Real Violence

The results of playing them however can be questionable. Studies have shown that playing with violent video games can desensitize you to violence. “Results demonstrate that playing violent video games, even for just 20 minutes, can cause people to become less physiologically aroused by real violence”.(Journal of Experimental Social Psychology) Acts of violence in the video form or even actually witnessing it visually can make people become desensitized. “Participants randomly assigned to play a violent video game had relatively lower heart rates and galvanic skin responses while watching footage of people being beaten, stabbed and shot than did those randomly assigned to play nonviolent video games”.(Journal of Experimental Social Psychology) This proves that the visual of violent acts cannot only change behavior but your health as

The data provided by J. Ramirez does not prove any significant role of Violent Video Games related to shootings in Schools while the editor of Clinton Village News shows studies that prove that only 1 out of 8 shootings are related with interest in Violent Video

The first body of evidence that supports the claim that video games do not cause violence in reality is that “almost all boys and most girls play video and computer games, including games with violent content” (Olsen, Kutner, and Warner 56). This would suggest that if all children play violent video games and video games did in fact cause children to act violently, then all children would be violent. As absurd as this suggestion is, when the claim came

The first reason that violent video games are not beneficial to our society is that they often award players for simulating violent behaviors, and thus that enhances the learning of them. Studies have shown that when violence is rewarded in video games, players exhibit increase of violence compared to those who play video games where violence is punished. Violent video games create aggressive human beings, and award players for violent behaviors. They require active participation, repetition, and

Some scholars argue however that violence in television, films and video games has in fact the opposite effect. As individuals become ‘saturated’ with violence, it can lead to a catharsis where videogames, television and films become a safe outlet to for aggressive feelings and emotions; as a result, individuals become less violent. Naturally, this argument goes against the idea that children are highly influenced by modelled behaviour as they try to replicate what they see (Freedman 2001). The influence of video games is therefore highly complex to resolve. Poole (2000) therefore argues that videogames may simply be part of many factors that lead to violent behaviour. Videogames as films and television may influence real life violence by having a particular style that is imitated. Pool argues that it is possible that the teenage murderers in America may have imitated the way in which people are killed in the video game Doom, however it is not possible to say that without playing the game they would not have killed their classmates. Research conducted in America reiterates this statement,

Besides the violent contents, video games have several positive aspects. Video games can push children's

Video games. Americans has long been drawn to the idea that violent movies or video games can provoke actual delinquency or serious crime. In 1963, the Stanford psychologist, Albert Bandura, performed an experiment in which one group of preschoolers watched films and cartoons of adults beating “Bobo,” a clown doll. When the kids, who witnessed Bobo’s travails, were later left alone with the toy, they were more likely than other children, to abuse Bobo themselves. Bandura concluded that “social scripts” presented on screen can guide children’s behavior in real life. In the article “The Case for Violent Video Games” by Dana Goldstein, writes that such anxieties intensified after the Columbine High School massacre in 1999. It turned out that Eric

In their research of violent videogames and the effect on children, they have found that “the simplistic belief that exposure to media violence will lead directly to individual violence is clearly wrong.” (Kutner, Olsen, 2008) I am going to ask you to look deeper than this. I assert that although violent video games are thought to encourage real world violence, they actually help to prevent it.

Ferguson creates his argument by conducting his own research on delinquency and bullying behaviors and how exposure to violent video games may influence them. His results indicated that the main predictor for delinquency and bullying were the aggression traits of the child as well as their stress levels. Many of my other sources use Ferguson’s research and I believe starting with his research and seeing why the other sources believe this about his work will help format my paper in a much simpler way.

Anderson to support his claim by showing that most blame of violent outbreaks in society are blamed on one single thing, like video games, but if you look at the studies there are some many different factors that affect the behavior of today’s society. The author then goes on to say “Most researchers in the field agree with Dr. Anderson evidence and findings,” which establishes an accepted respect of authority for his source. This gives the reader a feeling of comfort in knowing that these sources are scholarly and can be trusted. Another source used by the author explains a recent experiment by psychologists at Iowa State University have found that after a short usage of the fighting game “Mortal Kombat” that they indeed acted slightly more aggressive shortly following the experiment but ultimately couldn’t find any results in long term effects. Mr. Carey states “Many similar studies have found the same thing: A dose of violent gaming makes people act a little more rudely than they would otherwise, at least for a few minutes after playing, but little is found about what actually follows,” this gives more support to his claim by displaying that his claim is the generally accepted and agreed upon opinion of most scholars in this field of study. Throughout the article the author gives each of his source’s full detailed background to explain why they are creditable and trustworthy

There are many issues when dealing with the two sides of this debate. Those who claim violent video games don’t harm society sometimes get their information from what they believe to be expert advice; many times this advice comes from “experts” hired by media industries. “The media industries spend so much money on trying to convince the general public that there is nothing to worry about,” says Craig Anderson, who was interviewed on “Violent Video Games and Other Media Violence”. “The media industry is very worried about its profits and will do almost anything to protect them.” People should also consider the times a violent video game was just the push some crazy kid needed to kill someone or do something crazy.

Video game makers have even advanced video games to give you the fell of using real weapons, also called virtual reality. There is a professor at the University of Missouri says that violent video games change behavior. First person shooter games help team players how to hurt people because first person shooter games are usually more realistic. Sixty percent sixth to eighth grade boys who play m-rated video games have hit or beat up somebody. Many people who have acted in mass shootings played violent video games. Violent video games have the tendency to lower people's empathy and they also lower people’s kindness. The APA says violent video games will risk the factor for aggression. When violent video games reward a player for violence, kids think violence is a good thing because they learn that you get rewards for committing violent acts. Sixty-seven percent of parents even agree that violent video games do lead to aggression.

“ , says that “It is not hard to ‘link’ video game playing with violent acts if one wishes to do so, as one video game playing prevalence study indicated that 98.7% of adolescents play video games to some degree”. What Ferguson tries to explain is that for anyone trying to correlate teenagers committing violent crimes and the amount of time playing video games is hardly evidence of anything. Trying to prove that a behavior, such as video gamming, so highly common amongst teenagers is the cause of a rare behavioral incidence, as a school shooting, is highly

Violent games are often played by kids, and kids are the main group of people who have desire to win. So, this mentality causes them get more and more angry, which may directly led to crimes. It is easy to have a casual effect after losing a game. That could makes people want to play another round, until they addicted into games. Children are still growing, and they start another game because they lose the last game, and this cycle will make the children more addictive. If games play more, they will feel immersive, it will give people a fake impression, and will affect the children 's growth. Also it influencing people’s time, this may cause children have less time to feel our planet, the outside world. Some of them are limited by violent video games, because they already addicted by those games. Secondly, violent behavior in reality is often caused by violent video games. People who likes to play violent video games are easy to get confused about reality and virtual. People are very focus when they play games, games could let people feels they are the character in the game. It could make people get angry, and once they finished their game, back to reality, they also may still think about the game, and want to have a chance to experience it, whether the result is as same as the game or not, and this could lead them to have a strong violent behavior in reality. Violent video games may change

A major opposition to violence video games leading to aggression is that the research that was done is not a valid research. Henry Jenkins said “...most of those studies are inconclusive and many have been criticized on methodological grounds” (2). The studies are not inconclusive because in the studies that the researchers do they