The Causes of Violent Acts in Society - Coursework Example

Does Watching Violence In Television, Film And Video Games Make People More Aggressive And More Likely To Commit Violent Acts In Society? Violence plays a major role in popular video games, television and film productions. It encourages people, adolescents more so than others, to mimic the violence displayed and portrayed on the screen. These activities have been shown to play a major part in influencing violence and aggression amongst persons, mainly teenagers. Research has also shown that playing violent video games such as Mortal Kombat, Doom, or 3D can increase a person’s aggressive thoughts and behavior in both a laboratory venue and in real-world situations. Repeated exposure to violent video games has been shown to, in effect, alter the player’s basic personality structure. The resulting changes in everyday social relations may lead to steady escalation in aggressive actions. Because of the powerful way in which the television media has focused on violent and antisocial behavior, the media deliberately misinforms, making the viewers fearful, suspicious and cynical. Because of its bias toward bad news, the media feeds a perception that the world is a violent, dangerous place. As a result, the viewers come to overestimate the rate of violence. With these images flashing in their minds every evening, the viewers become negative, mistrustful of others and withdrawn, and cease to believe in progress. Children, who are not mature enough to distinguish fantasy from real life, television from life on the street, come to assume that acts of violence are acceptable in real life and become incapable of making appropriate judgment calls in times of conflict. Children who are repeatedly exposed to entertainment violence are also more likely to see violence as an effective way of settling conflict. However, playing violent video games may be more detrimental than viewing violent television shows or movies because they are especially enthralling, interactive, and necessitate the player to associate on a personal level with the violent character of the game. Infamous events have generated extensive debate regarding the effects of video game violence. For example, a nationwide conversation ensued regarding what connection video games had to the 1999 Columbine High School (Littleton, Colorado, U.S.) massacre where two students murdered 13 and wounded 23 before killing themselves. While many motivations were likely involved, it is not possible to identify precisely what provoked these teenagers to shoot their classmates and teachers but violent video games have been mentioned as one possible contributing factor. The two students had often played Doom, a brutal and bloody firearms game that is used by the military to teach the U.S. armed forces how to kill more efficiently. To what degree this game influenced the actions of these two youths has been argued since this incident. The Entertainment media, it is widely accepted, is an extremely influential factor in everyone’s lives. “What behaviors children and adults consider appropriate comes, in part, from the lessons we learn from television and the movies” (Huesmann & Miller, 1994). It is reasonable to expect video games, especially those that portray violence, will have similar and possibly a more expansive effect on violent behavior. Currently, few papers exist which have thoroughly studied the connection between violent video game and subsequent violent actions. “Although the belief that the media are causing a harmful effect is wide-spread in the public, knowledge about the nature of the negative effects and how they work seems to be lacking. A good illustration of misinformed nature of the topic among well-meaning people occurred just after the shooting at Columbine High School” (Potter, 2002 P. 3). The studies are few and the public lacks knowledge concerning the effects of video games on young minds. However, this deficiency of credible information doesn’t stop amateur psychologists, parents mainly, from accusing anything but their precious children or themselves for the violent acts their kids commit. A comparison can be drawn by from a parent that attributes their child’s drug use, violent tendencies or suicide on a passage contained in a certain song. If a child tragically takes their own life, a listening to song may have lit the fuse but the underlying powder-keg of emotions causing their feelings of depression and hopelessness was much more responsible for the act. Parents of today did not play with sophisticated, violent video games as children but witnessed enormous amounts of violence on television. Television cartoons of the 1960’s and ‘70’s displayed more instances of graphic violence than kid’s today witness during an afternoon session of Doom. Watching violent acts alone, especially those in the world of make-believe, do not necessarily translate to violent actions. “When certain motives or cues occur in a child’s real-life environment, the child will not be able to make the association between those cues and the image he or she saw in the media. Thus children seem to be protected from an imitation effect because they do not understand the significance of violence as a tool for solving problems and do not see the utility in imitating it” (Potter, P. 75). Children understand the difference between what is real and what they are viewing on television screen or game unit. No one argues that video reality effects children’s development in varying degrees, however, “a child’s cognitive limitations do not translate consistently into higher vulnerability. There are times when children’s cognitive limitations actually protect them from negative effects” (Potter, P. 75). Children, as an example, have far less capability to comprehend connections between aggressive acts and motivations that would initiate those actions therefore are less likely to emulate unacceptable behaviors such as violence. Instead of taking responsibility for their kids’ action or their own poor parenting skills, parents often look for the easiest target to place blame. “We are a country full of finger pointers. When tragedy occurs, we blame the media, the movie industry, the video game industry; the list goes on and on. However, no one bothers to look in the most obvious place, the mirror” (Potter, 2002 P. 3). Most often, it is the parents who buy violent video games for their children then allow the game and the television to baby-sit their children. If they were concerned about a connection between video violence and real-life violence, then why did they make the purchase to begin with and why do they allow violent cartoons to be watched over and over again or own a television, video game or computer at all? Truth is most parents find the idea ridiculous that a game could cause their children to act inappropriately but when they do, they place blame on an inanimate object to reflect the blame away from themselves, where it rightfully belongs. Of course, images on television to play some part in the development of a child but it are hardly the main influence. “The media should not be regarded as blameless merely because there are other sources of blame. This is an example of partial understanding” (Potter, 2002 P. 3). Many factors play a role in child development, some more so than others. To make the blanket statement that ‘video games cause violent outcomes in kids not already predisposed to violence acts at least to some degree’ is a simplistic and lazy assessment of the situation. Parents teach their children to think critically, to examine several points of view and possibilities before making a determination but do not employ these tactics when blaming video games for violent behavior. “We need to get the past the limitation of searching for single causes, life is more complicated than that. There are many factors that shape who we are, and the media are in important, but not the sole factor in that shaping” (Potter, 2002 P. 3). Typical characteristics of the video game crowd include boys and single men, often into their 30s or greater, who find the world of the video game intriguing. Johnny wants the war game. Sally isn’t as interested, but why? The answer, it has been suggested, is both biological and sociological in nature. While acknowledging that behavior differences between boys and girls are inherited to an extent, this discussion explores the societal reasons that Johnny is expected to be the aggressor and Sally the submissive one. This circumstance leads to unfavorable consequences for women. Not surprisingly, boys usually prefer games that involve fighting, sports, gun-play, strategy, fantasy, simulations and adventure to a greater extent that do girls. Females prefer more conventional computer games, board, card, arcade, puzzle and trivia games for example. “Girls perform better on verbal tasks and pattern-matching, which may explain why quiz-trivia or puzzle games such as Tetris are favored by females. Older girls tend to prefer educational games while younger girls seek more entertainment-oriented content” (Chunhui Chu, et al. 2004). Many studies have demonstrated that violent video games begat violent behaviors. The propensity of boys to violence as compared to girls is exacerbated by their seemingly inherent need to play violent games. “Boys are generally at greater risk for aggressive behaviors, and they compound that risk by playing more violent games for greater amounts of time than girls play” (Gentile, et al. 2004). Video games trivialize the role of women in society in the minds of both girls and boys. These games underscore and strengthen stereotypical, traditional gender biases which are ultimately harmful to women. Violent video games provide a compelling and additive medium that conditions young minds to employ aggressive measures in the resolution of conflicts. Evidence suggests that the effects of violent video games seem to be cognitive in composition. Playing a violent video game also has been shown to encourage the susceptibility to aggressive thought patterns by the ‘semantic priming process.’ “We know from related research that merely seeing a picture of a gun or other weapon can increase the accessibility of aggressive thoughts” (Anderson et al, 1996). This process, in all probability, accounts for the ‘weapons effect’ first reported by Berkowitz and LePage (1967). However, there is presently no scientific evidence to conclusively report whether or not playing a violent video game increases susceptibility to aggressive thoughts. Current research demonstrates that aggressive behaviors arise both in everyday life situations and during orchestrated studies using objective, scientific procedures; the playing of video games that were violent in nature unquestionably correlated to an increase of aggressive conduct. In a college study, students who played a violent video game, not surprisingly, acted with increased aggression towards a playing partner than did those students who had played a nonviolent game. Another study was conducted which examined the video game habits of students during their four year college career which reported that when playing in a normal, dorm-room type environment, playing violent video games over a period of these years encouraged more aggressive behavior. This increase occurred, not only during the game but in other facets of the student’s lives as well. Both studies found that violent video games negatively influence a person’s current emotional condition escalating feelings of hostility or anger. The similar findings of these differing study methods gives further credibility to the premise that exposure to violent video games increases aggressive behavior (Calvert & Tan, 1994). Though the propensity for increased levels of violent behavior based upon playing violent video games cannot be definitely and scientifically established on the basis of one pair of studies, this evidence supports the findings of similar research. Considering what is known regarding the effects of media violence, especially television, the prevalence of violent video games, especially given the current trend in the realism of video game violence verify that parents, teachers, and society as a whole are justified in their concerns. “The present data indicate that concern about the potentially deleterious consequences of playing violent video games is not misplaced. Further consideration of some key characteristics of violent video games suggests that their dangers may well be greater than the dangers of violent television or violent movies” (Eron et al, 1987). At least three rationales have been established to explain why irrational behavior results from playing violent video games. The first concerns association with the aggressor. “When viewers are told to identify with a media aggressor, post-viewing aggression is increased compared with measured aggression of those who were not instructed to identify with the aggressor” (Leyens & Picus, 1973). When playing a video game that allows for ‘first person’ interaction, the player very often prefers to choose a character whose persona the player wants to identify with. The player, by controlling the action of their character usually attempts to view the game from their character’s perception. In other words, the player ‘becomes’ the video character, which enhances the game’s enjoyment. Anyone who has seen two teenage boys playing video games has witnessed them pretending to be the person they are controlling. The second rationale concerns the enthusiastic involvement while playing video games. Studies regarding catharsis hypothesis suggests that willingly behaving in an aggressive manner typically intensifies future aggressive behavior. “The active role of the video game player includes choosing to act in an aggressive manner. This choice and action component of video games may well lead to the construction of a more complete aggressive script than would occur in the more passive role assumed in watching violent movies or TV shows” (Geen, Stonner & Shope, 1975). A third rationale involves video games’ addictive nature and the negative stimulus that results from repetitiveness. The reinforcement characteristics of violent video games may enhance the learning and performance of aggressive scripts. Video games are “the perfect paradigm for the induction of addictive behavior” (Braun & Girioux, 1989, p. 101). Braun and Giroux’s research concluded that as many as 20 percent of teenagers are pathologically dependent on video games. In a very real sense, violent video games supply a comprehensive learning atmosphere for “aggression, with simultaneous exposure to modeling, reinforcement, and rehearsal of behaviors” (Loftus & Loftus, 1983). This combination of learning approaches has been revealed to be very influential. “When the choice and action components of video games is coupled with the games’ reinforcing properties, strong learning experiences result” (Loftus & Loftus, 1983). In the age of information and communication, many people feel utterly alone and depressed. Even worse than creating a world in which so many people feel alone and unable to trust their fellow man, television programmes causes the viewers to fail to sympathize with the victim. Viewers become accustomed to the violence scene on television with scenes that involve bloodshed, raping and other acts of extreme violence. This creates a situation in which the viewers are emotionally desensitized in real life violence. Demoralized by the violence scenes, the viewer finds it easier to identify with the aggressor and the aggressor’s solution rather than feel concern for the victim or victims of the violence. However, the interactive learning environment the video game presents suggests its influence is more powerful than the more broadly studied movie and television media. Playing violent video games, in the short term, appears to affect hostility by prompting aggressive thoughts. Long-term effects are liable to be longer lasting as well because the player is trained then practices aggressive acts that become progressively easier to access on a sub-conscious level for use when confronted by future aggravating circumstances. With enhanced realism and the growing trend to include increasing amounts of graphic violence in video games, those that play (and those that buy) violent video games should be alerted to the possible consequences. Works Cited Anderson, C. A.; Anderson, K. B.; & Deuser, W. E. (1996). “Examining an Affective Aggression Framework: Weapon and Temperature Effects on Aggressive Thoughts, Affect, and Attitudes.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Vol. 22, pp. 366-76. Berkowitz, L. & LePage, A. (1967). “Weapons as Aggression-Eliciting Stimuli.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 7, pp. 202-7. Braun, C. & Giroux, J. (1989). “Arcade Video Games: Proxemic, Cognitive and Content Analyses.” Journal of Leisure Research. Vol. 22, pp. 92-105. Calvert, S. L. & Tan, S. (1994). “Impact of Virtual Reality on Young Adults’ Physiological Arousal and Aggressive Thoughts: Interaction Versus Observation.” Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. Vol. 15, pp. 125-39. Chunhui Chu, Kaitlan; Heeter, Carrie; Egidio, Rhonda; Mishra, Punya. (May 2004). “Girls and Games Literature Review.” Michigan State University Mind Games Collaboratory. March 25, 2009 Eron, L. D.; Huesmann, L. R.; Dubow, E.; Romanoff, R.; & Yarmel, P. (1987). “Aggression and its Correlates Over 22 Years.” Childhood Aggression and Violence. D. Crowell; I. Evans; & D. O’Donnell (Eds.). New York: Plenum, pp. 249-62. Geen, R. G.; Stonner, D.; & Shope, G. L. (1975). “The Facilitation of Aggression by Aggression: Evidence Against the Catharsis Hypothesis.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 31, pp. 721-26. Gentile, Douglas A.; Lynch, Paul J.; Linder, Jennifer Ruh; Walsh, David A. (2004). “The Effects of Violent Video Game Habits on Adolescent Hostility, Aggressive Behaviors, and School Performance.” National Institute on Media and the Family. March 25, 2009 Huesmann, L.R. & Miller, L.S. (1994). “Long-Term Effects of Repeated Exposure to Media Violence in Childhood.” Aggressive Behavior: Current Perspectives. L.R. Huesmann (Ed.). New York: Plenum Press. Leyens, J. P. & Picus, S. (1973). “Identification with the Winner of a Fight and Name Mediation: Their Differential Effects Upon Subsequent Aggressive Behavior.” British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology. Vol. 12, pp. 374-77. Loftus, G. A. & Loftus, E. F. (1983). Mind at Play: The Psychology of Video Games. New York: Basic Books. Potter, W. James. (2002) “The 11 Myths of Media Violence” Sage Publications, Inc Read More