Support NeoGAF

[llien]

A new, longer-term study of video game play from the Max Planck Institute for Human Development and Germany's University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf recently published in Molecular Psychiatry found that adults showed "no significant changes" on a wide variety of behavioral measures after two straight months of daily violent game play. Most scientific studies on the effects of video game violence measure participants right after the completion of a gameplay session, when the adrenaline prompted by the on-screen action is likely still pumping. Researcher Simone Kuhn and her co-authors argue that "effects observed only for a few minutes after short sessions of video gaming are not representative of what society at large is actually interested in, namely how habitual violent video game play affects behavior on a more long-term basis." To correct for the "priming" effects inherent in these other studies, researchers had 90 adult participants play either Grand Theft Auto V or The Sims 3 for at least 30 minutes every day over eight weeks (a control group played no games during the testing period). The adults chosen, who ranged from 18 to 45 years old, reported little to no video game play in the previous six months and were screened for pre-existing psychological problems before the tests. Over 208 separate comparisons (52 tests; violent vs. non-violent and control groups; pre- vs. post- and two-months-later tests), only three subjects showed a statistically significant effect of the violent gameplay at a 95 percent confidence level. Pure chance would predict more than 10 of the 208 comparisons would be significant at that level, leading the researchers to conclude "that there were no detrimental effects of violent video game play."

Slashdot

 

[xviper]

it doesn't matter what game you play at any age, i and so many of my friends played GTA 3 and many other violent games at a young age and we are all fine, i don't know why the media blames tragic events on video games, maybe because it's the easiest explanation

 

[FloatingIslands]

Only 90 people seems like a small sample to conclude anything...

 

[iconmaster]

Yeah, I like their methodology but you'd probably want to see the study replicated with larger groups. Good start though.

 

[Northeastmonk]

It's crazy when I think about how people are doing research now versus how much time people have spent playing video games since the 70's? Not to mention the creators who actually develop the violent video games. They probably have more game time than some players do.

But even when graphics got better, it was more of an enjoyment than it was turning me into some antagonist.

That's probably where I'm missing the point. You also have to consider those who were raised without seeing blood on the screen or those with a history of domestic violence. Even then it's hard to form an actual theory about violent video games. I'm certain there's plenty of variables to consider. Not all people think alike.

Edit: but jeez we could have told you this outcome years ago.

 

[VertigoOA]

"Adults" vs the developing minds of children is ummm.... come on

 

[BANGS]

I'm so sick of this sensationalist crap. What an awful study...

 

[iconmaster]

"Adults" vs the developing minds of children is ummm.... come on

This study only covers adults; but there are plenty that look at kids. One involved almost 1500 high school kids over about four years. In general the finding seems to be an increase in short-term aggression but no clear long-term effect.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/science/studying-the-effects-of-playing-violent-video-games.html

(If you know of more recent studies, let us know.)

 

[Minamu]

Only 90 people seems like a small sample to conclude anything...

Not really. Statistics. With a confidence level of 95%, a 400 million population, a 10% margin of error in your results, and you only need 97 participants. Can easily be calculated on google with a sample size calculator.

 

[gunslikewhoa]

Water is wet.

 

[TheDuskwalker]

It doesn't matter how well any study is (since there have been much better, that focused on non adults) or how many facts are found on this subject. I mean if actual facts were being considered, this whole recent thing regarding violent video games wouldn't even be a thing.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Studies can say whatever you want them to say if you’re paying for the study.

 

[Minamu]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but based on several posts in here, it sounds like you guys are upset about these results?? Aren't they confirming somewhat that games ARE NOT TO BLAME? And you're throwing around accusations that the study is paid for? What do you want lol.

 

[Freshmaker]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but based on several posts in here, it sounds like you guys are upset about these results?? Aren't they confirming somewhat that games ARE NOT TO BLAME? And you're throwing around accusations that the study is paid for? What do you want lol.

It does imply that media consumption doesn't drive behavior. A lot of people believe that absolutely has to be true.

 

[BANGS]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but based on several posts in here, it sounds like you guys are upset about these results?? Aren't they confirming somewhat that games ARE NOT TO BLAME? And you're throwing around accusations that the study is paid for? What do you want lol.

You can't only demand fairness if you disagree with it...

 

[Minamu]

You can't only demand fairness if you disagree with it...

Meaning? Yeah, the study seems to focus on adults, while kids are probably more susceptible to their influences, so I can see that point. Kids are a part of the general population though, so a full dismissal of these results is a bit silly too.

It does imply that media consumption doesn't drive behavior. A lot of people believe that absolutely has to be true.

Seems weird to be hanging around a gaming forum if that's the case xD Unless they require a full acquittal where games are never in the wrong and are thus flaming this study for not committing 100% to the "cause".

 

[FloatingIslands]

Not really. Statistics. With a confidence level of 95%, a 400 million population, a 10% margin of error in your results, and you only need 97 participants. Can easily be calculated on google with a sample size calculator.

Not really. Statistics. With a confidence level of 95%, a 400 million population, a 10% margin of error in your results, and you only need 97 participants. Can easily be calculated on google with a sample size calculator.

Yes, you are right. What I mean is that if they repeated the study on different people (but maintaining the sample size), the confidence level could change. They should repeat the study more times to conclude it with more certainty.

 

[crobb991]

In other scientific news.. water is wet

 

[LaughingStock]

Fake violence is fake. Your brain knows the difference.

What i find really troubling is how kids have easy access to real life violence. You know, videos showing real people being killed. Isis beheadings and shit.

 

[Minamu]

Fake violence is fake. Your brain knows the difference.

What i find really troubling is how kids have easy access to real life violence. You know, videos showing real people being killed. Isis beheadings and shit.

I don't think seeing real violence will make anyone more likely to become a murderer, but that is probably not your point? Granted, I'm not suffering from mental illness as far as I know, and I recall two relatively early examples of both fake and real violence that made my stomach turn, one of which still haunts me. I remember seeing (fake?) blood splatter from a man's face from a kick from Jet Li in a movie (Black Mask I believe it's called). I was chocked for days and had to stop the movie. I had seen movie blood countless times before but that random injury resonated with me very strongly. I was more than likely older than 14 at the time. I've also seen an uncut Al Qaeda hostage beheading in school (unsupervised recess computer access) when I was maybe 17. I'm 33 this year and I still remember that video more vividly than I'd prefer. I was fortunate to see that shit in fairly safe environments and at an older age, but I doubt it would've made me go on a school rampage had I seen it when I was 10. Still, no one deserves to be exposed to that shit regardless of age :/

Regular bullying did more damage than games and real/fake violence ever did.