have they really missed out on?”
But for those parents who simply won’t let their children have video games at home, Olson says, “total denial doesn’t work.” There’s a good chance the child will just find somewhere else to play them. “It’s like saying, ‘We don’t allow books in our house.’ The medium is not good or bad, it’s how you make use of those games.”
( More stories )
Comments
2. Jeffe | 06.03.08
GTA is primarily about violence. It may not be about beating hookers to death and taking back your money, but having that in the game speaks volumes about what the content is. It reflects a small violent aspect of modern American culture, nothing more. It may be art, but that doesn’t mean that kids should be playing it.
3. Mr. Raymond Kenneth Petry | 06.03.08
This reads like a rehash of television statistics (the authorship is okay)–
We ‘know’ that children who watch no-television achieve the least in school: comparable to children who watch 3-4 hours a day (fact published mid-’80’s); The ‘best’ students watched 0.5-1.0 hours a day (peak interpolated between).
But video games aren’t just DVD’s that mom returns if inappropriate material is found: they’re too expensive; and they’re not-really TV-like: they’re too intense; And content is effectually nonlinear (’random access’); And we have a ’stupid history of flaming’ on IRChats and MUDs– fueling video-prurience.
But there’s also a lot of ‘business’, in video too, And that, stirs violence in thought if its work-through becomes mentally cluttered … That disguises statistics-taking: We have to run multidimensional measurement-correlations.
Hiding the control of violence behind a joystick does not lessen violence– A violent portrayal never lets a child think of the causation, beyond violence, but silences and hackles the opination into brick-bashers’ numbing stop-loss: Ultimately violence must-be talentless skilless mercenary jobbing ipso facto.
Violence emoted, verbal or portrayal, is divisive in society: Making friends among the violent -as thieves make friends- seems no-violence-at-all but all the while pushes closer to the brink of death: the last -whoopy- violence…
Violence has lost its savor in America (call it, jaded, sated, saturated) … which proves that television statistics never told the full depth of reason– and parents should, have taken heed, to -any- touches of violence … today’s tabloid news is old-hat-rechewed: the violence today is against decent people and they’re called, gay, hooker, (and expletives)– to pimp the violent acts.
Yet still, violence never appeals to smiling children: Not –real– children.
But above all, The one glaring fact is that technology is outpacing mankind’s ability to be decent, ethical, -moral- … compared to when I used to ‘dream’ of space-fleet-team-games-via-Internet … back in 1980 … a long while ago.
Games ought to-be-player-rated;– Television is so (or was, last I watched).
Ray.
4. Michaela Stephens | 06.03.08
I wish I could remember the book, but I read that in World War II, the US federal government was considering stopping sales of toy weapons (guns, ships, etc) to divert materials for the war. A toy maker convinced them not to by bringing in all his war toys and allowing the policy makers (grown men) to play with them for half an hour. Then he told them that those toys were necessary for the war effort and that they would make the nations boys into better sharpshooters, better gunners, better bombers, better soldiers.. The policy makers agreed and those toys stayed on the market. Why then are we now trying to convince ourselves that the opposite is true, that these violent video games do NOT make children and teens more violent? If we think about what they are training kids to do, they improve point-and-shoot instinctual action, the realistic sounds of distress from virtual victims cause hearts to become dulled and less-compassionate to verbal expressions of anguish, the blood and the gore.. I think that if video games do not substantially cause violence, then they must certainly cause social insensitivity, lack of mercy, and so on.
5. jesse | 06.04.08
i’m a thirty-something-part-time-gamer who’s enjoyed the occasional video game temper tantrum. games are not JUST for kids. so parents - just use common sense! the games have ratings for a reason. if you’re going to give a teen-rated game to a pre-teen, know that you are exceeding the intended audience of the game maker. AND if you can’t show that minimal level parental intervention, you have no right to blame the game.
6. Ryan | 06.05.08
I’m with Jesse on this one. The ESRB was created for a reason. They create ratings and even give descriptions of the content in the games that earned said game the rating it has. I’ve been playing games like Doom and Grand Theft Auto for as long as I can remember, and, being 21 now, I have yet to even get in a fight. When I play video games, I don’t look at the screen and think that I could get away with those things in real life. I know better than that. My parents taught me the difference between reality and fantasy. The problems are not with video games or music or movies. The problems come from either poor parenting (along with lack of responsibilty, since parents want to blame video games and not themselves) and/or a mentally unstable child. If a child can determine what’s real and what’s not, there wouldn’t be a problem. And to the person that said being exposed to violence so much numbs a person to it, that isn’t always true. I know, I could be the exception to the rule, but I know there are still others like me that, despite playing games where you kill or maim or whatever the villains, if I were to see someone get injured, even if it was someone I didn’t like, I would still try my best to help them as much as I could, instead of just making a call for help then leaving.
7. Richard Harris | 06.05.08
True or false: Violent video games cause children to become more aggressive.
Answer; think a little bit, a player is establishing in his brain ideas of
violence and constantly empowering those ideas. When you encounter an
event in life your first calling up of brain information is going to be the
most prevalent thoughts. When you have cemet banked paths of consciousness
established for a particular activity it is very hard to chose the dirt road.
The saying “practice make perfect” is true, so too if you continue to think
along certain paths those paths develope in power and strength. Just because
“science” has not figured out how to measure some results in no way means
they are not affecting the individual. I strongly suspect if you did the
opposite and the games were wholely constructive and of edifying content
there would be a positive result, however minimal or difficult to measure.
So if you had games on how to be an Angel or a celestial being assisting
God in the moral edification of humans or some type of similar senario
certainly the effect would not be bad, and if anything good. So too the converse. You are for sure not getting any good from violent games and if
getting anything it is bad. Let us not kid ourselves.
8. Rolf Ernst | 06.05.08
Isn’t it important to ask altogether: Do violent video games lead to violent behavior in adults? With the advent of Massive Multiplayer Online Roleplaying games such as ‘World of Warcraft’ and the more recent M (mature) rated title ‘Age of Conan’ simple sales and subscription analysis has shown that these very involved games have become a domain of the older (non-teen) generation. (The same is tru for Second Life, although this game has a slightly different dynamic.)AoC offers sexual and graphic violent content. Second Life allows the characters to have explicit sex with each other.
So do these games impact the older generation, the 20-45 ones? And if so, how does the element of online communities come into play? Do these virtual relationships interfere with real world socialization? Will we become one with our cyber-identity or this merely a form of online chess?
I have yet to see research into this matter.
I think the question of violence catalyst for youth has been hashed and rehashed and much of what has been to say has been said.
However, social impact of sexual and violent content (in particular
9. Johnny | 06.21.08
I grew up playing violent video games and I had a very violent dad, but I was never one to bully kids, I was the one who got made fun of. In middle school I became more violent but not because of video game but because of my friends. I played violent video games because they were fun, I never did anything in real life that I did on a game, because I knew that video games were fantasy worlds and this world had consequences. What I am trying to say is I do not believe that video games influence any child that much. However I have seen a couple of kids that do like to imitate those wrestling games.
10. Ethan Derrick | 06.23.08
Why won’t these people knock it off? Video Games do not make people violent, I have played video games for about 12 years and I have not been a violent person. I only become violent on certain terms
1. Somebody messes with me,my family,and my friends.
2.Big word talking @$$holes that say video games are violent.
I plan on playing video games until I die, and no superficial violent video game players report will change that.
nuff said - E.D.
11. Matthew | 06.26.08
i am a 17 yr old guy and i have been playing GTA since the 1st 1 came out on playstation in 1997, and i have never been violent.
over half of my games on PS2 are violent. i believe that it is not the game that makes you violent, but ur up bringing
i have also been playing violent games since the super nintendo.
so i am living proof that playing violent games does not make you more violent.
12. Eric | 07.07.08
“True or false: Violent video games cause children to become more aggressive.
Answer; think a little bit, a player is establishing in his brain ideas of
violence and constantly empowering those ideas. When you encounter an
event in life your first calling up of brain information is going to be the
most prevalent thoughts. When you have cemet banked paths of consciousness
established for a particular activity it is very hard to chose the dirt road.”
This is an interesting supposition. However if we were to explore this further, I’d submit that the brain patterns and paths being banked are very specific to playing a game. Memory is not simply a stream of images related to morally valued reactions as you present it. Instead memory is a bank of the whole experience - sight, sound, smell, emotions, muscle memory, etc. Being confronted by images and sounds from a screen and rapidly pushing buttons or moving a mouse are far far different activities than being confronted in real life by another person and actually pointing a gun or punching someone. In this respect playing with toy weapons is probably far more like to lead to violent behavior than any video game.
I’d suggest people read this article and the research it was based on. The bottom line is that there is NO EVIDENCE that playing video games leads to violence. NONE. ZERO. ZIP. NADA.
There are some correlations between violent/bully behavior and a) playing no video games; or b) spending vast quantities of time playing very violent video games.
1. Jody Sol | 06.02.08
Decent, but the mainstream media remains ill informed when it comes to the culture of gaming.
The saddest thing is that there is a great population of intelligent, and argumentative gamers out there following the industry and politics of gaming, and they think frightened parents and opportunist politicians are rather ignorant. And you know, they are right.
Ultimately this comes down to one thing, censorship, which ought not be allowed, especially at this point in time, when games are beginning to develop more complex and meaningful narrative, and dissenting political and social commentary.
The uninformed may think Grand Theft Auto is primarily about violence, beating hookers to death and taking back your money. Gamers know that GTA is a fun house mirror reflecting modern American culture.