Video Games and Violence - Essay Example

Video Games and Violence The debate over video games causing violence exists. In the United States, 92 percent of children between the age of two and seventeen play video games (Greitemeyer 1). Another important factor is that software sales was about $87 billion dollars in 2012. Greitemeyer explains that content analysis of video games showed that most of the popular video games contain violence and surveys revealed that violent video games are highly popular across different age groups. Further, there are people who think that games negatively affect children by their violent content as it makes children aggressive and anti-social. However, there are those that believe video games do not have negative effect on children. Rating systems development Video games have social impact and political impact on society. In the United Kingdom for instance, politicians have had concerns of the connection between video games and their effects on children’s behavior. In 2007, the British government legislated Digital Economy Act of 2010 (Robinson 414). Robinson further mentions that it had dual frameworks, one that a small majority falls under the British Board of Film Production while the majority regulated under a voluntary industry-led framework. It can be indicated that this system helps video games manufacturers produce games rather than help ban inappropriate games such as “Grand theft auto 6” . Most parents who are against the game might be afraid of its pornographic impact, but there are parents that help children get content. According to research done by BBFC, “ Kids mostly get what they want”. In addition, kid’s behavior can be understood, because they do not have knowledge about the new framework of age restricting categories made. A confusion exist for parents of whether to provide their children games according to the age restrictions or to uphold that decision to themselves as guardians of their children. Previous systems were enforced at an early stage of technology development. In 1994 to 2007, the development of more realistic games resulted in the BBFC more engaged with the industry (Robinson 415). According to Robinson, it led to the development of Industries in America to create its software ratings board. Furthermore, the newest system named the Universal Statutory Framework centered on the industry-led PEGI rating system. Meanwhile, it is yet to be implemented as of August 2011 (Robinson 416). Moreover, the problem was historically and to date parents purchase games with content inappropriate to their age. That is a problem, which the current framework is highly unlikely to address (Robinson 415). Data Researchers Tear and Nielsen explain, regardless of which side is right little research has explored the effects of video games on behavior. In addition, they claim that if video games increase anti-social behavior it seems reasonable to expect playing will also diminish prosocial behavior (Tear and Nielsen). Additionally, the finding notes that playing violent video games can increase social behavior and decrease aggressiveness. On the other hand, other studies have shown games to lead to aggressiveness and antisocial behavior. Greitemeyer and Osswald demonstrated that video games have beneficial effects on behavior and prosocial. Participants played a classic prosocial game, violent, neutral game for eight minutes. After the designated period, they were presented with the pen drop test. While the examiner pretends to have dropped his pens, it is seen which participants are eager to help him. Moreover, there were no noticeable differences between who played violent and neutral games. Another experiment was designed to explore the effect of contemporary violent games for eight minutes. They increased time played and picked “Call of Duty” that also showed no effect on prosocial behavior. Some people think that violent video games produce violent players. Censoring, profanity, and other violent factors are essential. But, it is difficult to enforce due to difference in age. Greitemeyer notes the average age of a video game player is 35 years. Furthermore, other people fail to acknowledge other categories rated for younger consumers such as “E” that means everyone or “T” which means for teenagers. The main problem is parents buying games not suited for their children and expecting people to behave in prosocial manner. Companies such as Sony and Xbox may issue ban on certain players for emitting racial slurs, screaming, and inappropriate language, but it cannot be perfect. Meanwhile, there should not be much worry as by children playing mature content could allow them to communicate with older age categories. Connection to online community increases the possibility of a child interacting with millions of players, some of which may be dangerous for child. Hence, the online platform increases the risk. The rating system favors more developers of games. According to Robinson, the age ratings systems would identify violent or controversial games as opposed to children. This will help game publishers defend themselves against future accusations of pushing violence onto children. Furthermore, rating system has been primarily led by industries that rely on self-regulation, and there is an absence of a statutory engagement (Robinson 416). Hence, regulation of content is taken in as a part of the developing process by developers rather than because of cuts implemented by a third party (Robinson 416). A study conducted by Holz and Kaestle on the effects of profanity when included in a game found that media users are more likely to imitate verbal aggression than physical aggression. They also noted that aggression is, in fact, the intention to harm another person. Further, sizes observed were small that can exclude profanity’s effect on aggression in players. In addition, there was no evidence for effect of protagonist profanity on players while antagonist profanity decreased participant’s aggressive effects (Holz and Kaestle 238). Moreover, they concluded that arousal is related to aggression, but it is has no link to player’s aggression as many video games tend to be exciting. The previous study addressed only profanities effect on aggression, but it had many flaws. Other studies have specialized on the effects of video games use of empathy on players. Happ et al. indicated that players perception of the game characters can lead them conceive if that characters actions are moral or not. Moreover, it can backfire depending on the interaction of game characters and the level of empathy players feel for them. Players may adopt novel identities, ”try on” ideal characteristics, share game characters goals, and experience their feelings, which may further intensify the perceived joy of playing the game (Happ et al. 774). Moreover, shifting the focus toward a victim in a video game enhances empathy from within the players toward the intended character. A research has found that inducing empathy will lead participants to perceive the violence in the game as less justified. In addition, empathy will reduce aggression and enhance prosocial behavior when playing a positively known comic character. In contrast, it can be expected that playing a famous villain can produce opposite effects. However, the research concluded that not all video games can affect children negatively but may have positive outcome on their behavior. The United States of America’s example In the United States, the government has been more successful as compared to United Kingdom. A series of studies undertaken by the federal trade commission into the marketing of violent games from 2000 to 2009 indicated various findings (Robinson 420). They have found that there have been changes on the way industry’s and retail sectors performed in the knowledge of consumers regarding the rating system. Although consumers have better knowledge of the ratings system, some ignores age ratings and purchase age-inappropriate games for their children. In addition, in 2000 it was found that 85 percent of children under age 17 were able to purchase M-rated games without adult consent. In 2009, nearly all retailers had point-of-sale systems to prompt cashiers to check age. In a survey conducted in 2010, only 13 percent of teenage shoppers were able to purchase M-rated games. It shows the increased awareness of parents on the current problems facing the system. The gap between believers and skeptics There is a continuing debate about the extent to which violent video games increase aggression. Greitemeyer’s study examined responses from research studies from both believers and skeptics on the link between violent video game play with aggression. He explains that that people are more willing to search for congruent information and abstain from seeking out incongruent information (Greitemeyer 2). Therefore, believers should be more likely to read scientific studies showing an effect of violent video games on aggression, whereas skeptics are more likely to seek out scientific studies showing non-significant findings (Greitemeyers 2). Furthermore, each side becomes more convinced of their views after being shown mixed evidence and the gap between views increases. Aggression is viewed as bad behavior that is unwanted. Consequently, when players of violent video games learn that their behavior makes them more aggressive they become threatened, because they tend to accept information that is not a threat to self at face value (Greitemeyer 2). As studies notes, males are more likely to play violent video games than females. Greitemeyer explains that females are reported more likely to change their opinion into believing that violent video games cause aggression. Therefore, it can be expected that this issue may not be resolved in the near future. Violent video games effects are of concern to many people. There is the framework system that has flaws, politicians making many precaution procedures following flawed studies. The other main problem is parents purchasing these games for under aged children. While the framework system is a great solution, parents need to take it more seriously because it was passed with children’s safety in mind. Moreover, various studies on the issue have serious flaws. The flaws are time spent by participants, the unpredicted results, and being male or female dominant players in different studies. In addition, parents who buy an age-inappropriate game for their child are the main problem. This issue can be continued. However, another factor that should be considered by both sides is that violent people can be drawn to these types of games. Further, violent events around the player may be the trigger to aggressive behavior. Works Cited Holz, Adrienne and Kaestle, Christine. "The Effects of Profanity in Violent Video Games on Players' Hostile Expectations, Aggressive Thoughts and Feelings, and Other Responses." Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 57.2 (2013): 224-241. Academic Search Premier. Web. 5 Nov. 2014. Greitemeyer, Tobias. "I Am Right; You Are Wrong: How Biased Assimilation Increases The Perceived Gap Between Believers And Skeptics Of Violent Video Game Effects." PLoS ONE 9.4 (2014): 1-7. Academic Search Premier. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. Happ, Christian, André, Melzer, and Steffgen, Georges. "Superman vs. BAD Man? The Effects of Empathy and Game Character in Violent Video Games." Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking 16.10 (2013): 774-778. Academic Search Premier. Web. 20 Nov. 2014. Morgan J., and Mark, Nielsen. "Failure to Demonstrate That Playing Violent Video Games Diminishes Prosocial Behavior." PLoS ONE 8.7 (2013): 1-7. Academic Search Premier. Web. 5 Nov. 2014. Robinson, Nicholas. "Video Games and Violence: Legislating On the 'Politics of Confusion.'" Political Quarterly 83.2 (2012): 414-423. Academic Search Premier. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. Read More