Johnny Horn
The Fleshlight superstore
www.JohnnyHorn.co.uk

 

 Researching Games...
  Affecting the mind?

 Hardcore DVD
 Online Sex Shops
 Magazines
Gay Shops
Internet Video
Offers
 
 
 

Melon Farmers Icon

 Home BBFC
Nutters  Sex & Shopping
 Index TV Liberty  Sex Sells News
 Links UK Criminalising Extreme Porn  Sex Sells Reviews
 Forum World  Criminalising P4P  Sex Shops List  

world map

World Censorship World News US News UK News
  World Censors Australia News Press Freedom
  World Campaigns European News Internet Blocking & Circumvention

28th November
2008
 Update:  Nutters vs Games...


suburban
amateurs

Exclusive amateur DVDs
 
UK glamour babes


Suburban
Amateurs

 

 
German nutters and politicians discuss violent computer games

Permalink
 full story: Killergames...German politicians target video games

Germany flagGerman nutters and politicians have just held a conference on violent computer games:

Douglas Gentile was, by far, the most moderate of the panel. He called to get rid of the simplistic idea that video games are either good or bad. And although he criticized ESRB, he opposed to a ban of the most violent games, asking for more media literacy instead.

Werner Hopf, who presented a longitudinal study claiming that violent video games is the most important risk factor in violent criminality rejected this idea, claiming that it was a trick of video game industry. Not only did he call for a ban of extremely violent computer games, but he also called for the suppression of USK (German rating systems) because according to him it's too close to the industry. He asked for its replacement by a more independent rating organization.

[Hopf's study found that (1) playing violent electronic games is the strongest risk factor of violent criminality and (2) both media-stimulated and real experiences of aggressive emotions associated with the motive of revenge are core risk factors of violence in school and violent criminality. The results of our study show that the more frequently children view horror and violence films during childhood and the more frequently they play violent electronic games at the beginning of adolescence the higher will these students’ violence and delinquency be at the age of 14].

USK was also criticized by researchers from the KFN, the Criminology Institute lead by Christian Pfeiffer, one of the most vocal German opponents against killer games. Regine Pfeiffer, Christian's sister, even attacked Electronic Arts violently, calling it a pig company.
[According to the report, she was frustrated in her efforts to sue EA over a violent game (Dead Space?) because the publisher is not headquartered in Germany].

Finally, journalist Rainer Fromm reiterated his objections against sadistic and militaristic games. But he also said that he considered video games per se as a great hobby, even telling that he plays them regularly as well as his children. He also reiterated his very positive opinion of eSports.

Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Hermann was happy about the success of this conference, and it confirmed him in his view that some violent games such as GTA 4 or The Godfather : Don Edition must be banned...

 

17th November
2008
 Update:  Gamers Lose No Sleep Worrying about Addiction...
 
Researchers find that violent games may effect sleep

Permalink

Stockholm University logoNew research from Sweden indicates that violent video games affect boys' heart rate and sleep, according to Science Daily.

The study, conducted by researchers from Stockholm University, Uppsala University and Karolinska Institute, tracked 12-15-year-old boys who were asked to play two different games:

The heart rate variability was affected to a higher degree when the boys were playing games focusing on violence compared with games without violent features. Differences in heart rate variability were registered both while the boys were playing the games and when they were sleeping that night. The boys themselves did not feel that they had slept poorly after having played violent games.

The results show that the autonomous nerve system, and thereby central physiological systems in the body, can be affected when you play violent games without your being aware of it. It is too early to draw conclusions about what the long-term significance of this sort of influence might be. What is important about this study is that the researchers have found a way, on the one hand, to study what happens physiologically when you play video or computer games and, on the other hand, to discern the effects of various types of games.

The researchers hope that their work may also have some implications for the study of so-called game addiction.

 

4th November
2008
   Aggressive Games Research...


ADULT
DVD
 MONTHLY

Free European delivery

AdultDVD
Monthly

 

 
Research suggests that violent games lead to getting into more trouble at school

Permalink

AAP logoChildren and teenagers who play violent video games show increased physical aggression months afterward, according to new research.

The research, published today in the journal Pediatrics, brings together three studies, one from the United States and two from Japan, examining the content of games, how often they are played and aggressive behaviors later in a school year.

The U.S. research looked at the effects of violent video games over time, said lead author Craig A. Anderson, a psychology professor at Iowa State University and director of its Center for the Study of Violence.

Anderson said the collaboration with Japanese researchers was particularly telling because video games are popular there and crime and aggression are less prevalent. Some gamers have cited Japan's example as evidence that violent games are not harmful.

Yet the studies produced similar findings in both countries, Anderson said. When you find consistent effects across two very different cultures, you're looking at a pretty powerful phenomenon. One can no longer claim this is somehow a uniquely American phenomenon. This is a general phenomenon that occurs across cultures.

The study in the United States showed an increased likelihood of getting into a fight at school or being identified by a teacher or peer as being physically aggressive five to six months later in the same school year. It focused on 364 children ages 9 to 12 in Minnesota and was first included in a 2007 book, Violent Video Game Effects on Children and Adolescents.

Japanese researchers studied more than 1,200 Japanese youths ages 12 to 18. In all three studies, researchers accounted for gender and previous aggressiveness.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, which publishes the journal in which the study appears this month, is in the process of revising its recommendations on media violence, and expects to issue a new statement in four to six months, a spokeswoman said. The academy now recognizes violence in media as a significant health risk to children and adolescents and recommends limiting screen time including television, computers and video games to one to two hours a day.

Refuted

Based on article from gamepolitics.com

In a letter to Pediatrics, Christopher Ferguson, a researcher at Texas A&M International University, has called the Anderson study into question. Ferguson claims that the research contains numerous flaws and disputes its meaningfulness. Ferguson writes:

In the literature review the authors suggest that research on video game violence is consistent when this is hardly the case. The authors here simply ignore a wide body of research which conflicts with their views...

The authors fail to control for relevant "third" variables that could easily explain the weak correlations that they find. Family violence exposure for instance, peer group influences, certainly genetic influences on aggressive behavior are just a few relevant variables that ought either be controlled or at minimum acknowledged as alternate causal agents for (very small) link between video games and aggression...

Lastly the authors link their results to youth violence in ways that are misleading and irresponsible. The authors do not measure youth violence in their study. The [research tool used] is not a violence measure, nor does it even measure pathological aggression. Rather this measure asks for hypothetical responses to potential aggressive situations, not actual aggressive behaviors.

 

17th September
2008
   Playing Civics...
 
US games survey finds a broadly neutral effect on civic life

Permalink

The Pew Internet & American Life Project has just released the results of the first-ever US, publicly available look at youth and video games.

Teens, Video Games & Civics examines how and why games are played and details the relationship that gaming has to social and civic engagement among teens in the United States.

In gathering their data, Pew conducted phone interviews with 12-17-year olds along with a parent. The results of the 75-page report are a fascinating glimpse into how video games fit into the lives of teens. Major conclusions include:

  • Almost all teens play games
  • 90% of parents say they always or sometimes know what games their children play.
  • 72% say they always or sometimes check the ratings before their children are allowed to play a game.
  • Parents of teens who play games are generally neutral on the effect of games on their children, with nearly two-thirds believing that games have no impact one way or the other on their offspring.
  • 62% of parents of gamers say video games have no effect on their child one way or the other.
  • 19% of parents of gamers say video games have a positive influence on their child
  • 13% of parents of gamers say video games have a negative influence on their child.
  • 5% of parents of gamers say gaming has some negative influence/some positive influence, but it depends on the game.

Civic engagement was one of the main focal points of the study. Games, however, seemed to have a mostly neutral effect in this area, with much depending on the civic-mindedness of individual gamers:

 

21st May
2008
   With increasing popularity and realism of games...
 
Why isn't there an epidemic of violence?

Permalink

International Journal of Liability and Scientific EnquiryDoes playing violent video games make players aggressive? It is a question that has taxed researchers, sociologists, and regulators ever since the first console was plugged into a TV and the first shots fired in a shoot 'em up game.

Writing May 14 in the International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry, Patrick Kierkegaard of the University of Essex, England, suggests that there is scant scientific evidence that video games are anything but harmless and that they do not lead to real world aggression. Moreover, his research shows that previous work is biased towards the opposite conclusion.

Kierkegaard points out that violent games are growing more realistic with each passing year and most relish their plots of violence, aggression and gender bias. But, he asks, Is there any scientific evidence to support the claims that violent games contribute to aggressive and violent behaviour?

Media scare stories about gamers obsessed with violent games and many research reports that claim to back up the idea that virtual violence breeds real violence would seem to suggest so. However, Kierkegaard has studied a range of such research papers several of which have concluded since the early 1980s that video games can lead to juvenile delinquency, fighting at school and during free play periods and violent criminal behaviour such as assault and robbery.

However, Kierkegaard explains, there is no obvious link between real-world violence statistics and the advent of video games. If anything, the effect seems to be the exact opposite and one might argue that video game usage has reduced real violence. Despite several high profile incidents in US academic institutions, Violent crime, particularly among the young, has decreased dramatically since the early 1990s, says Kierkegaard: while video games have steadily increased in popularity and use. For example, in 2005, there were 1,360,088 violent crimes reported in the USA compared with 1,423,677 the year before. With millions of sales of violent games, the world should be seeing an epidemic of violence, instead, violence has declined.

Research is inconclusive, emphasises Kierkegaard. It is possible that certain types of video game could affect emotions, views, behaviour, and attitudes, however, so can books, which can lead to violent behaviour on those already predisposed to violence. The inherent biases in many of the research studies examined by Kierkegaard point to a need for a more detailed study of video games and their psychological effects.

 

8th April
2008
   Relax!...
 
Research suggests that violent video games calm people down

Permalink

World of Warcraft gameA new study in the UK has found that playing online violent games actually reduces anger and relaxes gamers.

While some anti-gaming activists would love nothing more than to find new research that definitively links real life violence with violence in video games, one recent study in Britain found that playing violent video games online actually has a tendency to make people less angry.

Miss Jane Barnett and her colleagues at Middlesex University are presented their results at the British Psychological Society's Annual Conference in Dublin.

For the study, 292 male and female World of Warcraft players, aged between 12 and 83, were given a questionnaire on anger, aggression and personality. The participants then played the game for two hours and then completed the survey yet again. Ultimately, the results showed that the gamers were more likely to feel calm or tired after playing – but there were differences depending on sex, age and personality.

There were actually higher levels of relaxation before and after playing the game as opposed to experiencing anger but this did very much depend on personality type. This will help us to develop a emotion and gaming questionnaire to help distinguish the type of gamer who is likely to transfer their online aggression into everyday life, explained Barnett.

 

7th April
2008
   Auto Autism...
 
Computer game addicts like people with Asperger's

Permalink

Grand Theft Auto IV gamePeople who are addicted to playing computer games show some of the same personality traits as people with Asperger's syndrome.

This is the conclusion of Dr John Charlton of the University of Bolton and Ian Danforth of Whitman College, USA. Their results were presented at the British Psychological Society's Annual Conference in Dublin,

The researchers questioned 391 computer game players, 86% of whom were male. They considered relationships between addiction, 'high engagement' and personality.

They found that the closer the players got to addiction the more likely they were to display negative personality traits. And that as players showed more signs of addiction they were increasingly characterised by three personality traits that would normally be associated with Asperger's, a variety of high functioning autism. These were neuroticism, and lack of extraversion and agreeableness.

The researchers believe that these people are not classifiable as having Aspergers syndrome but share some of the same characteristics because they find it easier to empathise with computer systems than other people.

Dr Charlton said: 'The thinking in the field is that there is a scale along which people, even those considered to be 'normal', can be placed upon. And that people such as engineers, mathematicians and computer scientists are nearer to the non-empathising, systemising, end of the spectrum, with people with Asperger's syndrome even further along again.

Our research supports the idea that people who are heavily involved in game playing may be nearer to autistic spectrum disorders than people who have no interest in gaming.

Update: Poor Communications

8th April 2008

Dr John Charlton, a psychologist from the University of Bolton, has clarified that gaming does not cause Asperger Syndrome. Dr Charlton pointed out that some media outlets have been misinterpreting his research into video game addiction, which noted that some addicted gamers exhibit characteristics similar to those of people with Asperger Syndrome.

In no way can it be said that Asperger's can be caused by game playing (Asperger's is thought to have a biological basis), SPOnG was told.

 

6th March
2008
 Offsite:  Grand Theft Childhood...
 
The surprising truth about violent video games

Permalink

Grand Theft ChildhoodIn 2007, results from a breakthrough Harvard video game study found that children used video games to manage their feelings, the stereotype of the socially stunted gamer was a myth, and there was no obvious connection between violent games and youth crime.

Two of the researchers who conducted the study have written Grand Theft Childhood, due out this spring. Expanding on what they have already written, this authors promise to cut through the “myths and hysteria” about the affects of violent video games on children and address the real issues “parents, teachers and public policy makers” need to be concerned with.

Co-author Dr. Cheryl K. Olson was kind enough to answer some questions about the book:

The book was based on our two-year, $1.5 million research project at Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School – particularly the surveys and focus groups we did with middle-schoolers and their parents, in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and South Carolina.

From the start, our research was designed with parents in mind. We weren’t just interested in statistical significance; we wanted to help parents and policymakers understand what’s normal, when to worry about violent video games, and when video games might benefit some kids.

Game Couch: One of the findings of the original study (reported in a Massachusetts General Hospital press release) was Children who play violent games are more likely to play to get their anger out, and the study noted that while violent video game playing is up, youth crime is in decline. Doesn’t this run contrary to the popular view that violent video games indoctrinate children into a culture of violence?

Dr. Olson: Many children in our survey, as well as our focus groups with boys who play violent games, said they played games to manage their feelings. This included playing games to help get my anger out, to forget problems, to relax, and to feel less lonely. Children who played at least one M-rated video game a lot in the past six months were significantly more likely to agree that getting anger out was one reason they played video games.

...

One reassuring thing we found is that most children who play GTA don’t see the characters as role models, and don’t see the game as like real life. In fact, the “unreality” is one thing they like about the series. They can test boundaries and try things that, as one boy put it, hopefully, will never happen to you. So you want to experience it a little bit without actually being there.

One of the biggest draws of GTA seems to be not the violence but the open environment and array of choices: You can be a good guy and a bad guy at the same time. Every child will play the game differently.

...Read the full article

 

2nd March
2008
   That's a Relief...
 
Do we really enjoy the deaths of our digital opponents?

Permalink

007 Nightfire gameDA new study by a team of researchers from Helsinki, Finland has made the news lately due to its tentative answer.

The team's surprising findings: Video game players from its test group were angered and anxious after shooting their enemies, while their own deaths elicited a response of joy.

The study: The Psychophysiology of James Bond: Phasic Emotional Responses to Violent Video Game Events recorded the psychophysiological responses of 36 young adults while playing James Bond 007: NightFire.

Previous studies have postulated that pairing violent actions with positive rewards is a recipe for desensitization. Though the Helsinki researchers expected their subjects to enjoy the act of killing, the subjects' responses were just the opposite.

The Bond researchers tentatively concluded that their results, which showed a negative response to the death of an enemy, lend little credence to the idea that video games desensitize players to violence: From this perspective, the fact that wounding or killing the opponent elicited negative, not positive, emotional responses might be reassuring.

With that hypothesis in mind, the team synced recorded game video with physiological data gathered from the players. In some cases, data from a non-violent event in Super Monkey Ball 2, picking a banana, was used as a comparison to the violent Bond game.

The data showed that not only do players react negatively to the deaths of opponents, but they also react positively to the death or wounding of their own character. However, rather than concluding that video game players are sadistic individuals, the team is guessing that players are simply relieved from the tension of playing.

Though the brief relief from combat may explain the positive response to a player's own death, an enemy death is also followed by a reprieve from combat, making the negative response all the more interesting.

The study also showed that even after multiple play sessions, users still responded to the events in much the same way.

There was no evidence for desensitization of emotional responses as a function of repeated exposures to violent game events, concluded the study.

 

31st December
2007
   Lobotomised by Games...
 
Games cause decreased blood flow to the brain

Permalink

Taipei Veterans General HospitalPeople who spend too much time playing video games, especially violent video games, may risk damaging brain functions and affect their learning and emotional control, according to findings of a study.

Chou Yuan-hua, a doctor in the Department of Psychiatry of Taipei Veterans General Hospital, enlisted 30 youngsters, all aged 25, as research subjects.

They were given physical examinations to monitor changes in blood circulation in their brains before and after each played a video game for 30 minutes.

The study found that the act of playing video games obviously causes a decreased blood flow in the brain, and that the effect is even more pronounced in those playing violent video games.

Noting that the study focused on subjects who played video games for only 30 minutes, Chou said many youngsters spend far more time on video games each day, unaware that doing so on a long term basis could damage the frontal lobe of the brain, as well as the anterior cingulate gyrus.

He explained that the frontal lobe of the cerebral cortex, located at the front of the brain, is associated with thinking, speaking, decision-making and impulse control, while the anterior cingulate gyrus, located in the medial wall of the frontal lobe, modulates internal emotional responses.

Although no conclusions as yet have been drawn regarding what might happen if blood flow to these brain areas is diminished frequently, it is already known that frontal lobe damage can leave a person emotionally adrift, opening him or her up to odd mood changes and variations in social behavior and personality.

Chou added that clinical experiences have proven that patients with schizophrenia or depression have significantly lower blood flows in their frontal lobes and anterior cingulate gyruses.

 

Violent Video Games as Exemplary Teachers:
A Conceptual Analysis

Douglas A. Gentile
Institute of Science and Society
Iowa State University
National Institute on Media and the Family

J. Ronald Gentile
University at Buffalo
State University of New York

November, 2007

See the full paper [pdf]


Iowa State University logoAbstract

This article presents conceptual and empirical analyses of several of the “best practices” of learning and instruction, and demonstrates how violent video games use them effectively to motivate learners to persevere in acquiring and mastering a number of skills, to navigate through complex problems and changing environments, and to experiment with different identities until success is achieved.

These educational principles allow for the generation of several testable hypotheses, two of which are tested with samples of 430 elementary school children (mean age 10 years), 607 young adolescents (mean age 14 years), and 1,441 older adolescents (mean age 19 years). Participants were surveyed about their video game habits and their aggressive cognitions and behaviours.

The first hypothesis is based on the principle that curricula that teach the same underlying concepts across contexts should have the highest transfer. Therefore, students who play multiple violent video games should be more likely to learn aggressive cognitions and behaviours than those who play fewer.

The second hypothesis is based on the principle that long-term learning is improved if practice is distributed more across time. Therefore, students who play violent video games more frequently across time should be more likely to learn aggressive cognitions and behaviours than those who play the same types of games for equivalent amounts of time but less frequently.

Both hypotheses were supported. We conclude by describing what educators can learn from the successful instructional and curriculum design features of video games.

 

The Good, The Bad and the Ugly

A Meta-analytic Review of Positive and Negative Effects of Violent Video Games

By Christopher John Ferguson
Department of Behavioral, Applied Sciences and Criminal Justice, Texas A&M International University, Laredo, TX 78045, USA

From SpringerLink
See also Game Politics see full article

November 2007


Counter Strike gameAbstract

Objective Video game violence has become a highly politicized issue for scientists and the general public. There is continuing concern that playing violent video games may increase the risk of aggression in players. Less often discussed is the possibility that playing violent video games may promote certain positive developments, particularly related to visuospatial cognition.

The objective of the current article was to conduct a meta-analytic review of studies that examine the impact of violent video games on both aggressive behavior and visuospatial cognition in order to understand the full impact of such games.

A detailed literature search was used to identify peer-reviewed articles addressing violent video game effects. Effect sizes r (a common measure of effect size based on the correlational coefficient) were calculated for all included studies. Effect sizes were adjusted for observed publication bias.

Results indicated that publication bias was a problem for studies of both aggressive behavior and visuospatial cognition. Once corrected for publication bias, studies of video game violence provided no support for the hypothesis that violent video game playing is associated with higher aggression. However playing violent video games remained related to higher visuospatial cognition.

Results from the current analysis did not support the conclusion that violent video game playing leads to aggressive behavior. However, violent video game playing was associated with higher visuospatial cognition. It may be advisable to reframe the violent video game debate in reference to potential costs and benefits of this medium.

Ferguson also commented:

It is not hard to ‘‘link’’ video game playing with violent acts if one wishes to do so, as one video game playing prevalence study indicated that 98.7% of adolescents play video games to some degree with boys playing more hours and more violent games than girls.

However is it possible that a behavior with such a high base rate (i.e. video game playing) is useful in explaining a behavior with a very low base rate (i.e. school shootings)? Put another way, can an almost universal behavior truly predict a rare behavior?

 

Games Cause Violence: But Not Much

Violent video games and anger as predictors

From Next Generation see full article

August 2007


Mortal Kombat: Deadly AllianceDo violent video games make players aggressive? The answer, according to Professor Patrick Markey, is yes. But Markey is no bog standard game basher. He likes shooters and he thinks the effects of violent games have been taken way out of context by the media and by the industry’s enemies.

Image He says, When you look at the research there’s no question at all. Violent video games do cause aggression. It’s so clear. You have to be dishonest not to see it. However, and this is a huge however, the effect is very, very small.

“It’s not as if this is a light switch that either video games do or do not cause aggression. You have to think about the strength of that effect. Most people assume it has a really big effect, but what we find from research is it actually has a very tiny effect.


Markey conducted his research with Gary Giumetti at Villanova University in Pennsylvania. 167 university undergraduates, participated in the study.

Two groups separately played violent and non-violent games (Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance; Doom 3; or Return to Castle Wolfenstein against Tetris Worlds; Top Spin Tennis and Project Gotham Racing).

Overall, players of the violent video games produced significantly more aggressive responses than the non-violent games players. The mean number of aggressive responses for the three non-violent video games did not differ from each other. Nor did the mean number of aggressive responses for the three violent video games.

This all looks like a clear case against violent games. However, when the results were compared against the initial questionnaires, it turned out that mild-mannered people were affected the least by the games while ‘angry people’ were affected the most.

 

Not Playing Games

Videogame Deprivation Caused Columbine Massacre

From MegaGames see full article

July 2007


   
Manhunt 2 game cover
A new research published in American Journal of Forensic Psychiatry proposed that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold went on a killing rage at Columbine High School in 1999 because they were abruptly denied access to their M-rated games.

According to the study written by Jerald Block, a researcher and psychiatrist in Portland, the two young men relied on the virtual world of computer games to express their rage and to spend time, and cutting them off in 1998 sent them into crisis. Very soon thereafter - a couple of days - they started to plan the actual attack.

Block sifted through thousands of pages of documents released by Columbine investigators and found that Harris and Klebold had each been temporarily kept off computers at school or at home several times, and after each incident, according to Block, the boys' writings or behavior became more violent.

After the Colorado rampage, the Secret Service searched for common threads in more than three dozen school shootings, said Cheryl Olson, co-director of the Center for Mental Health and Media at the Massachusetts General Hospital. The commonalities they found were male gender and either being treated for depression or showing signs of depression. Some of the shooters were good students, some bad; some were bullies, some were bullied; and some played video games, but most did not, she added.

Two-thirds of middle- school boys play M-rated games regularly, said Cheryl Olson. They're not turning kids into killing machines. The evidence just isn't there.

 

Playing Games

BBFC publishes research re playing video games

From the BBFC see also BBFC Video Games Report [pdf]

18th April 2007


   
Manhunt video game
Video games tend to polarise opinions in a way that other entertainment media do not. People who do not play them cannot understand their attraction and that lack of understanding can lead to some games being demonised. While there is research designed to show the short term physical reactions of video games players, there is very little information about why people play video games and what impact they think playing games has on them. The BBFC today published the results of a research project involving video games players ranging from children as young as seven through to players in their early 40s; parents of young games players; games industry representatives; and games reviewers.

The research set out to gain insights into a number of issues including:

  • the attractions of playing video games
  • what impact games players think playing has on them and their behaviour
  • whether the interactivity element of games alters the experience
  • what players think about the violence in some games
  • how they choose which games to play
  • what parents think about video games.

The key findings of the research were:

  • that children begin playing games at an increasingly early age, but that the overall age of games players is getting older
  • there is a sharp divide between male and female games players in their taste in games and how long they spend playing
  • female games players tend to prefer ‘strategic life simulation’ games like The Sims and puzzle games and spend less time playing than their male counterparts
  • male players favour first ‘person shooter’ and sports games and are much more likely to become deeply absorbed in the play
  • younger games players are influenced to play particular games by peer pressure and word of mouth, but negative press coverage for a game will significantly increase its take up
  • people play games to escape from every day life and to escape to a world of adventure without risk which is under the control of the gamer, unlike the real world
  • games provide a sense of achievement and are active, unlike television and films which are passive. However, games are better at developing action than building character and as such gamers tend to care less about the storyline than making progress in the game
  • gamers appear to forget they are playing games less readily than film goers forget they are watching a film because they have to participate in the game for it to proceed. They appear to non-games players to be engrossed in what they are doing, but, they are concentrating on making progress, and are unlikely to be emotionally involved
  • gamers claim that playing games is mentally stimulating and that playing develops hand eye coordination
  • violence in games, in the sense of eliminating obstacles, is built into the structure of some games and is necessary to progress through the game. It contributes to the tension because gamers are not just shooting, they are vulnerable to being shot and most gamers are concentrating on their own survival rather than the damage they are inflicting on the characters in the game. While there is an appeal in being able to be violent without being vulnerable to the consequences which similar actions in real life would create, gamers are aware that they are playing a game and that it is not real life
  • gamers are aware that violence in games is an issue and younger players find some of the violence upsetting, particularly in games rated for adults. There is also concern that in some games wickedness prevails over innocence. However, most gamers are not seriously concerned about violence in games because they think that the violence on television and in films is more upsetting and more real
  • gamers are virtually unanimous in rejecting the suggestion that video games encourage people to be violent in real life or that they have become desensitised. They see no evidence in themselves or their friends who play games that they have become more violent in real life. As one participant said: I no more feel that I have actually scored a goal than I do that I have actually killed someone. I know it’s not real. The emphasis is on achievement.
  • non-games playing parents are concerned about the amount of time their children, particularly boys, spend playing games and would prefer that they were outside in the fresh air. However, they are more concerned about the ‘stranger-danger’ of internet chat rooms. While the violence in games surprises them and concerns some of them, they are confident that their children are well balanced enough to not be influenced by playing violent games
  • while parents agree that there should be regulation of games some are happy to give their children adult games because they are “only games”.

David Cooke, Director of the BBFC said:

The BBFC classified just under three hundred video games last year. Most games in the UK are classified under a pan-European voluntary system, but those with adult content are required to come to us. We take this part of our responsibilities under the Video Recordings Act very seriously. Our examiners actually play the games for up to five hours, assessing all levels of the games and considering all the key issues. Players and the parents of young players can be sure that all aspects of the game have been taken into account before reaching a classification. We require key issues to be flagged and aids such as cheat codes to be supplied to us. We take context into account, and examine works in a way which is as thorough and penetrating as anywhere in the world.

The element of interactivity in games carries some weight when we are considering a video game. We were particularly interested to see that this research suggests that, far from having a potentially negative impact on the reaction of the player, the very fact that they have to interact with the game seems to keep them more firmly rooted in reality. People who do not play games raise concerns about their engrossing nature, assuming that players are also emotionally engrossed. This research suggests the opposite; a range of factors seems to make them less emotionally involving than film or television. The adversaries which players have to eliminate have no personality and so are not real and their destruction is therefore not real, regardless of how violent that destruction might be. This firm grasp on reality seems to extend to younger players, but this is no reason to allow them access to adult rated games, as they themselves often admit that they find the violence in games like Manhunt very upsetting. Parents should not treat video games in the same way they would board games. We will continue to examine very carefully those games which come to us, to flag any concerns we have and, if necessary, to use our statutory powers.

There is no question that video games are an important form of entertainment for an ever increasing number of people. As the technology improves the games will become more and more realistic and it is important that games are properly rated to protect younger players from the games with adult content, which the BBFC does. This research provides some valuable insights into why people play video games and what effect they think playing has on themselves and friends. It has also highlighted parental attitudes to video games. We hope that it will provide some food for thought for the industry, and everyone who has an interest in the impact of games and we will be taking the research outcomes into account as we review our games classification policies over the coming months.

 

Research by Dr Vincent Mathews, of Indiana University School of Medicine

Playing violent video games makes children lose their self-control.

Presented to the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)

Based on an article from the Daily Mail
4th December 2006


Indiana University School of MedicinePlaying violent video games makes children lose their self-control.

An analysis of brain activity demonstrates they become more emotionally charged after using the graphic technology. At the same time there is a marked decrease in activity in parts of the brain which are linked to self-control, focus and concentration.

The latest research from Indiana University School of Medicine, United States, shows that violent video games stimulate activity in the region of the brain governing emotional arousal in teenagers.

Researchers randomly assigned 44 adolescents to play either a violent or non-violent video game for 30 minutes. A scanning technique was then used to study the volunteers' brain functions during a series of tasks measuring inhibition and concentration.

The group that had played the violent game showed less activity in the prefrontal parts of their brains involved in inhibition, concentration and self-control. There was more activity in the amygdala region, which helps govern emotional arousal.

Dr Vincent Mathews, professor of radiology, who led the research, said: These findings raise concern that these types of video games are having some sort of effect on the brain and likely an effect on behaviour as well. This is the first time that it has been demonstrated that violent video games can affect brain physiology and the way the brain functions.

Our study suggests that playing a certain type of violent video game may have different short-term effects on brain function than playing a non-violent - but exciting - game. Additional investigation of the reasons for and effects of this difference in brain functioning will be important targets for future study, but the current study showed that a difference between the groups does exist.'


The findings were presented to the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) in Chicago last week.

 

Research by Professor Nicholas Carnagey, of Iowa State University

Violent video games can 'desensitise' players to the horrors of real-life brutality after just 20 minutes of playing

Published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Based on an article from the Daily Mail
18th August 2006


Carmageddon PC gameViolent video games can 'desensitise' players to the horrors of real-life brutality after just 20 minutes of playing, scientists have claimed.

A new study found that students who played graphic games for only a short of period of time were less emotional when later confronted with scenes of real violence, such as beatings, stabbings and shootings.

For the latest study, American psychologists carried out experiments on 257 college students, both male and female.

One group was given 20 minutes to play one of four violent games: Carmageddon, Mortal Kombat, Future Cop and Duke Nukem.

The other group was given one of four "passive" games to play including 3D Pinball, Glider Pro, 3D Munch Man and Tetra Madness.

Both where then shown ten-minute videos of shootings, stabbings, prison fights, courtroom outbursts, and confrontations with police - and tested for their emotional response. This was measured by their heart rate and perspiration. Those who had engaged in violent games had 'lowered physiological responses'. In other words, their heart rates were lower and they sweated less.

This supposedly showed they had become desensitised to the brutality of the real world, said psychologist Professor Nicholas Carnagey, of Iowa State University, who led the study.

The students who played the non-violent games had increased heart rates and perspiration when they saw the video footage - meaning they were upset by it.

Professor Carnagey said he was 'surprised' at how quickly the games dulled the players' response to real-life violence. He warned: It appears that individuals who play violent video games get used to it. They eventually become physiologically numb to it.

The study, published the findings in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, said parents should be wary about the effect that violence in PC games and on television has on their children.
 
Reader's Comment:

Er, doesn't this *actually* only prove the difference between 30 minutes of one type of imagery, vs 20 minutes of one type and then 10 minutes of a polar opposite?

In other words, the same effect you'd get from switching channels between, say, a sitcom and a news channel, vs the effect of sticking with one channel for the full half hour...

 

Video Violence Males 'Chronic Players' Prone to Real World Aggression

From University of Missouri-Columbia

January 2006


Video games such as Gun and Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas might be at the top of many Christmas lists this year, despite their graphic violent content and mature ratings. These games might be mere entertainment to some, but a researcher at the University of Missouri-Columbia found that playing these violent games changes a person's brain function and desensitizes chronic players to real world violence.

Most of us naturally have a strong aversion to the sight of blood and gore, said Bruce Bartholow, assistant professor of psychological sciences at MU. Surgeons and soldiers may need to overcome these reactions in order to perform their duties. But, for most people, a diminished reaction to the effects of violence is not adaptive. It can reduce inhibitions against aggressive behavior and increase the possibility of inflicting violence on others.

Bartholow, along with Brad Bushman from the University of Michigan and Marc Sestir at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, asked 39 male undergraduate students how often they played their five favorite video games and how violent the games were. Next, the researchers showed participants a series of images on a computer screen, including emotionally neutral images, such as a man raiding a bicycle; violent images, such as a man holding a gun to another man's head; and negative, but nonviolent images, such as a dead dog. As participants viewed these images, the researchers measured a type of brainwave, known as P300, which is believed to reflect how people evaluate images like these.

After viewing the pictures, participants were told that the last part of the experiment involved a competition with another participant to see who could press a button faster following a series of tones. Before each tone, participants set the level of a noise blast that their opponent would receive if the opponent lost. There actually was no opponent.

The researchers found that the participants who routinely played violent video games showed less brain reactivity, measured by diminished amplitude of the P300 brainwaves, when they viewed the violent images compared to the equally negative, nonviolent image. They also found that the smaller a participant's brain response to violent images, the more aggressively he behaved during the final part of the experiment.

These findings are among the first to link chronic violent video game play, diminished brain responses and aggressive behavior, Bartholow said. People often assume that any negative effects of playing violent games are short-lived, but these results suggest that repeated exposure to violent video games has lasting negative consequences for both brain function and behavior.

This study will be published in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.

From the BBC

But some experts still remain unconvinced of a link.

Jonathan Freedman, a psychologist from the University of Toronto in Canada, said: All we are really getting is desensitisation to images. There's no way to show that this relates to real-life aggression.

And Professor David Buckingham, an expert on the media and children at the Institute of Education, added there was still no consensus on whether violent games caused aggressive behaviour or were just played by violent people:
The debate we are seeing is very similar to the one that has raged for years about TV. The truth is there are many factors that can lead to violence, such as being withdrawn and isolated, so it is hard to say it is because of one thing. In the absence of any proof, I think we have to be agnostic about it. However, I think there is an argument about the morality of some games. Some actually encourage amoral behaviour to win the game and I think parents should be talking to their children to make sure they realise this is a joke. Children are generally good at telling fantasy from reality, but parents should be discussing this.

 

Altered States: Violent video games alter brain's response to violence

December 2005
www.NewScientist.com
Helen Phillips

The work will appear early in 2006 in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.


A brain mechanism that may link violent computer games with aggression has been discovered by researchers in the US. The work goes some way towards demonstrating a causal link between the two - rather than a simple association.

Many studies have concluded that people who play violent video games are more aggressive, more likely to commit violent crimes, and less likely to help others. But critics argue these correlations merely prove that violent people gravitate towards violent games, not that games can change behaviour.

Now psychologist Bruce Bartholow from the University of Missouri-Columbia and colleagues have found that people who play violent video games show diminished brain responses to images of real-life violence, such as gun attacks, but not to other emotionally disturbing pictures, such as those of dead animals, or sick children. And the reduction in response is correlated with aggressive behaviour.

The brain activity they measured, called the P300 response, is a characteristic signal seen in an EEG (electroencephalogram) recording of brain waves as we register an image. The P300 reflects an evaluation of the emotional content of an image says Bartholow, being larger if people are surprised or disturbed by an image, or if something is novel.

The team recruited 39 experienced gamers, and used questionnaires to assess the amount of violent games they played. They then showed them real-life images, mostly of neutral scenes, but interspersed with violent or negative (but non-violent) scenes, while recording EEGs.

In subjects with the most experience of violent games, the P300 response to the violent images was smaller and delayed. People who play a lot of violent video games didn’t see them as much different from neutral, says Bartholow. They become desensitised. However, their responses are still normal for the non-violent negative scenes.

This may not be surprising - video games have been used to desensitise soldiers to scenes of war. But when the players were subsequently given the opportunity to “punish” a fake opponent in another game, those with the greatest reduction in P300 brain responses meted out the most severe punishments.

Even when the team controlled for the subjects’ natural hostility, assessed by standard questionnaires, the violent games experience and P300 response were still strongly correlated with aggressiveness. As far as I’m aware, this is the first study to show that exposure to violent games has effects on the brain that predict aggressive behaviour, says Bartholow.

But the study has failed to convince some critics. We habituate to any kind of stimulus, says Jonathan Freedman, a psychologist from the University of Toronto, Canada, who has prepared several government-level reports on media and games violence. All we are really getting is desensitisation to images. There’s no way to show that this relates to real-life aggression.

He says that stopping people playing violent video games would be like preventing them from playing sports such as football or hockey.

Other researchers are more concerned. Craig Anderson of Iowa State University in Ames, who has studied the effect, says:
THese brain studies corroborate the many behavioural and cognitive studies showing that violent video games lead to increases in aggression.

 

Reality Bytes: Eight Myths About Video Games Debunked

Henry Jenkins
MIT Professor

A large gap exists between the public's perception of video games and what the research actually shows. The following is an attempt to separate fact from fiction.

From the
Video Game Revolution

Posted Dec 2005

Henry Jenkins is the director of comparative studies at MIT.


1. The availability of video games has led to an epidemic of youth violence.

According to federal crime statistics, the rate of juvenile violent crime in the United States is at a 30-year low. Researchers find that people serving time for violent crimes typically consume less media before committing their crimes than the average person in the general population. It's true that young offenders who have committed school shootings in America have also been game players. But young people in general are more likely to be gamers — 90 percent of boys and 40 percent of girls play. The overwhelming majority of kids who play do NOT commit antisocial acts. According to a 2001 U.S. Surgeon General's report, the strongest risk factors for school shootings centered on mental stability and the quality of home life, not media exposure. The moral panic over violent video games is doubly harmful. It has led adult authorities to be more suspicious and hostile to many kids who already feel cut off from the system. It also misdirects energy away from eliminating the actual causes of youth violence and allows problems to continue to fester.


2.
Scientific evidence links violent game play with youth aggression.

Claims like this are based on the work of researchers who represent one relatively narrow school of research, "media effects." This research includes some 300 studies of media violence. But most of those studies are inconclusive and many have been criticized on methodological grounds. In these studies, media images are removed from any narrative context. Subjects are asked to engage with content that they would not normally consume and may not understand. Finally, the laboratory context is radically different from the environments where games would normally be played. Most studies found a correlation, not a causal relationship, which means the research could simply show that aggressive people like aggressive entertainment. That's why the vague term "links" is used here. If there is a consensus emerging around this research, it is that violent video games may be one risk factor - when coupled with other more immediate, real-world influences — which can contribute to anti-social behavior. But no research has found that video games are a primary factor or that violent video game play could turn an otherwise normal person into a killer.

3. Children are the primary market for video games.

While most American kids do play video games, the center of the video game market has shifted older as the first generation of gamers continues to play into adulthood. Already 62 percent of the console market and 66 percent of the PC market is age 18 or older. The game industry caters to adult tastes. Meanwhile, a sizable number of parents ignore game ratings because they assume that games are for kids. One quarter of children ages 11 to 16 identify an M-Rated (Mature Content) game as among their favorites. Clearly, more should be done to restrict advertising and marketing that targets young consumers with mature content, and to educate parents about the media choices they are facing. But parents need to share some of the responsibility for making decisions about what is appropriate for their children. The news on this front is not all bad. The Federal Trade Commission has found that 83 percent of game purchases for underage consumers are made by parents or by parents and children together.

4.
Almost no girls play computer games.

Historically, the video game market has been predominantly male. However, the percentage of women playing games has steadily increased over the past decade. Women now slightly outnumber men playing Web-based games. Spurred by the belief that games were an important gateway into other kinds of digital literacy, efforts were made in the mid-90s to build games that appealed to girls. More recent games such as The Sims were huge crossover successes that attracted many women who had never played games before. Given the historic imbalance in the game market (and among people working inside the game industry), the presence of sexist stereotyping in games is hardly surprising. Yet it's also important to note that female game characters are often portrayed as powerful and independent. In his book Killing Monsters, Gerard Jones argues that young girls often build upon these representations of strong women warriors as a means of building up their self confidence in confronting challenges in their everyday lives.

5.
Because games are used to train soldiers to kill, they have the same impact on the kids who play them.

Former military psychologist and moral reformer David Grossman argues that because the military uses games in training (including, he claims, training soldiers to shoot and kill), the generation of young people who play such games are similarly being brutalized and conditioned to be aggressive in their everyday social interactions.
Grossman's model only works if:


we remove training and education from a meaningful cultural context.
we assume learners have no conscious goals and that they show no resistance to what they are being taught.
we assume that they unwittingly apply what they learn in a fantasy environment to real world spaces.

The military uses games as part of a specific curriculum, with clearly defined goals, in a context where students actively want to learn and have a need for the information being transmitted. There are consequences for not mastering those skills. That being said, a growing body of research does suggest that games can enhance learning. In his recent book, What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy, James Gee describes game players as active problem solvers who do not see mistakes as errors, but as opportunities for improvement. Players search for newer, better solutions to problems and challenges, he says. And they are encouraged to constantly form and test hypotheses. This research points to a fundamentally different model of how and what players learn from games.

6.
Video games are not a meaningful form of expression.

On April 19, 2002, U.S. District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh Sr. ruled that video games do not convey ideas and thus enjoy no constitutional protection. As evidence, Saint Louis County presented the judge with videotaped excerpts from four games, all within a narrow range of genres, and all the subject of previous controversy. Overturning a similar decision in Indianapolis, Federal Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner noted: "Violence has always been and remains a central interest of humankind and a recurrent, even obsessive theme of culture both high and low. It engages the interest of children from an early age, as anyone familiar with the classic fairy tales collected by Grimm, Andersen, and Perrault are aware." Posner adds, "To shield children right up to the age of 18 from exposure to violent descriptions and images would not only be quixotic, but deforming; it would leave them unequipped to cope with the world as we know it." Many early games were little more than shooting galleries where players were encouraged to blast everything that moved. Many current games are designed to be ethical testing grounds. They allow players to navigate an expansive and open-ended world, make their own choices and witness their consequences. The Sims designer Will Wright argues that games are perhaps the only medium that allows us to experience guilt over the actions of fictional characters. In a movie, one can always pull back and condemn the character or the artist when they cross certain social boundaries. But in playing a game, we choose what happens to the characters. In the right circumstances, we can be encouraged to examine our own values by seeing how we behave within virtual space.
 
7.
Video game play is socially isolating.

Much video game play is social. Almost 60 percent of frequent gamers play with friends. Thirty-three percent play with siblings and 25 percent play with spouses or parents. Even games designed for single players are often played socially, with one person giving advice to another holding a joystick. A growing number of games are designed for multiple players — for either cooperative play in the same space or online play with distributed players. Sociologist Talmadge Wright has logged many hours observing online communities interact with and react to violent video games, concluding that meta-gaming (conversation about game content) provides a context for thinking about rules and rule-breaking. In this way there are really two games taking place simultaneously: one, the explicit conflict and combat on the screen; the other, the implicit cooperation and comradeship between the players. Two players may be fighting to death on screen and growing closer as friends off screen. Social expectations are reaffirmed through the social contract governing play, even as they are symbolically cast aside within the transgressive fantasies represented onscreen.

8.
Video game play is desensitizing.

Classic studies of play behavior among primates suggest that apes make basic distinctions between play fighting and actual combat. In some circumstances, they seem to take pleasure wrestling and tousling with each other. In others, they might rip each other apart in mortal combat. Game designer and play theorist Eric Zimmerman describes the ways we understand play as distinctive from reality as entering the "magic circle." The same action — say, sweeping a floor — may take on different meanings in play (as in playing house) than in reality (housework). Play allows kids to express feelings and impulses that have to be carefully held in check in their real-world interactions. Media reformers argue that playing violent video games can cause a lack of empathy for real-world victims. Yet, a child who responds to a video game the same way he or she responds to a real-world tragedy could be showing symptoms of being severely emotionally disturbed. Here's where the media effects research, which often uses punching rubber dolls as a marker of real-world aggression, becomes problematic. The kid who is punching a toy designed for this purpose is still within the "magic circle" of play and understands her actions on those terms. Such research shows us only that violent play leads to more violent play.


Sources

Entertainment Software Association. "Top Ten Industry Facts." 2003.
www.theesa.com/pressroom.html

Gee, James. What Video Games Have to Tell Us About Learning and Literacy. New York: Palgrave, 2001.

Grossman, David. "Teaching Kids to Kill." Phi Kappa Phi National Forum 2000.
www.killology.org/article_teachkid.htm

Heins, Marjorie. Brief Amica Curiae of Thirty Media Scholars, submitted to the United States Court of Appeals, Eight Circuit, Interactive Digital Software Association et al vs. St. Louis County et al. 2002. www.fepproject.org/courtbriefs/stlouissummary.html

Jenkins, Henry. "Coming Up Next: Ambushed on 'Donahue'." Salon 2002. www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/08/20/jenkins_on_donahue/

Jenkins, Henry. "Lessons From Littleton: What Congress Doesn't Want to Hear About Youth and Media." Independent Schools 2002. www.nais.org/pubs/ismag.cfm?file_id=537&ismag_id=14

Jones, Gerard. Killing Monsters: Why Children Need Fantasy, Super Heroes, and Make-believe Violence. New York: Basic, 2002.

Salen, Katie and Eric Zimmerman. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2003.

Sternheimer, Karen. It's Not the Media: The Truth About Popular Culture's Influence on Children. New York: Westview, 2003.

Wright, Talmadge."Creative Player Actions in FPS Online Video Games: Playing Counter-Strike." Game Studies Dec. 2002.
www.gamestudies.org/0202/wright/

 

Nutters Take a Body Blow over Game Violence

The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

From The Register

Posted August 2005


The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has weighed into the ongoing debate regarding a possible link between violent video games and "real-world aggression".

The University says the findings of the first long-term study into exposure to video games and subsequent stroppy behaviour may be "surprising", given that they show "robust exposure to a highly violent online game" did not cause any substantial increase in said aggression.

The findings will indeed suprise attorney Jack Thompson who has vowed to prove the link between Grand Theft Auto: Vice City and the 2003 murder of two police officers and a civilian police worker in Fayette, Alabama.

As we recently reported, after being arrested for the triple homicide, 20-year-old perpetrator Devin Moore was alleged to have said: Life is a videogame. Everybody has to die some time. Moore is known to have spent many hours playing GTA:VC, dubbed a "murder simulator" by Thompson.

Thompson declared: Moore rehearsed, hour after hour, the cop-killing scenarios in that hyper-violent video game. The makers, distributors, and retailers of that murder simulator equipped Moore to kill as surely as if they had handed him the gun to do it. Blood is on the hands of men in certain corporate board rooms from Japan to New York.

While the eventual outcome of Thompson's campaign in uncertain, the Illinois findings will do little to further his cause. Report lead author Dmitri Williams said researchers found "no strong effects associated with aggression caused by this violent game", referring to Asheron's Call 2 (AC2) which guinea pigs played an average 56 hours over the course of a month.

Williams explained: Players were not statistically different from the non-playing control group in their beliefs on aggression after playing the game than they were before playing. Nor was game play a predictor of aggressive behaviors. Compared with the control group, the players neither increased their argumentative behaviors after game play nor were significantly more likely to argue with their friends and partners.

Williams did, however, warn: I'm not saying some games don't lead to aggression, but I am saying the data are not there yet. Until we have more long-term studies, I don't think we should make strong predictions about long-term effects, especially given this finding.

In fact, the issue is rather more complicated than critics and defenders of video games might suggest. Williams noted: This game featured fantasy violence, while others featuring outer space or even everyday urban violence may yield different outcomes.

Williams admitted that because the test didn't centre solely on younger teenagers, he could not say that teenagers might not experience different effects. Older players in their study were perhaps more strongly influenced by game play and argued with friends more than their younger counterparts.

Williams summarised: If the content, context, and play length have some bearing on the effects, policy-makers should seek a greater understanding of the games they are debating. It may be that both the attackers and defenders of the industry's products are operating without enough information, and are instead both arguing for blanket approaches to what is likely a more complicated phenomenon.

The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's findings appear in the June issue of Communication Monographs in an piece entitled Internet Fantasy Violence: A Test of Aggression in an Online Game.

Methodology

The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's test was conducted as follows:

The new study involved two groups of participants: players – a "treatment" group of 75 people who had no prior MMRPG [massively multiplayer online roleplaying game] play and who played AC2 for the first ti