Effect of Video Game Violence on Physiological Desensitization to Real-Life Violence - Literature review Example

The Desensitizing of Society: Is Video Game and Media Violence to Blame? Due INTRODUCTION Throughout theages the forms, concepts, and nature of what human beings do for entertainment have changed drastically; from the reading “penny novels” by candlelight to watching theatre and from listening to the radio to watching films and television. All offer creative avenues appealing to the masses. As long as there has been public entertainment there have been questions of morality, ethics, and decency presented by those who did not support that medium. This is an ethical argument that has never, in fact, ended. Today, many still feel that violent video games and simulated violence in film and television are having a negative effect on society. They feel it is desensitizing them to real violence. They are less shocked, less empathetic, and learn to have less sympathy for others after exposure to graphically violent video games. In the article, “The Effect of Video Game Violence on Physiological Desensitization to Real-Life Violence,” the authors detail a study that confirms a correlation between desensitization and violent video games (2007). However, their study appears to assume that because these player are desensitized it, automatically, makes them a greater risk to act out violently in the real world. This is simply not true and it is an unfair bias present in the article. HISTORY In the article, “The Effect of Video Game Violence on Physiological Desensitization to Real-Life Violence,” a study was conducted comprising 257 college students of both genders. The ultimate goal of the research was to expose the individuals to violent game content and then exposed to images of real life violence. They would regularly record their physiological response to the real life images after continuous exposure to the violence in the game through their changes in heart rate and Galvanic Skin Response, GVR (2007). The results favored the author’s intent. They were able to correlate a continuing level of desensitization exists to real life violence once they have been exposed to violent simulated media. However, they fail to identify what that actually means. To the average person it could insinuate that desensitization leads to violent behavior, but there is no definitive proof supporting that DISCUSSION Sometimes it seems that desensitization is associated with a loss of decency or ethics. In other words, being less sensitive to certain images and events makes you cold or less compassionate to the feelings of others (American Psychological Association, 2014). However we have no one to blame but ourselves for the changes in imagery and need for greater and greater realism. We expect the imagery to be more realistic, more advanced, making the ability to imagine your experience all the more realistic. We look for that ability to immerse ourselves within an experience; that is what makes it entertaining. Desensitization is not a bad word. Individuals who wish to be medical doctors need to become desensitized to the sight of blood and images of severe or internal injuries, in order to do their jobs effectively. When a doctor walks into the room to see a nearly severed limb dangling by a sliver of muscle to the patients torso do they scream, get nauseas, or pass out from the sight. No they are not at all awed or shocked by the image because they have been exposed to it throughout their education. Psychologists often use different forms of emersion therapy to aid patients that suffer from phobias. These types of irrational fears can be paralyzing and negatively effect people’s lives. For example, like someone terrified of snakes may end being forced to hold one. These people all benefit from desensitizing themselves to certain types of experiences or imagery that were once terrifying to them (ProCon.org, 2011). Speaking of fear; it is public fear and outcry at the tragic number of school shootings that have occurred over the last 2 decades, from Columbine to Newtown, children were responsible for arming themselves, intentionally and violently, ending the lives of their schoolmates. The fact that the majority of such video game correlations are linked to children, the public concern is even greater. Because many of these children were known to play realistically hardcore and highly violent games; it was not hard for the public to turn on the video games industry needing someone to blame. However, this is not the moral obligation of the game creators or providers to monitor their content for children; it is the adults, parents, supervisors of lives of young people who need to be invested in their actions and exposures. The children who have crossed that line and became dangerous have, also, been determined to suffer from other potential mental illness. Video games alone were not responsible. Children have always emulated the policeman chasing “bad guys” or super-strong superheroes tossing villains across the room. All of this violent play has been present long before there was television and video games. Children read books and pretended to be the characters, like Peter Pan sword fighting with Captain Hook. A few decades later they watch westerns and start simulating gunfights or they watch “Star Wars” and pretend to clash invisible light sabers (Emmons, 2013). Most children are taught and understand the difference between make believe and reality and therefore have a good foundation not to be aggressive or violent. The truth is Video games have always been violent; however, it was not until graphics became much more realistic that the nature of the violence and the visual expression of it have come more life-like that it began to fall under fire. In reality, 85% of video games on the market have some sort of violent content; however, that content cannot be blamed for contributing to violent behaviors only that it causes desensitization to certain acts and imagery (Nauert, 2007). Current studies have determined that the majority of video game players that engage in violent game, at a percentage of more than 90% of young players are not statistically predisposed to behave, act out, or desire to act out violently in any way in their everyday lives (ProCon.org, 2011). The ethical debate on violent media, be it video games, television, or film can have a desensitizing effect and, therefore, negative effect on those exposed to them. Many offer the ethical question of why we are engaging in simulated warfare, murder, and rampant violence as a form of entertainment? Regardless of whether it is responsible for increasing societal violence, why is violence such a prevalent player in our entertainment choices (Emmons, 2007)? Most importantly, they question if such exposures can damage development and lead to psychological harm. There is no data that the correlation between media violence is indicative of it having a causative effect on violent behaviors (ProCon.org, 2014). The creative minds, artists, developers, and producers of modern film, television, and video games defend themselves explaining that the content as part of the story they are telling. Additionally, a number of ratings systems exist today that warn about violent content in video games, television, and film in order to let viewers know ahead of time. People on the other side of the argument, those that do not believe that violence in media causes violence in society, argue that if violent content is offensive or violent everyone has the option not to watch such shows or purchase such games. 30 years ago live-action role-playing games, like “Dungeons & Dragons,” became popular teen entertainment in the 1980s and continues today. Many people believed that such games were encouraging kids to act out violently. That they would play these games and eventually move to real-life violence as an inevitable event. However, the majority of these game players never did, nor would, engage in real-life violence against others. The same is true for modern games and the other forms of media. Many adults and 69% of children, between 12-17, admit to playing video games, at least, once a day; this equates to millions of people, however only a handful will ever act out in genuinely violent ways, which indicates that the flaws are with the individuals who ultimately committed the violent acts and not with popular games and entertainment (Emmons, 2013). Television shows like “The Walking Dead” present fantasy death in violent, gory and gruesome ways and shows like “CSI” elevated the imagery of a T.V. crime scene to a whole new level. However, this does not mean that individuals who watch these shows are going to arm themselves and starting hunting zombies or seeking to devise the perfect crime scene. The same can be said of video game players. Just because they pretend to be an alien warrior or an apocalyptic survivor does not mean that they will transfer the violence and experience of the game into their real lives (ProCon.org, 2011). The average person knows how to separate the two easily; it is insulting to insinuate that we have no control over our perceptions. Have we as a society fallen so far that we need an organization, governmental agency, or legislation to dictate to us what level of violence we are individually allowed to view? The reality is no, absolutely not. CONCLUSION Violence is part of reality, albeit an unpleasant one. Sometimes the violence manifested in arts and media are highlighted not in with the intention of encouraging violence but trying to warn against it. Regardless of its presentation or intention at the core it is entirely unfounded, unfair, and inaccurate to arbitrarily conjoin the desensitization to violence to a propensity for committing violence together. That is a hypothetical assumption that is not supported by most modern research. In the case of the authors of the article of focus, “The Effect of Video Game Violence on Physiological Desensitization to Real-Life Violence,” was successful at verifying that people who are exposed to violent and graphic video games have a decreased physiological response to real life violent images. However, that is all they have done. There is no reason to assume that all desensitization is necessarily bad, that those desensitized will act out violently in their day-to-day lives, and that the entertainment and video game industries cannot and should not be used as a scapegoat for increases in the statistics, nature, and degrees of violent acts committed by individuals within society. REFERENCES Carnagey, N. L., Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2007). The effect of video game violence on physiological desensitization to real-life violence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 489–496. Emmons, S. (2013, February 21). Is media violence damaging to kids?. CNN, Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/21/living/parenting-kids-violence-media/ Nauert, R. (2008, July 28). Video games desensitize to real violence. Psych Central, 1. Retrieved from http://psychcentral.com/news/2006/07/28/video-games-desensitize-to-real-violence/137.html American Psychological Association. (2014). Violence in the media — psychologists study tv and video game violence for potential harmful effects. American Psychological Association, 1. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/research/action/protect.aspx ProCon.org. (2011, March 29). Do violent video games contribute to youth violence? procon quotes. Retrieved from http://videogames.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=1608 Read More