As I’ve been reading the articles for this week, I’ve been trying to discern exactly what the main points of disagreement are. Of the articles I’ve read so far, Craig A. Anderson seems like he is the author who is most opposed to violent video games. His focus is on violent video games; I don’t see him arguing against video games in general. Henry Jenkins attempts to separate fact from fiction with respect to the public’s perception of video games. Overall, he doesn’t appear to condemn violent video games, but he also admits that there may be a growing consensus among researchers that violent video games may be a contributing risk factor to anti-social behaviors. I’m actually not clear as to whether or not he’s supports the idea that children may play violent video games without negative affects. He does say that parents need to share in the responsibility of what games their children play. So he seems to be at least somewhat in agreement with Anderson that violent video games may be a factor in contributing to anti-social behavior. Jenkins and Anderson also seem to be in agreement that non-violent video games aren’t really a problem. Sternheimer’s article doesn’t seem to distinguish clearly between the affects of the media and the affects of violent video games. But I don’t see her concerned with video games in general and she seems to think the alarm over violent video games is a bit exaggerated. Likewise, the Video Game Report Card argues that parents and retail stores need to take more responsibility for keeping violent games out of the hands of children and young teens. Seems to me the main question being discussed is, To what extent do violent video games encourage anti-social or aggressive behaviors? Is it only one risk factor and perhaps a small risk factor at that or do violent video games contribute in a more significant way to these kinds of unacceptable behaviors?
I’m curious as to whether others see the main question the same or in a different way.
Becky
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I get confused when people wholeheartedly believe any one thing about violent games, even more confused when they believe games are a big risk factor and encourage anti-social thoughts and behavior. In fact, I get kind of angry when I remember being a kid in high school after Columbine and having to go through metal detectors and getting my bookbag searched more often if I happened to wear an edgier, darker outfit that day. As if my choices in media, subcultures, and their reflections in my clothing were to be taken as a sign that I was a dangerous person and someone for adults to watch out for in case I bring drugs or weapons into building. I wonder if young people felt that kind of anger in previous eras when librarians said fiction was bad for them, parents wouldn't let them listen to rock and roll or read comic books, or when adults judged you for playing Dungeons and Dragons -- all because their developing brains couldn't be trusted to make healthy, "right" media choices.
In 3rd grade, I played Mortal Kombat arcade games despite the media outcry over the "realistic blood and gore" in the games. The kids I knew would crowd around the machines and we'd be mesmerized by the action on the screen -- right down to the parts where players' skeletons are pulled out of their bodies and set on fire. Looking back at those "realistic graphics", I don't know what the concern was about. Were people really afraid we'd grow up desensitized to issues of death and violence or grow up unconcerned with the welfare of others in a large part because of Mortal Kombat?
Anyhow. I'm allowing this comment to be more rambly than a post would, sorry.
I just don't trust most studies. I think we should be aware that the opposing studies are in support of opposing viewpoint, which makes the main questions for me to be: (1) Why are there such opposing viewpoints and opposing studies? (2) What makes the violent video game controversy different from previous controversies over popular media among youth?
I think anybody who says a medium itself is hugely responsible for encouraging positive or negative behaviors isn't giving the free will of the kids' themselves enough credit. Or giving the family lives and individual circumstances of each kid enough credit.
The only person in the media who I can think of offhand that says video games play a huge roles in the lives of aggressive children is the lawyer I mentioned in a previous post, Jack Thompson. He tries to claim that shooters play violent video games, but even the police will tell you in their reports that they don't consider video games to be truly relevant to the crimes they committed. I'm glad the police didn't jump to conclusions about that.
Some examples of studies about video games with positive outcomes (that don't seem get as much press or sink into the collective consciousness of the nation or world) include one where researchers say "violent video games make people more relaxed" or that more generally, "kids who DON'T play video games are at risk" because not playing games means you are not as socially competent as your peers.
Anyhow, this is all from my perspective.
Argh, Blogger ate my comment. Here it goes again:
I wrote the comment rather quickly without cleaning it up (not that blogging is meant to be the purest writing medium in existence -- ha!), so I hope I didn't repeat myself too much or come across as attacking anybody ... except zealots, obviously. I just get worked up about this stuff sometimes, when it comes close to my heart.
Thanks for writing your thoughts on this, Becky. I'm going to miss this blog.
Klara, your post is a good reminder for me how different this subject is for those who look at the subject from the view of an insider. Myself, I only play video games when I want to educate myself about what almost everyone else is doing. I may get mesmerized for five or ten minutes, but rarely much longer than that and I don't think there are any games I've played more than twice.
You wrote that you don't trust most studies. From what I've read about the effects of violent video games on the users, I don't trust most of the studies either. That is because the articles are written in such a sloppy fashion. I don't know if the studies are done well or poorly. If I didn't have several other classes with major projects hanging over my head, I'd search the data bases to see if their are scholarly articles on the topic. I would just caution you to take the experiences of you and your friends for what they are. They are certainly valid experiences to be considered in the light of research. But just because that was your experience doesn't mean it is everyone's experience. Even if using violent video games is only one small risk factor in terms of someone engaging in anti-social behavior, I think that's something worth knowing. I think studies can be done which will help us know more clearly whether or not that is true. Such a study might also reveal that the violent video games are zero risk factor. I'd just like to see a well done study. I assume you would also.
Becky
Post a Comment