How Video Game Connected to Gun Violence

[The57ironman Profile]

You dont have to ban all games to do something about this issue. Is there anyone calling for that?

You can make the rating system harsher on things like butchering civilians in games. maybe say, hey this shouldn't be T, or M, but something even higher in rating. You could also make a harsher punishment for selling games with a high rating to minors. I'm pretty damn sure most of the kids playing COD are under 17, even though the rating is M.

Lets look at movies, Rampage for example. I dont personally think that an R rating is suitable for a movie about someone butchering a bunch of civilians for fun. Hell, i dont think and X rating is enough for that. Its just is some vile shit that no one should see.

Having a rating system in place makes a lot of sense, we just dont really enforce them, or even use them effectively.

.


......yeah , see..?..that'll solve everything...

[Megame23 Profile]

i didn't say it would 'solve everything' but it would keep games and movies ABOUT BUTCHERING CIVILIANS off the shelves...

Please do explain why you think things like that should be available.

[Spock Profile]

Video Games Desensitize to Real Violence

By Rick Nauert PhD Senior News Editor
Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on July 28, 2006


New research has found exposure to violent video games can desensitize individuals to real-life violence. According to the investigators, this is first documented finding that video-games can alter physiological responses typically aroused by real violence.

Past research revealed that exposure to violent video games increases aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, physiological arousal and aggressive behaviors, and decreases helpful behaviors. Previous studies also found that more than 85 percent of video games contain some violence, and approximately half of video games include serious violent actions.

Nicholas Carnagey, an Iowa State psychology instructor and research assistant, and ISU Distinguished Professor of Psychology Craig Anderson collaborated on the study with Brad Bushman, a former Iowa State psychology professor now at the University of Michigan, and Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.

They authored a paper titled “The Effects of Video Game Violence on Physiological Desensitization to Real-Life Violence,” which was published in the current issue of the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. In this paper, the authors define desensitization to violence as “a reduction in emotion-related physiological reactivity to real violence.”

Their paper reports that past research — including their own studies — documents that exposure to violent video games increases aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, physiological arousal and aggressive behaviors, and decreases helpful behaviors. Previous studies also found that more than 85 percent of video games contain some violence, and approximately half of video games include serious violent actions.

The methodology
Their latest study tested 257 college students (124 men and 133 women) individually. After taking baseline physiological measurements on heart rate and galvanic skin response — and asking questions to control for their preference for violent video games and general aggression — participants played one of eight randomly assigned violent or non-violent video games for 20 minutes. The four violent video games were Carmageddon, Duke Nukem, Mortal Kombat or Future Cop; the non-violent games were Glider Pro, 3D Pinball, 3D Munch Man and Tetra Madness.

After playing a video game, a second set of five-minute heart rate and skin response measurements were taken. Participants were then asked to watch a 10-minute videotape of actual violent episodes taken from TV programs and commercially-released films in the following four contexts: courtroom outbursts, police confrontations, shootings and prison fights. Heart rate and skin response were monitored throughout the viewing.

The physical differences
When viewing real violence, participants who had played a violent video game experienced skin response measurements significantly lower than those who had played a non-violent video game. The participants in the violent video game group also had lower heart rates while viewing the real-life violence compared to the nonviolent video game group.

“The results demonstrate that playing violent video games, even for just 20 minutes, can cause people to become less physiologically aroused by real violence,” said Carnagey. “Participants randomly assigned to play a violent video game had relatively lower heart rates and galvanic skin responses while watching footage of people being beaten, stabbed and shot than did those randomly assigned to play nonviolent video games.

“It appears that individuals who play violent video games habituate or ‘get used to’ all the violence and eventually become physiologically numb to it.”

Participants in the violent versus non-violent games conditions did not differ in heart rate or skin response at the beginning of the study, or immediately after playing their assigned game. However, their physiological reactions to the scenes of real violence did differ significantly, a result of having just played a violent or a non-violent game. The researchers also controlled for trait aggression and preference for violent video games.

The researchers’ conclusion
They conclude that the existing video game rating system, the content of much entertainment media, and the marketing of those media combine to produce “a powerful desensitization intervention on a global level.”

“It (marketing of video game media) initially is packaged in ways that are not too threatening, with cute cartoon-like characters, a total absence of blood and gore, and other features that make the overall experience a pleasant one,” said Anderson. “That arouses positive emotional reactions that are incongruent with normal negative reactions to violence. Older children consume increasingly threatening and realistic violence, but the increases are gradual and always in a way that is fun.

“In short, the modern entertainment media landscape could accurately be described as an effective systematic violence desensitization tool,” he said. “Whether modern societies want this to continue is largely a public policy question, not an exclusively scientific one.”

The researchers hope to conduct future research investigating how differences between types of entertainment — violent video games, violent TV programs and films — influence desensitization to real violence. They also hope to investigate who is most likely to become desensitized as a result of exposure to violent video games.

“Several features of violent video games suggest that they may have even more pronounced effects on users than violent TV programs and films,” said Carnagey.

A copy of the paper is available at http://www.public.iastate.edu/~vasser/pubs/06CAB.pdf.

Source: Iowa State University




APA Reference
Nauert PhD, R. (2006). Video Games Desensitize to Real Violence. Psych Central. Retrieved on January 13, 2013, from http://psychcentral.com/news/2006/07/28 ... e/137.html

[Iwanci Profile]

I thought I would add one other thought about a person's disposition to commit acts of violence.

I contend that we ALL have some predisposition to acts of violence, given the 'right' circumstance and/or trigger we are all capable of committing horendous acts of violence.

The problem, in my opinion, is not determining who has a greater propensity for violence and limiting access to guns fr those people, the problem is far greater. It involves us limiting access to anyone who is at that knife edge point, anyone who is at that thin line between 'sanity' and 'insanity', anyone who is just about to go over the edge... this is the greatest problem and we will never be able to do anything about it.

As unpopular as this may seem, the next best and logical thing to do is to limit access to weapons that have the propensity to inflict the greatest toll when someone does in fact go over the edge.

It is NOT about the rights of people to defend themselves, it is about the right of innocent people to NOT be placed in the firing line of anyone who for whatever reason has decided that he/she will make a point.

You can NOT dispute that anyone has the propensity to commit acts of violence, and you can likewise NOT dispte that all we can really do as a society is limit the carnage by limiting access to weapons that are most likely to inflict the greatest suffering.

At the end of the day it is purely a numerical issue... One enraged person can inflict pain and suffering on another or several, The same enraged person with an automatic weapon can inflict pain and suffering on many many more people.

The real issue is that we all have the propensity for violence and most of us may at some point in our lives be confronted with the triggers that could push us over the mental cliff... what we are able to do next is what we need to limit as a society.


Not perfect but my opinion at any rate...

[Doogle Profile]

What is funny is that people are blaming video game for violence when this is clearly a ridiculous notion.

If this statement were true and we are applying it across the board, that would mean Canada's murder rate would be as high as America's, same as every other country in the world, but we don't see that.

We also don't see increases in Homicides for the last 20 years, in fact, in America we have seen a 20% decline in homicides for the last 2 decades which included the rising of the video game industry with the most violent games coming out in the last 15 years.

So, if we are comparing legality to irresponsibility, then we should all illegalize our own freedom to be confined into a cage just to be safe 100%, right? Specifically the ones calling for more gun control based on "Minority Report" style legislation to restrict access to all because of the "maybe" criminals of the future.

What is funny to me is that people on most types of medication are able to drive. What is also interesting is that vehicles have more restrictions: License, Insurance, Registration, Drivers testing, Tabs. Yet, these vehicles kill more people a year than all gun deaths combined.


This is what I mean by illegalizing freedom for all. If we can ignore the fact that other tools kill more people, but yet blame the tool being used instead of the individual, we are going to legislate ourselves into slavery again all in the name of misguided prevention.

People want to blame video games for someone else's logical fallacy of life being the same as a game. It's just not true, it means they weren't stable to begin with, which most crazy people think they are the most rational people in the world and everyone else is insane and unless they realize this, they will always be crazy.

This begs the question, should we start outlawing video games? sure, let's do it, then people will read science fiction books or investigative books filled with violent accounts, then we can start blaming them too, then we can ban those, so on and so forth.


The fact is, we don't live in a utopia, we don't and can't fix everyone. Unfortunately, until these criminals commit a crime we can't do anything about it unless those people help themselves before committing a crime.. should we try to side step this, it will result in others not being able to keep their rights all because of a select extremely small percentage that decides they don't want to follow the rules. This percentage is less than 1% so why should the extremely large majority have to suffer because of the mistakes of the criminally insane minority, are we all guilty before being innocent? or are we all innocent before being guilty? Are we really being compared to psychopaths?

I would hope not.

Fuck me, good points and like Low6 says, a debate, rather than a slanging match. Still that could change.

Thing is, Will started this thread with what I presume was the intention of pointing out a connection between video games and gun crime, and based on influence from constant imagery and audio, there must be a connection that affects a small minority a' la advertising.
I don't recall anyone calling for a ban on video games per se in this thread, but points have been raised as to their effect and also as to why people feel the need to play a killer/murderer.

Why do normal people want play games that simulate murder?
Why do psychopaths want to play games that simulate murder?

Yeah, as kids, we all played war, loads of people watch war films without feeling the need to start bombing other countries.

Maaaan, I don't know if it would be any better though if we were all influenced by "The Sound of Music" - Oh shit, forgot about the Nazi connections there.

[Doogle Profile]

i didn't say it would 'solve everything' but it would keep games and movies ABOUT BUTCHERING CIVILIANS off the shelves...

Please do explain why you think things like that should be available.

Exactly. It's to desensitise. To create a destabilising environment to cause apathy towards brutality and injustice, cruelty and death to humans, animals and the environment.

[Doogle Profile]

I thought I would add one other thought about a person's disposition to commit acts of violence.

I contend that we ALL have some predisposition to acts of violence, given the 'right' circumstance and/or trigger we are all capable of committing horendous acts of violence.

The problem, in my opinion, is not determining who has a greater propensity for violence and limiting access to guns fr those people, the problem is far greater. It involves us limiting access to anyone who is at that knife edge point, anyone who is at that thin line between 'sanity' and 'insanity', anyone who is just about to go over the edge... this is the greatest problem and we will never be able to do anything about it.

As unpopular as this may seem, the next best and logical thing to do is to limit access to weapons that have the propensity to inflict the greatest toll when someone does in fact go over the edge.

It is NOT about the rights of people to defend themselves, it is about the right of innocent people to NOT be placed in the firing line of anyone who for whatever reason has decided that he/she will make a point.

You can NOT dispute that anyone has the propensity to commit acts of violence, and you can likewise NOT dispte that all we can really do as a society is limit the carnage by limiting access to weapons that are most likely to inflict the greatest suffering.

At the end of the day it is purely a numerical issue... One enraged person can inflict pain and suffering on another or several, The same enraged person with an automatic weapon can inflict pain and suffering on many many more people.

The real issue is that we all have the propensity for violence and most of us may at some point in our lives be confronted with the triggers that could push us over the mental cliff... what we are able to do next is what we need to limit as a society.


Not perfect but my opinion at any rate...

Agreed. I don't think prohibition of such material is the way forward; I think creating an environment and mind-set that means people don't crave such shit in the first place is the best bet.

I know - no idea.

[Iwanci Profile]

The reason why children do not go out and blow up countries after playing war games is obvious... firstly, they are children and secondly they can't just go out and buy explosives, thirdly they lack the infrastructure or mental capacity to do any serious damage... However, children are very capable of inflicting their own kind of cruelty given the opportunity and provided with no parental boundaries (read Lord of the Flies).

I do not think that banning violent video games or movies etc will have an absolute effect on violence, however, reducing the amount and type of crime displayed may in-fact reduce the desensitisation effect, not to mention the fact that it would lessen the ability for certain people to gain ideas, lessen any ability to ‘mock up’ scenarios and would not provide potential for them to build the necessary courage to fulfil their acts.

The violent game or movie is NOT the trigger for violence, but in my opinion it is one factor in the way violence is played out by some people.

Should they ban violent games? No, however they should limit what is able to be done in these games. We all have our own moral compass that we feel should enable us to view whatever we like and we can then control our own actions and behaviours, however, some of us have a broken compass and are unable to show restrain or curb our actions.

This comes back to censorship, in my opinion, and whilst I am against censorship at times I think certain people should never have access to certain material. Then again I think that some people should not be allowed to live amongst us too, rightly or wrongly.

[Aragajag Profile]

Every murderer drank milk at one time, does milk lead to murder?

[WillEase666 Profile]

Every murderer drank milk at one time, does milk lead to murder?

It may.