Video Games Connection to Violence

Video Games Connection to Violence

Video games can be dated back to the late 1940s. Thomas Goldsmith and Estle Ray Mann invented the first video game called Cathode Ray Tube Amusement Device. It had an assortment of knobs used to move a dot that appeared in the cathode ray tube display. This game was inspired by how missiles appeared in WWII radars, and the object of this game was to control the missiles and hit the target. Video games gained popularity in the 1970's when Nolan Bushnell and Ted Dabney introduced the Atari game "Pong" into the family home. Over the last ten years video game popularity has increased tremendously. The most popular of these games are first person shooters (FPS) such as Call of Duty, Doom, and Halo. Call of Duty has sold 6.5 million copies in the U.S. and U.K. alone. Most of these were purchased within 24 hours of its release, thanks solely to vendors holding midnight release parties for the popular games.

As the level of violence in video games has increased, so has concern for the effects on those who play, especially those who play a lot. Many are quick to point out that most school shootings in recent years have been carried out by avid gamers, and their games of choice were always dark and violent. It is very difficult to think of one definition of violence. When most people think of violence in connection with video games, their minds immediately jump to images from Call of Duty: gunfire, explosions, and large amounts of blood and gore. Very few people would consider Mario Brothers to be a violent game. However, the book Violence by Slavoj Zizek explores two types of violence. He argues there is subjective violence and then there is objective violence. Subjective violence is the type of violence we see daily; people being harmed and something we actively carry out. Objective violence on the other hand is much less active; it is equally prevalent, yet we do not notice it as much. Mainly it is destruction, where our actions indirectly cause death. This distinction is very important because games like Call of Duty utilize subjective violence, where the player directly kills other characters that resemble human. However, Mario utilizes objective violence, where our actions do not directly kill characters. The difference between the two is very slight, yet we must recognize both as violent.

Christopher J. Ferguson, an assistant professor of behavioral sciences and criminal justice at Texas A&M University, argues that it has become all too common to blame videos games for inciting individuals to act out in a violent manner. He stresses that people have always blamed a variety of art forms as being responsible for personal failings. He points out that the new scapegoat is the video game platform. In his meta-analysis of video game studies, he concluded that there was no evidence to support either a casual or correlational relationship between video games and aggressive behavior. He explains the reason video games are blamed is publication bias. That means the media tends to publish articles that support a hypothesis that video games cause violent behaviors. Ferguson claims that violent crime rates in the United States have gone down significantly since 1994 while video games have gotten more popular and more violent. He states, "In my opinion, the video game hypothesis remains because it fits well with the dogma of social science (which has yet to escape from an obsession with deterministic learning models that humans as passive programmed machines rather than active in determining their own behaviors)" in this quote he explains that humans are able to determine their behavior and that they are not passive programmed machines. He believes that the media issues serve to distract us from more-sensitive topics that may be the real contributor to violent behaviors, notably violence in families, while not all abuse victims become violent offenders. He also believes that it is a better reason and more valid to explain violence than blaming video games. He suggests that many of us prefer to blame others, particularly an abstract entity such as media, for our problems rather than accept personal responsibility when we or our children behave badly.

On the other hand, David S. Bickham, staff scientist at the Center on Media and Child Health and Children's Hospital in Boston, disagrees with Ferguson. He argues that violent video games can lead to violent behaviors in children. According to Bickham, violent video games typically reward aggression and teach players that violence is an acceptable form of problem solving. He claims that scientists have exposed children to violent media and found that they behave more aggressively than children who saw non-violent television or played non-violent games. Bickham also explains that scientists have found that even after controlling dozens of complex environmental and individual characteristics linked to aggression, watching violent television and playing violent video games still increases the likelihood that a child will be violent. He believes that video games are exceptional teaching tools, incorporating many techniques that promote learning. He explains his belief with four points. First video games are interactive, allowing the player to be closely involved with the main character and to control that character's actions. The second point he emphasizes on is video games directly reward the child's success in performing the actions, with visual effects, points, and opportunities to take on new challenge. Third, video games typically require almost complete attention, necessitating constant eyes-on-screen and hand-eye coordination to succeed in the game. The fourth and final point he explains is video games are designed to be incredibly engaging and "fun" often leading children to slip deeply into a "flow state" in which they may be at increased vulnerability to the messages of the game. He thinks that the exposure to the violent video games, where violence is justified, rewarded and often the only option for success, primes children for hostile thoughts and behaviors immediately after playing a game. Lastly he compares the effects of video games on children of different ages by saying "Children younger than eight years are more vulnerable to media violence effects because they have not yet developed the ability to discriminate fully between fantasy and reality in media content. Research has consistently shown that young children often behave more aggressively than older children do after playing violent video games."

Reporter Jennifer Seter highlights growing concerns among parents and mental health professionals about the potentially addictive qualities of computer and video games. She cites an Iowa State University study that indicates that 8.5 percent of teen gamers