The Influence of Violent Video Games on Aggression

Everyday people are subject to countless violent images in the media. Some claim that violent video games are the main reason behind violent acts such as school shootings carried out by teens (Sternheimer, 2007). The truth is that the majority of those who play violent video games do not commit acts of violence. Politicians looking to explain why the youth of today is so violent often conclude that video games are to blame (Sternheimer, 2007). The reality is that there are other variables at work when an individual decides to commit a violent act. While it should be taken into consideration that violent video games are a risk factor for increasing aggression in youth, there is in no causal connection between violent video games and youth violence (Freedman, 2002). Some individuals have been inspired to commit a violent crime because of a video game yet it can be concluded that variables such as psychological problems mediate the relationship between video games and acts of violence.

In the constantly evolving world of video games, violent content has become increasingly widespread. Studies show that 90 to 98 percent of teen and mature rated video games feature acts of physical aggression (Haniger & Thompson, 2004). A video game world that is saturated with violence leads to great amounts of player exposure to violent content. Smith, Lachlan, and Tamborini (2003) took a representative sample of 60 mature and teen rated video games and found that players are exposed to 4.59 violent actions per minute. It could be argued that being exposed to such a huge amount of violence could teach children violent scripts for social problems (Smith et al., 2003). This evidence shows that video games could be considered one of the many risk factors for aggression in youths. Not only is violence widespread throughout video games but it is increasingly realistic such as in the Grand Theft Auto series. The Grand Theft Auto series features a narrative where violence is rewarded, justified, unpunished, and central to the plot. According to research the portrayal of rewarded, justified, and realistic violence committed by appealing characters shows the largest effects on aggression whereas violence that is unrewarded or unjustified by unappealing characters shows the smallest effects on aggression (Hearold, 1986). Rewarded video game violence, from characters people easily identify with, is a theme that is widespread throughout the video games of today.

Empirical evidence shows that video games do exert a negative influence on those who play them but only to a limited degree. Research on parts of the brain, using brain imaging technology, found that participants who played a violent video game conclusively showed neural patterns characteristic of aggressive cognition and behavior. (Weber, Ritterfeld, & Mathiak, 2006). It was concluded from the brain patterns that there was suppression of positive emotions such as empathy in order for the player to play the game successfully (Weber et al., 2006). While it has been proven that violent video games prime the mind for aggressive cognition, it does not translate to aggressive behavior. It can be argued that even if the mind handles virtual and non-virtual experiences in the same way, they can still feel differently to the individual (Weber et al., 2006). In order to make the jump from aggressive cognitions in a virtual world to aggressive behaviors in a non virtual world variables specific to the individual have to be mediating the relationship. This is based on the empirical fact that the majority of individuals who play violent video games do not commit violent crimes such as school shootings (Sternheimer, 2007). Also those people who claim to be inspired to commit crimes because of violent video games may be seeking out violent video games because their predisposed toward wanting to commit violent acts (Sternheimer, 2007). Often times politicians will seek to generalize specific cases of violent behavior such as the school shooting at Columbine High, where the perpetrators claimed to be inspired by the game Doom (Sternheimer, 2007). The problem with blaming video games for violent crimes by troubled teens is that time order cannot be established and there are problems concerning third variables mediating the relationship.

Research on the relationship of violent video games and real violence often show the two existing together, but failing to have a causal link. In Johnathan Freedman's book titled, Media Violence and It's Effect on Aggressions, he systematically analyzed almost all media-violence studies and concluded that the majority of studies produced evidence that is inconsistent or contradicts the idea that media violence causes real violence. Also in the recent period of time where video games have become more popular, there have been decreasing crime rates in the U.S. (Freedman, 2002). Decreasing U.S. crime rates show that a growing video game playing community is not contributing to violent crimes. Furthermore, this is evidence for the idea that the relationship between violent video games and violent crimes is often mediated by other factors. There is no one reason why people commit violent crimes, often it is a combination of things. A published literature review, of studies that claimed a real connection between increased aggression and violent video games, showed that there were many methodological flaws in the studies including only short term measures of aggressive consequences of playing video games (Griffiths, 1999). Another study used to support blaming video games for the Columbine shooting used a sample of college kids instead of troubled teens (Sternheimer, 2007). Also the study measured aggression through how fast the individual would read aggressive words on a computer screen after playing a violent video game (Sternheimer, 2007) . Studies such as this one lack external validity and fail to explain why certain video game players commit violent crimes and not the millions of others (Sternheimer, 2007). The research showing that violent video games translates to violent behavior are methodologically flawed and lack the much needed external validity to establish a causal connection.

There are two theories that present ideas as to why video games are not to blame and why politicians are in a state of media violence panic. The first theory is the symbolic catharsis hypothesis which states that watching/playing violent video games helps to purge the viewers frustrations and helps to release aggressive pressure (Weber, 2006). The theory predicts that there will be lowered aggression in the individual after game play (Weber, 2006). The theory is hard to test because of the need to be in a state of anger before playing a video game yet it presents a valid idea behind why video game playing could be therapeutic for angry individuals (Weber, 2008). The second theory that can be used to explain why politicians target video games is the third person effect. It is the idea that both "you" and "me" are not affected by violent media but others are greatly affected (Davidson, 1983). Politicians have the idea that others do not know what they know so they overestimate the negative impact it will have on the general public causing them to promote censorship (Davidson, 1983). Both these theories lend insight into how video games can actually be therapeutic for angry individuals and why politicians are so uptight in thinking that the public will be negatively harmed by violent media.

Violent video games can be considered one of the many risk factor for certain troubled youths in relation to violent crimes. For the majority of the video game playing community, the violence in video games does not lead to violent crimes. Due to possible mediating factors, an inability to establish time order, a decrease in U.S. crime rates, and other methodological flaws in studies it is not possible to conclude a causal relationship between violent video games and violent crimes. With theories such as the catharsis hypothesis and the third person effect there needs to be more research done on the topic of video games before politicians jump to conclusions about their effects. With the world in the state that it is in today, violent video games rank last on the list of threats to humanity.

References
- Davison, P.W. (1983). The Third Person Effect in Communication. Public Opinion Quarterly. 47, 1-15.
- Freedman, JL. (2002). Media Violence and Its Effect on Aggression: Assessing the Scientific Evidence.
- Griffiths, M. (1999). Violent video games and aggression: A review of the literature. Aggression and violent behavior, 4(2), 203-212.
- Haninger, K., & Thompson, K. M. (2004). Content and ratings of teen-rated video games. Journal of the American Medical Association, 291(7), 856-865.
- Hearold, S. (1986). A synthesis of 1043 effects of television on social behavior. In G. Comstock (Ed.), Public communication and behavior. Vol. 1 (pp. 65-133), San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
- Smith, S. L., Lachlan, K., & Tamborini, R. (2003). Popular video games: Quantifying the presentation of violence and its context. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 47, 58-76.
- Sternheimer, K. (2007).Do Video Games Kill?. American Sociological Association. (6)1, 13-17.
- Weber, R., Ritterfeld, U., Mathiak, K. (2006). Does Playing Violent Video Games Induce Aggression? Empirical Evidence of a Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study. Media psychology, 8(1), 39-60.