4 ms·

Have a look at this FAQ from one of the authors from 2009: http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/faculty/caa/Video_Game_FAQs.html http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/

by onli 15y ago

Have a look at this FAQ from one of the authors from 2009: http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/faculty/caa/Video_Game_FAQs.html http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/faculty/caa/Video_Game_FAQ... Totally surprising that a following meta(!)-study has the same conclusion. It is known for years that studies in that area are biased (conservative/christian sponsors?) and are often eager to see casualty where none can be proven. A meta-study proves only that such studies exist.

zokiboy 15y ago
Meta study had to be completed before 2010 to be published in Mar 2010. FAQ was published in 2009, I guess at the same time the paper was submitted for review. That's the reason for having same conclusions.
- onli 15y ago
  The FAQ mentions an article from 2003. I don't know these people, don't know if this role is part of their academic career like suggested in a comment above, but even being of that opinion such a long time suggests a bias when starting a new study.
zokiboy 15y ago
And this area is biased in both direction. From one side you have family groups and from other side you have game industry. And there are studies showing both sides. That's why meta studies are needed.
- onli 15y ago
  Which then would only reveal the truth if they could read those intentions of the studies they are using, or if both biases negate each other.
JabavuAdams 15y ago
What evidence would change your mind, or is your belief also faith-based?
- onli 15y ago
  Probably none, even though i didn't state my opinion on the subject itself. Measuring long-time-effects is hard. You probably could convince me with a well-done study that violence in games has a short-term effect on aggression. Like letting people play and provoke them afterwards, measuring the different reactions when playing prior an ego-shooter or Sims. But long-term-effect? Just a have a look in the study. Using factors like the VGV-general measure fails to convince me that they didn't just discovered that violent people like violent games, or that people of the working-class or lower prefer to play (and are generally more aggressive) and so on.
  - nitrogen 15y ago
    Like letting people play and provoke them afterwards, measuring the different reactions when playing prior an ego-shooter or Sims. It would be interesting to test various ways of mitigating violent behavior, like whether or not subjects are reminded before and after playing that "it's just a game." You'd also need to compare playing a video game for x hours to watching a movie for x hours, reading a book for x hours, or being made to wait quietly in a room with nothing to do for x hours. Finally, comparison to other pseudo-violent pastimes like high-contact sports would also be enlightening. Edit: it should also be considered whether the benefits of video games outweigh any negative behavioral influence they may have.

by onli 15y ago

zokiboy 15y ago

Meta study had to be completed before 2010 to be published in Mar 2010. FAQ was published in 2009, I guess at the same time the paper was submitted for review. That's the reason for having same conclusions.

onli 15y ago
The FAQ mentions an article from 2003. I don't know these people, don't know if this role is part of their academic career like suggested in a comment above, but even being of that opinion such a long time suggests a bias when starting a new study.

zokiboy 15y ago

And this area is biased in both direction. From one side you have family groups and from other side you have game industry. And there are studies showing both sides. That's why meta studies are needed.

onli 15y ago
Which then would only reveal the truth if they could read those intentions of the studies they are using, or if both biases negate each other.

JabavuAdams 15y ago

What evidence would change your mind, or is your belief also faith-based?

onli 15y ago
Probably none, even though i didn't state my opinion on the subject itself. Measuring long-time-effects is hard. You probably could convince me with a well-done study that violence in games has a short-term effect on aggression. Like letting people play and provoke them afterwards, measuring the different reactions when playing prior an ego-shooter or Sims. But long-term-effect? Just a have a look in the study. Using factors like the VGV-general measure fails to convince me that they didn't just discovered that violent people like violent games, or that people of the working-class or lower prefer to play (and are generally more aggressive) and so on.
- nitrogen 15y ago
  Like letting people play and provoke them afterwards, measuring the different reactions when playing prior an ego-shooter or Sims. It would be interesting to test various ways of mitigating violent behavior, like whether or not subjects are reminded before and after playing that "it's just a game." You'd also need to compare playing a video game for x hours to watching a movie for x hours, reading a book for x hours, or being made to wait quietly in a room with nothing to do for x hours. Finally, comparison to other pseudo-violent pastimes like high-contact sports would also be enlightening. Edit: it should also be considered whether the benefits of video games outweigh any negative behavioral influence they may have.