4 ms·

Yes, and if you read all the links you would see https://www.scribd.com/doc/223284732/Scholar-s-Open-Letter-to-the-APA-Task-Force-On-Violent-Media-Opposing-APA

Yes, and if you read all the links you would see https://www.scribd.com/doc/223284732/Scholar-s-Open-Letter-to-the-APA-Task-Force-On-Violent-Media-Opposing-APA-Policy-Statements-on-Violent-Media https://www.scribd.com/doc/223284732/Scholar-s-Open-Letter-t... >a large group of researchers including academics from Harvard, Yale and Columbia universities—took issue with the APA, the task force and its research methodology. In an open letter, the group called the APA's policy statements on violent video games "misleading and alarmist" and said they "delineated several strong conclusions on the basis of inconsistent or weak evidence." as well as other studies demonstrating that "Results indicated that studies of VVGs and aggression appear to be particularly prone to false positive results" and "Results indicated that publication bias does exist for experimental studies of aggressive behavior, as well as for non-experimental studies of aggressive behavior and aggressive thoughts. Research in other areas, including prosocial behavior and experimental studies of aggressive thoughts were less susceptible to publication bias."

coldtea 7y ago
Still, official position is what it is -- and there is counter arguments by a large group, but not the larger body (APA) or the group dedicated to it. In any case, nothing that shows that considering the case being "absurd" -- which is what I answered too. At worse, an open question.
- okmokmz 7y ago
  If you have evidence debunking the number of studies and expert opinions I've posted I'd love to see it. The evidence supporting your opinion has been debunked and called out in other studies and by experts in the field as I've demonstrated. Feel free to stick by what you believe, but you know what they say about opinions... Interestingly the studies that support your opinion came to false and misleading conclusions due to bias as well as weak and inconsistent data, much like the comments supporting your opinion
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >If you have evidence debunking the number of studies and expert opinions I've posted I'd love to see it. First of all, how is the burden on proof on me? The causal link is the official APA position, the "number of studies and expert opinions" you've posted is not it. >The evidence supporting your opinion has been debunked and called out in other studies and by experts in the field as I've demonstrated. Oh the irony. Do you just pick the experts you agree with over the official body's position? A number of experts also objects for climate change being man-made -- in fact you can find a number of experts objecting to almost everything established. Second of all, my point was not that the causal link is true (which would made the argumentation relevant) but that considering it is not at all "absurd" -- as the parent commenter (you?) insisted, and in fact it's seriously studied.

coldtea 7y ago

Still, official position is what it is -- and there is counter arguments by a large group, but not the larger body (APA) or the group dedicated to it. In any case, nothing that shows that considering the case being "absurd" -- which is what I answered too. At worse, an open question.

okmokmz 7y ago
If you have evidence debunking the number of studies and expert opinions I've posted I'd love to see it. The evidence supporting your opinion has been debunked and called out in other studies and by experts in the field as I've demonstrated. Feel free to stick by what you believe, but you know what they say about opinions... Interestingly the studies that support your opinion came to false and misleading conclusions due to bias as well as weak and inconsistent data, much like the comments supporting your opinion
- coldtea 7y ago
  >If you have evidence debunking the number of studies and expert opinions I've posted I'd love to see it. First of all, how is the burden on proof on me? The causal link is the official APA position, the "number of studies and expert opinions" you've posted is not it. >The evidence supporting your opinion has been debunked and called out in other studies and by experts in the field as I've demonstrated. Oh the irony. Do you just pick the experts you agree with over the official body's position? A number of experts also objects for climate change being man-made -- in fact you can find a number of experts objecting to almost everything established. Second of all, my point was not that the causal link is true (which would made the argumentation relevant) but that considering it is not at all "absurd" -- as the parent commenter (you?) insisted, and in fact it's seriously studied.