Violent Video Games May Cause Increasing Violence Over Time

There’s been another study released which further supports a theory that mothers have known for decades: Violent video games can bring out the aggressive side of the kids who play them.

This new Ohio State University study is the first to provide evidence that the negative side effects from playing video games can actually build and grow over time.

After studying a group of gamers for 3 consecutive days, Brad Bushman, a professor of Ohio State University’s School of Communication, found that their aggressive tendencies grew with each additional day when they played violent games. By contrast, there was no “meaningful” change in aggression for those gamers who played non-violent games.

While this is hardly the first study to link violent video games with aggression, it is the first of its kind to provide experimental evidence that this aggression accumulates with time, thereby leading to potential long-term effects.

[TheModernKamikaze]

I never believed this,
as a kid, I played GTA San Andreas, Manhunt, God of War, etc..

I never felt angry or collected anything harmful.
I just play the game, because I know the difference between
Virtual and reality.

[Y_5150]

Same here, while your list is a bit more extreme than mine, good point. I played every GTA PS2 game for the PS2 as a kid! I still wouldn't like to inflict violently at another person.

[wsoutlaw87]

Lol a whole 3 day study of someone "observing" aggression, very conclusive.

[Bimkoblerutso]

Ironically, it will probably be thrown around as "conclusive" evidence in countless censorship battles in the future.

[aliengmr]

3 days which contained a grand total of 1 hour of gaming.

[Anon1974]

And yet they showed a link between aggressive games and aggressive tendencies even in that short period of time.

This just mirrors the findings of more extensive studies regarding the affects of violent TV viewing habits and a rise in aggression. You can't tell me you think that the findings of these studies don't just translate over to videogames.

All this tells us is that parents need to be responsible for their children's viewing/gaming habits. So many act like this is an attack on gaming. It's just a study. If videogames exposure caused cancer, wouldn't you want to know and find out what you could do to limit the chances of that happening? Of course you would.

So wouldn't it be logical that if there were any adverse effects to prolonged use of violent videogames that we should want to be informed so we could make more informed decisions for ourselves and our children? Do you really think videogames are somehow magically insulated from the effects that we've seen from exposure to other violent forms of media? It's just amazing to me that so many would choose to be wilfully ignorant of what study after study is telling us.
Rather than picking apart the studies, shouldn't we instead be asking for specifics, how serious an issue it is and what we can do to limit the impact on children? As a parent, that's what it makes me want to do.

[aliengmr]

@darkride66

This is not me defending gaming its me defending logic and reasoning.

Long time ago, just after Columbine there was this study done that made headlines for linking violent video games with aggression. I read it. And though much of the "jargon" was over my head at the time, one thing was clear, every section ended with "no conclusive results". The study ended by saying the tests didn't work and "theorized" that mentally unstable persons that are prone to aggression may be affected.

At the time I kept wondering why the study was being used as a factual basis for those claiming video games cause aggression. At the time I thought maybe it had gone over my head. It wasn't until many years later that someone explained it that I realized my initial thoughts were right.

Through that time violent video games causing violence and aggression became fact among those unfamiliar with games. I had a professor in college site that very report while claiming it. Even this very article claims studies in the past linked violent game with aggression, when NONE actually have.

Here is the issues I have with this:

1. I liken studies like this to conspiracy theories. In that if you try hard enough you can get whatever result you want. Both need to be taken with a grain of salt.

2. I really don't look at this study as an attack on gaming, but fodder for the ignorant. Comparing video games to cigarettes? That just plain asinine.

3. The effect violent games have on human behavior is a very complex issue and 70 students gaming for 1 hour total in 3 days is hardly enough time to produce a conclusive result.

4. Of course we have to pick apart the study. If its flawed, like so many studies, you end up believing in facts that aren't facts.

You have based you entire post on this study being accurate in the first place. Not once questioning the validity of it and calling those that do "willfully ignorant".

You want facts, NO study has ever conclusively proven a link between video games and aggressive behavior.

You really think that picking the more "aggressive" path in a story could not be influenced by any other factors? That one test of 70 students over 3 days is going to produce the best possible results?

I really applaud the balls it took for you to call everyone willfully ignorant and in the very next sentence do exactly that. As a parent, I want facts, not theories.

[rainslacker]

While most studies do say that there is no correlation between the two, there are ones that focus differently and say that violent, or even action/racing/sports games can lead to a heightened sense of aggression after a play period. Much in the same way that movies or sports like football or hockey(even if watching) can. None of them has confirmed that it will lead to violence however. Any credible study has stated that it COULD lead to excessive aggression or violence in someone who was predisposed to it.

However...with this study, based on my own logical understanding of games, and empirical evidence of having watched many people play games, it does seem that it is making a conclusion without defining the results. Nothing was said about a base line being established for the questions that were asked after the game play sessions, so it's unknown if they would have responded similarly before playing the game. It also didn't say what kind of base line was set up for determining if these people were predisposed towards a more confrontational end. With a pool of only 70 participants(35 on each side) it's not big enough to make the conclusion valid.

On top of that the actual research data punished the "loser" of a race they gave after the game itself, thus making the actual "research" into a game. Far from scientific.

Edit: Just noticed you pretty much said the same thing further down. And I wasn't disagreeing with you, just adding to your statement.

[wsoutlaw87]

I go to uconn and my gf is a psyc major and we have both been apart of these stupid college studies that they just do for attention. Usually its very obvious what outcome they are trying to prove. One I was in had pictures side to side of a person covered in tatoos and a regular looking person. They then gave you a paper and said who would you be more likely to trust. These test should never get any publicity and are in no way scientific. You can absolutely do a test that proves what ever you want. I could do one that says playing games makes people happier than people who dont.

[MrDead]

We had the same fears with computer games in the 80's and we all turned out ok.

"If Pac-Man had affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive electronic music."

Marcus Brigstocke.

[zerocrossing]

Oh SNAP!

/S

[Tzuno]

Maybe people learn to gain some respect from the ones that try to step on them with no right.

[zerocrossing]

We've gaming for years and most of us are fine, that's pretty conclusive.

[gamingisnotacrime]

including violent kids

[aliengmr]

"While this is hardly the first study to link violent video games with aggression, it is the first of its kind to provide experimental evidence that this aggression accumulates with time, thereby leading to potential long-term effects."

No. Establishing a link requires experimentation and evidence, not speculation.

As to this test, I hardly consider ending a story in a different way as an indicator of heighten aggression in the real world. Simply being inspired by something doesn't prove anything.

I went to the link provided and wasn't able to find the study. Maybe they are on to something or maybe not. However, I question the the boldness of claiming this as fact. What the test proves is playing violent video games will increase violent creative writing. In fact it doesn't show anything more than a temporary increase in aggressive thoughts. Not knowing the context of the stories participants were asked to provide an ending for makes it very hard to judge. For instance, if participants were asked to provide endings for action/adventure stories, I would question whether aggression is really a factor.

Playing a racing game and playing CoD are 2 fundamentally different experiences. Its the human element. This is where I believe this test is flawed. I would not consider Racing games a proper non-violent game when the test is very "human" biased. It renders the non-violent side null and void which means the personification of the player character and all the other subtle elements that are present when one is playing a game is completely ignored. Not to mention this is all based on 1 hour of gaming in 3 days.

TLDR; Bold claims like this are irresponsible. The test is proves nothing long term AT ALL. IMO the test is far to simplistic and thus flawed.

[PirateThom]

I've been playing violent games for a large portion of my life and, even playing FPS games from time to time, I've never had an urge to kill someone, I have never been involved in a fight and I am absolutely against guns.

I'm not alone.

For every case of "violence caused by video games" there's at least one case like me, where it had no effect.

It's all irrelevent anyway. Violence never existed before video games.

[KrisButtar]

"After studying a group of gamers for 3 consecutive days" so they made judgement calls after 3 days,

how many hours a day? how old were these test subjects, ratio between male and female?

to be honest after gaming for most my life, if someone forced me to game for 3 days straight i think i would be cranky to, it wouldnt matter if the game was violent or not

[aliengmr]

20 minutes a day for 3 day was enough to form a conclusion on the immeasurable human psyche.

[Hicken]

FAIL.

[Saryk]

I should be a study case! I have played console/computer games since the 2600 and the C-64. I have never killed anyone, I wanted to kill a lot of people (mostly drivers), but as of yet, never have. Might be that thing called prison, my asshole and freedom!

[Dirtnapstor]

So does playing on the playground, so does playing sports, so does being competitive...same chemicals run through our bodies, it's our body's natural response.
It's funny to hear the media, etc. making all these types of claims as if the child is the final decision maker!?!?! Where are the parents? Games have ratings for a reason, Yes? My point is not whether or not...but who is in charge?!
Parents need to be parenting and should regulate their children. There is something to be said about 'sheltering your child'.

[Dirtnapstor]

In the early 1980's, the blame for teen suicide and violence was on an Atari 2600 game called Berserk. Youtube it for a good laugh! Scapegoat after scapegoat....

[TukkerIntensity]

Rock N Roll
Dungeons and Dragons
Ozzy Ozbourne
Rap Music
Video Games

.... how 'bout just stop being a shitty parent? See if that makes a change - stop looking to pin it on something you don't understand or something that might be an easy scapegoat.

[isarai]

If this i true, why isn't the ESRB a militia of mass murderers?

[csreynolds]

These articles are utter bull. The problem lies with the individual, not the medium. I've been playing shooters, beat 'em ups and other 'violent' games for decades, but I've had no desires to harm or kill anyone. The types that gun down schools or become mass murders are a special kind of f**ked up before games even enter into the equation.

End of.