[Taken from my website, http://pcgamingcomp.blogspot.com/]
Can
the scientific method help illuminate the contentious issue of violence
and video games in our favor? We as gamers intuitively understand the
limitations of games to influence behavior, but formal scientific
evidence would absolve games in the eyes of the mainstream.
"There
is a direct relationship between realism and degree of violence
enabling," declared Dave Grossman, a former Army Ranger and
paratrooper. While the military training he incurred decades ago
included proper restrictions on violent behavior, thus enabling its
release in a controlled, directional manner, video games offer no such
"sanctions to constrain violence."
"The worse is yet to come," Grossman gloomily predicted.
Over
a decade after the publication of "On Killing," it has become clear
that Grossman's hypothesis was woefully oversimplistic and, worse of
all for a PhD holder, extremely unscientific in its approach. The data
is uniquivocal; as video games have expanded their capacity to portray
the tortuous dismemberment and outright atomization of fellow homo
sapiens, aggravated assault rates have continued to decline. Of course,
these variables very probably have nothing to do with one another, yet
Grossman could not admit as much when the trend of assault happened to
be going the other way.
One
shouldn't be too harsh on those of a more conservative stripe, however.
Their arguments make intuitive sense. All sorts of media, along with a
host of other socializing factors, influence the development of
individuals at the level of the brain. Why would video games be any
different? And presumably, the effect initiated by video games wouldn't
be a positive one, considering the rather brutish content they contain.
The truth, as is often the case, is somewhere in-between two extremes.
Will
too many play sessions of Serious Sam turn you into Son of Sam?
Unlikely. But that doesn't mean violent video games are a carefree
investment, or that we should lightheartedly dole them out in bushels
to our children.
A
literature review of the available research reveals a 40/60 split
between articles that establish a link between violent games and
"aggressive tendencies," and those that do not.
There's no accepted definition of this
term (or its variants), but if the research is any good it invariably
involves MRI scans performed on people playing violent games. It seems
probable that continually playing such games do indeed increase "aggressive tendencies." But that's not the smoking gun those desperate
for one were looking for.
The
problem is, there are hundreds of variables that constantly provide
input to our moment-to-moment experience of the world, many of which
also increase aggressive tendencies. The immensely complex confluence
of these variables, including their interaction with the random genetic
background of an individual, makes it folly to try and pin violent
behavior on just one factor.
Nor
is there any convincing evidence that an increase in aggressive
tendencies necessarily equates to an increase in violent behavior. One
may well get frustrated more easily and throw a controller at the wall
(who hasn't?), but that's still a long, long way away from butchering
another human being. Thus the researchers still have all their work ahead
of them.
Finally, if we were forced to play the guessing game, we might conjecture variables that inculcate actual violence towards others in the real world,
such as elite military training, would have a far more profound affect
on one's psyche than video games (see what I did there, Dr. Grossman?).
Thus, from a scientific standpoint, a
tentative conclusion would be that the research is simply too complex
to decide one way or the other. Until a major breakthrough in
neuroscience presents itself, and/or invasive procedures become
acceptable, we will remain nowhere near close to answering this
question conclusively. Still, such a non-answer is useful, if for no
other reason than outing those would claim a matter-of-fact causal
relationship as frauds.
And yet, in the future...
Conservative politicians will continue to use private sexual acts as an excuse to limit our rights and restrict our behavior. Their Liberal brethren will do likewise for the sake of our "health."
Much coveted bipartisanship will prevail, and these supposedly
vociferous opponents will join hands to exploit the non-existent link
between video games and violence to further curtail citizens' rights
and enhance control.
As such, the ultimate answer to the question originally presented, even if evidence in our favor existed, is an emphatic no.
Voilà.
|
However, a positive correlation is not a causal relationship; nor does the data say anything about the direction of such causality.
It is just as likely - or more so - that Grossman etc have got it entirely backwards. In other words, those with violent tendencies may simply be more likely to seek out violent games. It seems more probable that our nature would modify our choice of leisure activity than the converse.
the constitution. "Iowans ought to have their say," Grassley says. "They ought to be able to
decide."
and try to use that to 'limit our rights and restrict our behavior'.
In other news, I'd agree with Tim that the inverse of what they are suggesting is true. I scream at the television when playing a video game because I learned that from my father when he watched the Yankees. People get excited, it's ok. Those who go over the line are, most generally, just looking for their excuse.
I'm just flattered anyone is reading this at all.