Violence in Videogames
A thesis about
the relationship between violent video games and real-life violence
By Tim Fieldhouse and
Bertjan van Dijk
With the rise of technology come many new popular
forms of entertainment. In the past twenty years, video game popularity has
skyrocketed, even surpassing the
motion-picture industry in sales and revenue. In the past, technologies such as
radio, motion picture, and television have been scrutinized for supposed
violent side effects on the mind. The most recent victim of this scrutiny is
the most increasingly popular form of entertainment - computer and video games.
Much of the scrutiny the video games industry is receiving is due to simple
ignorance about the industry, as well as some poorly run studies that receive a
great deal of media attention.
After evaluating many claims and upon close inspection of many studies, it
can be concluded that there is currently no proven link between real-life
violence and video game violence.
As an industry worth over 7 billion-dollars, video and computer games are becoming a prime
form of entertainment in the home. The video game industry also mirrors radio
and television with the amount of criticism it is receiving (Grapes 1-2). Video
games are currently receiving a great deal of scrutiny from anti-violence
groups, the media, and some studies. One study, run by psychologists Craig Anderson and Karen Dill, was
conducted in order to find a link, if any, between real-life violence and video
games. The study claims they have reached conclusions proving a relationship
between violent video games and real-life violence. In the this study, the
experimenters sat a number of people down, some playing the violent action
“shooter” Wolfenstein 3D, and others playing the calm
puzzle game Myst.
The arousal was much higher in the people playing Wolfenstein 3D than in the people playing Myst, and
the experimenters interpreted it as heightened aggression (Freedman 5). Many
other studies have also come to similar conclusions using similar techniques.
The media clearly supports the negative claims about
video game violence. National news broadcasters, newspapers, and magazines
commonly run segments and articles highlighting new studies and their negative
conclusions, as most recently seen with the events in
With numerous studies and claims such as these, one
would assume many statistical facts would be readily available to back them up.
This is entirely untrue. In fact, juvenile crime in
In fact, many industry experts claim video games can actually benefit children.
Some industry experts, such as Sega of America’s former president Tom Kalinske,
claim that video games can help children develop new skills for the
technological job market.
Kalinske
even goes as far as to say it helps many children in their education. He points
out a true story of how video game technology helped a struggling special
education class in
Criticism against video games is not entirely unwarranted, however. Even though
the average American “gamer” in 2000 was of the age twenty-eight, there are
still millions of children playing video games, both violent and non-violent
(Gannet 3). Most people would agree that letting someone as young as eight
years old play a video game with any amount of gore should be restricted. Video
game developers have been very responsible in the use of these ratings.
According to a report issued by the Federal
Trade Commission (FTC), the industry has made progress in limiting
inappropriate ads to children. The National
Institute on Media and the Family (NIMF), an organization that evaluates
media for adequate family-oriented content and responsible regulations, complimented
the video game industry’s efforts to keep violent games out of the hands of
children. In their “Sixth Annual Video and Computer Game Report Card,” released
on
Many studies about video games have been conducted. A good number of studies
are conducted by splitting a certain number of people into two groups, one group
playing violent games, and the other playing non-violent games. Shortly after
the allotted time of play, the subjects’ aggressive thoughts are measured.
Almost always, the people who played the violent games had a much larger amount
of aggressive thoughts than the people who played non-violent games. These
thoughts are interpreted by the experimenters as a higher aggression (Freedman
3-5). This is where one problem lies. It’s not truly a measurement of how
aggressive someone is, but simply that they are thinking about aggressiveness.
Jonathan L. Freedman, from the
Department of Psychology at the
comments
on these types of studies, saying “After watching a war movie, you probably
have thoughts of war, but no one would suggest you are more likely to wage war”
(Freedman 7). Other studies, such as the aforementioned
Marc Saltzman,
from the Gannet News Service, points out how “the authors don’t control for the
possibility that the subjects may have a predisposition to violence in the
first place” (Gannet 2). Many of these problems can have major effects on the
results of the study. The list of flaws simply goes on and on.
It seems the United States Surgeon
General recognizes the lack of truly scientific and fairly conducted
studies. In 1999, President Clinton called for a report on the effects of
violent media on children. The study, conducted by the Surgeon General,
concluded “there is no substantial
evidence that supports the hypotheses that violent video games have any effect
on a child’s psyche, let alone their behaviour” (McDowell 1). The
Surgeon General also found that video games can help children by giving them
more “positive forward thinking”
(McDowell 1).
With the support of the Surgeon General, one would
think that the media tendency to scrutinize video games would lessen, if only
by a small amount. Sadly, this report did not make much news and is ignored
quite a lot in the media. Instead, countless news reports still point out the
outdated media violence study by the Surgeon General in 1972, named “Television
and Growing Up: The Impact of Televised Violence”. This study claimed media
violence, including the then-popular video game arcade, was demoralizing youth
(
Many courts have been graciously fair when cases
against the video game industry are brought to court,
however one teachers’ family in the
In
However, as seen in the recent decision handed down by Judge Limbaugh, games in the
Video games, while one of the most popular forms of entertainment, are one of
the most controversial topics in today’s society. After compiling and
evaluating many different sources of information, including studies, media
reports, industry experts’ comments and court cases, it is clear that there is
currently no substantial evidence or support concluding a link between violence
and video games. Without fair and well-organized studies, and especially
without support of the legal systems, those who claim violence in video games
cause people to act violent currently have no solid support for their theories.
Works Cited
Falcon,
Mike. “Video Games: Bad, but not all Bad.”
Freedman, Jonathan L. “Evaluating the Research on Violent
Video Games.” Department of Psychology in
Gannet News Service, Inc. and/or
Gibson, Steve. “Game Industry Wins.” Shacknews. On-line.
Grapes, Bryan J. Violent Children.
MacQueen, Ken. “Killing Time.”
Maclean’s. On-line.
McDowell, Nick. “Surgeon General: Video games Not Lethal.”
PC Gamer Web. On-line.
Stossel, John. “The Games Kids
Play.” On-line.
Wadhams, Nick. “Columbine Lawsuit Dismissed.” Yahoo!
News. On-line.
Walsh, David. “Sixth Annual Video and Computer Game Report Card.” National Institute on Media and the Family On-line.
Brahe, Tycho. “Penny-Arcade:
Seems Wet.” www.penny-arcade.com On-line.