Grand Theft Auto inspires Thai murder

[Yorick]

http://www.mindfully.org/Health/2005...ion19aug05.htm

Most studies done on violence and video games support the conclusion that violent video games can increase aggressive behavior in children and adolescents, especially boys, researchers said on Friday. An analysis of 20 years of research shows the effects can be both immediate and long-lasting. "The majority of the studies would suggest there are effects," said Jessica Nicoll of Saint Leo University in Saint Leo, Florida, who worked on the study. One study showed that children who played a violent game for less than 10 minutes and then took a mood assessment test rated themselves with aggressive traits and aggressive actions shortly after playing. Teachers of 600 8th and 9th graders, aged 13 to 15, said children who spent more time playing violent video games were more hostile than other children and more likely to argue with authority figures and other students. The findings, presented at an annual meeting of American Psychological Association, prompted the group to adopt a resolution recommending that all violence be reduced in video games and interactive media marketed to children and youth. "Additionally, the APA also encourages parents, educators and health care providers to help youth make more informed choices about which games to play," the Association said in a statement. BAD EXAMPLE Video games set a bad example and may be particularly influential because a player takes on the roles of heroes and villains, violent and otherwise, the APA said. Perpetrators of violence go unpunished 73 percent of the time in all violent scenes, the group said. "Showing violent acts without consequences teach youth that violence is an effective means of resolving conflict," said psychologist Elizabeth Carll, who helps direct the group's Committee on Violence in Video Games and Interactive Media. Nicoll said in an interview that "only a handful" of the studies she and colleagues examined found no connection between violence and violent video games. The findings are similar to those seen for violent television shows. Joaquim Ferreira of the University of Coimbra in Portugal and colleagues studied more than 800 youngsters aged from 9 to 14 and found the biggest factor linking television violence and actual aggression was the child's understanding of the violence. "It is the way you perceive the violence and how you deal with the kids and help them understand reality," Ferreira, who also presented his findings to the APA meeting, said in an interview. Parents can sit with children and explain cartoons or television shows to them -- something the APA and other groups recommend doing. But this is more difficult to do with video games, Ferreira said. "You are part of the thing," he said. "You get involved in the violence because you are doing it."

[Yorick]

http://www.webmd.com/news/20000424/c...ce-video-games

Two new studies in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology add some scientific weight to the claim that violent video games can increase aggression. "These two studies, plus other research on video game violence ? all point in the same direction," researcher Craig A. Anderson, PhD, from Iowa State University, tells WebMD. "It's a direction that's not unexpected, because the effects of playing violent video games look to be very similar to the effects of lots of exposure to violent TV. Basically, kids who play a lot of violent video games are at risk for becoming more violent people." Still, other researchers say much more study is needed before one can say definitively that violent video games can lead to aggression. And representatives of the video-game industry say findings of these studies don't always correlate to real life. Anderson collaborated with Karen E. Dill, PhD, from Lenoir-Rhyne College in Hickory, N.C., on the two recent studies. He was with the University of Missouri-Columbia at the time. The first study surveyed more than 200 college students about their traits of aggressiveness and any delinquent behavior in the near past, in relation to the kinds of video games they played and how often they played them. Ultimately, those who had played more violent video games as teenagers reported engaging in more aggressive behavior. Men exhibited more aggression, and men who are more prone to exhibit aggressive behavior may be even more vulnerable to violent video games, the study found.

[Yorick]

Need I post any more studies?

[Iron Greasel]

Yorick: What was that first post about? The first quote seems to say, behind all the psychological terminology, that people can learn from example. The second seems to state that psychologists do not know how this actually happens. The third one describes "game theory", which, to my understanding, doens't have very much to do with violence in video games.

As for the others, I stand by my previous position. Video games can affect the mind of the player in various subtle ways, but they will not turn him into a homicidal maniac. In all these studies, was there a single occurrence of a test subject attacking the person doing the test after playing a video game? There is a difference between "more violent" and "murderous".

The example that started this discussion, the guy who tried to steal a taxi after doing it in GTA, did not score thirty percent higher than average in a multiple choise "are you violent"-test. He killed a person. That is not something that normal individuals do in normal conditions, with or without violent video games.

[Iron Greasel]

Originally Posted by Firestormalpha I don't recall anywhere in this thread that anyone declared the need for a ban on any games. The need for better regulation in a system that obviously is flawed, yes. That, perhaps the creators of games might entertain some notion of self-regulation in releasing content into a system that is KNOWN to be flawed in it's regulatory powers, yes. But I haven't seen anywhere that someone has said BAN GTA or anything of the sort, aside from Cerek's post at the beginning.

I think Cerek's post at the beginning counts, actually. Can't think of any reason it wouldn't. And many here have called for some kind of regulation, which, I think, is "anything of the sort".

And how is the regulation system obviously flawed? The games clearly state on them that they are not intended for kids. It is, in many places, illegal to give them to kids. The kids still play them, yes, but the system is not any more flawed than the system for the distribution of any other product. I have personally witnessed people under 18 drinking and smoking. How are video games different?

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Iron Greasel I think Cerek's post at the beginning counts, actually. Can't think of any reason it wouldn't. And many here have called for some kind of regulation, which, I think, is "anything of the sort".

It does count, unless of course you look at all of my subsequent posts where my position changed to suggestions that manufacturers self-regulate and simply produce different games where the characters actions don't center around breaking established laws of society.

But I did say "banned" at first, so let's not consider anything said after that.

Originally Posted by Iron Greasel And how is the regulation system obviously flawed? The games clearly state on them that they are not intended for kids. It is, in many places, illegal to give them to kids. The kids still play them, yes, but the system is not any more flawed than the system for the distribution of any other product. I have personally witnessed people under 18 drinking and smoking. How are video games different?

This has been exhaustively addressed. Not all stores or merchants enforce the regulation system. Even if they do, there are ways around it. Since children will obviously get their hands on the games regardless of any regulations put in place, it makes sense that manufacturers should simply not produce these games to begin with. I realize that's a fantasy, but I can always hope corporations will someday develop a conscious.

[Bungleau]

For the record, I *have* played GTA. 3 or 4, I think... 'twas at my brother's, a couple of years ago. I did not play it through, so that will count against me, I'm sure. However, I did notice that after playing for a couple of hours, when we headed out to dinner, I drove *much* more aggressively than usual... kind of like I was driving in the game. One subjective incident, to be sure, but one that tells me that on some level, I was more into the game than I really realized.

That said, I do believe that the overall tone of this thread is toward self-regulation. It appears to me that the difference is between self-regulation on the consumer's side, through effectively using ratings and other means to keep things out of the wrong hands; and the publisher's side, by deciding what games to produce.

I agree with Yorick: the young man in Thailand is the most recent piece of evidence in the matter. Unfortunately, the nature of the issue is that only the problems, like him, will get brought to the public's eye. There's little newsworthiness in stating that "36,523 teenagers played GTA yesterday and showed prosocial behavior, common sense, and pleasant attitudes".

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca So the sociopath who stabbed somebody while stealing their taxi is an expert on whether or not video games cause harm to society? It must be true because he said so? Classic. LOL Your wrong FSA, I'm no sensationalist. I do appreciate the irony though.

Well, Chewie, you were the one who stated in a different thread that "ONE example of a child being harmed is too much."

Several studies show exposure to aggressive stimuli increases aggressive behavior and here is one example where that behavior was carried to the most tragic outcome possible. The child/young adult in this example was harmed by blurring the distinction between fantasy and reality.

Perhaps you should reconsider your position on this issue given your position on the earlier issue.

[Iron Greasel]

Originally Posted by Cerek It does count, unless of course you look at all of my subsequent posts where my position changed to suggestions that manufacturers self-regulate and simply produce different games where the characters actions don't center around breaking established laws of society. But I did say "banned" at first, so let's not consider anything said after that.

You changed your position later? Sorry, the thread was too exhaustively long to re-read. I suppose Firestormalpha was right, then.

Originally Posted by Cerek This has been exhaustively addressed. Not all stores or merchants enforce the regulation system. Even if they do, there are ways around it. Since children will obviously get their hands on the games regardless of any regulations put in place, it makes sense that manufacturers should simply not produce these games to begin with. I realize that's a fantasy, but I can always hope corporations will someday develop a conscious.

But it sort of feels that you're singling out video games. Tobacco and alcohol are quite obviously harmful, more so than video games, and children have access to both. Yorick's studies mention that violence in video games has similar effects as violence in TV (I'm guessing movies, too). Eh, maybe I'm too defensive about this. Nothing wrong with self-regulation.

Originally Posted by Cerek Several studies show exposure to aggressive stimuli increases aggressive behavior and here is one example where that behavior was carried to the most tragic outcome possible. The child/young adult in this example was harmed by blurring the distinction between fantasy and reality.

I'm not sure if we should believe the taxi stealing person. He says he was influenced by the game, but that doesn't mean that the game made him do it. He might be trying to dodge blame. He might have been just looking for any excuse to do something violent.

Pekka-Eric Auvinen, the guy who shot all those people in that school in Finland a few months back, mentioned Plato and Nietzsche as influences in his murder-suicide note. There was a brief debate about whether they should be removed from school curriculum, but this was quickly waved aside as silly. Oh, and he played video games, too. The general consensus is that the kid was messed up to begin with.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't blame video games for murders just because the murderer says we should.

[Chewbacca]

Originally Posted by Cerek Well, Chewie, you were the one who stated in a different thread that "ONE example of a child being harmed is too much." Several studies show exposure to aggressive stimuli increases aggressive behavior and here is one example where that behavior was carried to the most tragic outcome possible. The child/young adult in this example was harmed by blurring the distinction between fantasy and reality. Perhaps you should reconsider your position on this issue given your position on the earlier issue.

It's obvious you haven't played the game and that you don't know much about how video games are marketed or sold. Correspondingly, comparing GTA with easy to use, widely available handguns is simply ridiculous.

Anything and everything aggresive may or may not influence people to be aggressive, but very little if anything can take away an individual's determination of choosing action.

Allowing sociopaths to blame their behavior on a video game( or anything else) and citing this a proof of a societal problem is a great victory for sociopaths everywhere.

Take Care!