# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Do Video Games Cause Violence? 9 Pros and Cons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Proponents say playing violent video games causes more aggression. Opponents say the games are a convenient scapegoat for real-life violence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The debate as to whether or not benefits of video games really exist has been going since the days of Pong and Space Invaders.

Unfortunately, most people have always assumed they were the cause of many mental and physical problems. Even if there was a lack of scientific evidence to prove it.

Some say it is in our human nature to find something to blame when there's an issue, and video games have always been an easy target.

But things have changed and now more professional studies are being conducted to find out the real benefits of playing video games.

Are video games good for you?

Are video games really hinder our ability to learn, make us more violent, or affect our physical health?

While there still isn't enough evidence to offer a solid answer, the good news is that most researchers are discovering why gaming is good for you.

The Benefits of Video Games

Video games benefits include promoting healthy lifestyles, increasing social activity, slow the aging process, and make the participant a better decision-maker.

Video Games Can Help Build

Source: ESA Essential Facts

Is Playing Video Games Good for You?

Yes, there are plenty of positive effects of video games. Gaming can help those suffering from addictions or cravings to decrease the intensity of their desires. They can also potentially help those who have multiple sclerosis with balance and improved cognitive function.

Why Video Games Are Good for You

The positive effects of video games are in the way they fit into different facets of our daily lives. Some of the benefits are physical, psychological, and social. Contrary to popular belief, they can promote healthy living and increased social activity through various avenues.

Games like Call of Duty and Splinter Cell multiplayer can help forge friendships and bonds that will last for years. Things like the Wii Fit can promote a better lifestyle, keeping someone active, and on their diet goals daily.

The Positive Aspects of Playing Video Games

Source: Statisca

This article will show you 10 reasons why video games are good for you.

Before you read on, remember that anything in excess can be harmful.

No positive effects of video games will justify playing them for 10 hours a day.

It's your responsibility to figure out how long you should play before putting the controller down and doing something else, as difficult as it may be. So, let's take a step back and take a look at the 10 positive effects of video games.

Remember that anything in excess can be harmful.

No benefit that comes from a video game will justify playing them for 10 hours a day.

It's your responsibility to figure out how long you should play before putting the controller down and doing something else, as difficult as it may be.

10 Data-Driven Benefits of Video Games

Playing Video Games May Slow Down Aging

Male, female, young adult, middle-aged person- all have one thing in common and that's aging.

And while getting older and wiser has its perks, there are also a number of natural problems that come about as well.

There's a reason why you see senior citizens driving at 25 MPH even though the speed limit is 45.

But just like maintaining a healthy exercise routine can help your body feel 50 when you're 60, our brain can also be kept 'in shape'.

In fact, a study conducted by researchers at the University of Iowa showed that playing video games can do just that.

The study had 681 healthy people aged 50 and older to play video games for 10 hours for five to eight weeks, and this is what they found:

"We've shown that 10 hours is enough to slow the decline by several years. We saw a range across all our tests from a minimum of a year-and-a-half all the way up to about six-and-a-half years of recovery or improvement. From just 10 to 14 hours of training, that's quite a lot of improvement".

Key Takeaways

It seems performing any task that requires exercising your mind will help it stay sharper, and that includes video games. ()

If you have ever done a crossword or sudoku, then you already know the benefits of gaming. Video games can train your brain, open up new pathways of thought in your brain, and keep your mind a honed edge.

Although I'm an admitted crossword addict, being intellectually stimulated by the benefits of gaming started in 6th grade when I first played Shogun Total War. I was captivated by the setting of feudal Japan. I then dedicated a project towards it and started reading more and more about specific points in history.

It was addictive, learning about these different phases of history, and how well that video games serve them. These different niches serve to help us learn better and experience creative and enjoyable brain tools.

Better Decision Maker

C. Shawn Green from the University of Rochester wanted to see how video games benefits our ability to make decisions.

His goal was to test if games, which demand us to view and keep track of moving peripheral images, improve our ability to receive sensory data and thus help us make more precise decisions.

The study had a group of young adults with no gaming experience play video games in action genre, at a fast pace for 50 hours.

A second group of the same age played a slow-paced strategy game instead.

Key Takeaways

After the study, Green had nothing but good things to say:

"Action video games are fast-paced, and there are peripheral images and events popping up, and disappearing. These video games are teaching people to become better at taking sensory data in, and translating it into correct decisions."

A colleague of his even went on to say that shooters can change the brain by dramatically enhancing many of our low-level perceptual functions. Definitely good news for all the Halo and Call of Duty fans out there. ()

Games Can Help (Not Hurt!) Your Eyesight

There are few gamer kids who grew up without ever hearing their parents say "you're going to go blind watching that screen all day".

For a while, it did seem like they had a point since we tend to blink much less frequently while playing a game.

This can cause serious problems like eyestrain and dry eye syndrome.

Another team of researchers from the University of Rochester sought to determine once and for all: Are video games bad for you when it comes to vision?

The 2009 study involved having a group of experienced first-person shooter gamers plays Call of Duty and Unreal Tournament 2004 while more casual gamers played slow games like The Sims 2.

Key Takeaways

After testing, those who played the first-person shooters showed signs of having a better vision than the others.

Daphne Bavelier, the leader of the study, discovered a clear physical benefit of playing video games which is an improvement in the ability called contrast sensitivity function.

This ability helps us discern between changes in shades of gray against a colored backdrop, which is very beneficial while driving at night. ()

Video Games Can Make You Less Anti-Social

One of the worst stereotypes associated with playing video games is that those who do are awkward social rejects.

Even if there are plenty of basement-dwelling gamers out there, that doesn't mean all gamers have problems socializing in public and making friends.

Researchers from three different institutions in the UK and Canada recently did their own studies to find out how common antisocial behavior is among people who play video games frequently.

Key Takeaways

What each one discovered is that gamers who partake in live social environments are actually the most communicative and friendly people there.

"Gamers aren't the antisocial basement-dwellers we see in pop culture stereotypes; they're highly social people," said one of the researchers who went to more than 20 events where gamers get together.

While observing gamers he even went on to admit that they formed stronger relationships than non-gamers due to their matching love of games. (

When the second Splinter Cell game, Pandora Tomorrow came out, I was the only one of my friends with it. That means I was relegated to play spies vs. mercs alone with strangers. Luckily for me, I met a cool gamer, and we hit it off almost immediately.

After some time playing the game, we developed a little friendship. We would play video games together after school, and it was a ton of fun being able to collaborate with someone, especially with some of the more toxic users online.

We remained Xbox LIVE friends throughout the years, along with the other gamers that I have crossed paths with. So is playing video games good for you socially? Yes, in many cases they can form and strengthen friendships.

Benefits of Gaming in Everyday Life

Source: ESA Essential Facts 2022

Games Can Enhance Your Ability To Learn

Contrary to popular belief when it comes to positive and negative effects of video games, researchers from the UK found that certain video games can actually enhance our brain flexibility.

The study was done at both the University College London and the Queen Mary University of London and had 72 volunteers play two different games for 40 hours over six to eight weeks.

The games were Starcraft, a fast real-time strategy game, and The Sims, a slower life-simulation game. Both those games were used to answer the question once and for all: Is gaming good for your learning ability?

Key Takeaways

Here's what they had to say:

"This result supports the notion that the within-StarCraft gaming manipulation led participants to manage more information sources during gameplay, thus leading to enhancements in cognitive flexibility."

In other words, the people who played Starcraft boasted better cognitive flexibility since the game requires constant thinking and player input.

So there you have it - slower games may not offer the same benefits of playing video games with a faster pace. It's cool to know that our favorite fast-paced games are helping us become better learners while entertaining us. (

Help Improve Hand-Eye Coordination

There are many professions that require having better hand-eye coordination than the average person.

Of course, surgeons depend on theirs to not only perform a successful operation but also make sure they don't nick an artery or vital organ.

That's why a lot of aspiring surgeons are now required to perform virtual surgeries for training.

Curious to see who could perform better at these virtual surgeries, Scientists at the University of Texas Medical Branch brought together a group of high school kids, college students, and medical residents.

After testing the three groups to see who could outperform the others, the scientists were surprised to discover that the high school students did the best.

Why?

Key Takeaways

Simply put, the high school kids played video games at least two hours a day while the medical residents rarely had time to play.

While one of the researchers insists that the residents would still do better in actual surgery, the study is one of many proving that our favorite games can help improve our hand-eye coordination. ( Source)

I credit getting my driver's license to gaming. No, seriously! I didn't get it right away when I was 16, which caused some loss of self-esteem. Yet, when I finally tried driving, I realized how similar it was to driving games and flight simulators.

Hours playing Grand Theft Auto paid off! Okay, maybe not the best 'car' example. How about Gran Turismo? Yeah, hours of playing Gran Turismo paid off!

So, when people ask, what are the advantages of video games? Yes, they can help with hand-eye coordination, confidence, and reflexes. Not to mention helping someone pass their license test!

Improved Focus and Attention

One of the biggest worries among parents today is almost unanimous, and that is: Are video games good for your brain? Most parents fear that their children sit in class thinking about Minecraft and Pokemon instead of listening to the teacher.

To see if improved cognition and perception can be a direct cognitive benefit of playing video games, a researcher named Vikranth Bejjanki performed a few experiments alongside several colleagues.

These tests first involved having two groups, experienced and inexperienced gamers, perform several perceptual tasks such as pattern discrimination.

The gamers ended up outperforming the other group who rarely, if ever, played games before the experiment.

Key Takeaways

The paper concludes with the following:

"The enhanced learning of the regularity and structure of environments may act as a core mechanism by which action video game play influences performance in perception, attention, and cognition."

In other words, playing video games improves several abilities, including paying attention. ()

Video Games May Help Treat Depression

A few years ago researchers in New Zealand sought to search for any benefits of gaming that can help in treating mental disorders like depression.

This was done with SPARX, a game specifically designed to provide therapy to teenagers in a way that's more active and enjoyable than regular counseling.

Over 168 teens with an average age of 15 participated, with all of them having shown previous signs of depression.

While half of the group received traditional counseling, the other group got to play SPARX.

The game involves creating avatars to rid the virtual world of enemies representing gloomy, negative thoughts.

Every stage also introduced general facts about depression, including ways to relax and deal with negative emotions.

Key Takeaways

Here's their conclusion after discovering that SPARX players did better at recovering from depression than the other group:

"SPARX is a potential alternative to usual care for adolescents presenting with depressive symptoms in primary care settings and could be used to address some of the unmet demand for treatment."

Video Games Can Help You Stay Fit

Of all the benefits of video games on this list, this is the one that most people already know.

This is likely attributed to Nintendo's Wii system that introduced motion control gaming to players all over the world.

Active games like Wii Sports and Wii Fit are to this day found in hospitals and retirement homes.

Researchers at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center recently performed a test to discover the pros of video games for kids in comparison to activities like watching TV and browsing the internet.

Tests involved measuring the heart rate, self-reported exertion, and energy expenditure of kids aged 10 to 13 while they performed three specific activities:

playing active video games

watching television

walking on a treadmill

The team discovered that playing motion-control games was was just as beneficial as walking on a treadmill at a speed of 3.5mph.

Both exercises had the kids burning the same amount of calories, which was nearly three times more than the children just watching Netflix. ()

Video Games Can Help Couples

While there are plenty of ways for couples to have fun together and relax, psychologists from the University of Denver wanted to find out if playing video games was one of them.

This is an interesting study because research shows men care more about this part of a relationship than women do.

At the same time, most guys are known to either play games alone or with other male friends- not so much their girlfriend, wife, etc.

The study, which actually started in 1996, had 200 couples in their second year of marriage decide what aspect of their relationship was most important.

Their answers demonstrated a strong correlation between the importance of partaking in fun, exciting activities together, and a good relationship.

Key Takeaways

Howard Markman, one of the psychologists involved in the study said this:

"The more you invest in fun and friendship and being there for your partner, the happier the relationship will get over time."

So even though the experiment didn't involve playing video games, it serves to prove that couples who play video games together tend to have happier, healthier relationships. ()

Okay, so I know that some couples experience what I deem 'Call of Duty syndrome.' In which the girlfriend is disinterestedly (can you blame her?), watching her boyfriend play video games, usually Call of Duty.

You can totally avoid this through the benefits of gaming with the right combo of game and gamer. With my girlfriend, we found a sweet gaming spot. One day I recommended Stardew Valley to her. Being a fan of Harvest Moon, she picked it up and immediately loved it.

Later on, Stardew Valley came out with a multiplayer update, allowing us to play together. It was so much fun, and I believe it really added important communication aspects to our relationship.

Recently, we beat Starbound together, and we are on the lookout for the next great multiplayer co-op game!

More Reasons to Love Video Games

Interest in History and Inspires You to Read More

With so many different benefits of gaming out there right now, it's a wonder we can get to even a fraction of them. Luckily, one of the most popular series is the Assassin's Creed franchise is steeped in factual and fictional history.

The games take place in real-time periods, having the player take part in actual events with fictional and historically accurate characters. This is only one example of a video game advantages you can gain over time from playing games.

The Total War games are rife with historical accuracy and freedom. The most recent release of Total War: Three Kingdoms introduces those not familiar with China's epic history could very well have gamers pick up the famous book it's based on, promoting more literacy.

After playing the game mentioned above, I actually headed to the bookstore and picked up a copy of Luo Guanzhong's Romance of the Three Kingdoms. It's a dense read, but the point is I was interested enough in the rich history built up with the gameplay that I was moved to read more.

Click here to check out the most popular video game genres out there.

Excuse me while I plot like Cao Cao and fight like Lu Bu!

Helps Multiple Sclerosis Patients Improve Their Balance

Multiple Sclerosis, or MS, is a severe disease that affects the nervous system. Although it can be treated, there currently is no cure.

Along with medications, playing video games have actually shown to help MS patients with their uncomfortable symptoms like balance, cognitive functions, and motor control impairment. MS patients often go through trying and tough physical therapy for their conditions and provide benefits of gaming they can easily manage and access.

"For example, a study published in November 2014 in the journal Radiology reported that 24 MS patients improved their balance and even lessened their risk of falling as a result of playing video games using a Wii balance board. The game works by having users stand on a board while shifting their weight to follow the interactive instructions on the screen."

Although playing video games doesn't cure MS, they can potentially be a valuable and life-changing experience for those suffering from it.

Along with being a fantastic party game, the Wii has proven to bolster the number of benefits of gaming, in conjunction with something like the Wii Fit.

Video Games Can Stop Cravings

While we all know the feeling of being completely enchanted by a great game, could this help people struggling from cravings like smoking?
A study was released in which players who played the puzzle game Tetris experienced significantly fewer cravings than those who didn't partake in Tetris. This was initially a study to determine if playing video games could curb cravings for junk food, and ended up helping those suffering from severe addictions to alcohol and tobacco.
Prof. Jackie Andrade, from the School of Psychology and the Cognition Institute at Plymouth University, explains:

"We think the Tetris effect happens because craving involves imagining the experience of consuming a particular substance or indulging in a particular activity. Playing a visually interesting game like Tetris occupies the mental processes that support that imagery; it is hard to imagine something vividly and play Tetris at the same time."

Looks like staying up late playing Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice was actually healthy and not terrible for me! Well, okay, maybe not exactly the same thing, but still. It's definitely good to know that seeing Tetris blocks when you close your eyes at night might actually be a good thing! The benefits of gaming couldn't be more evident in this case.

Conclusion on the Benefits of Gaming

Just like video games themselves, the field of studying how games help or hurt us is still very new.

There is still plenty of research to be done before we find out how the virtual characters, stories, and worlds we love really provide any significant benefits of video games. In the meantime, check out our list for the most popular games in the market right now.

Even so, feel free to show your friends and family this list if they're the kind of people who still assume games are to blame for obesity, school shootings, and antisocial behavior.

It will help them realize that instead of giving us problems, games may have actually been improving our lives in some ways.
Let's Compare Notes
We want to hear from you. To ask a question about this article or to provide additional information, shoot us a message at: [email protected]

Written by Dustin Tyler [ Updated September 27, 2023]

Initially focused on web dev, Dustin was introduced to game design by a friend after college and was immediately attracted to the combination of technical skill and creativity required to make an awesome game.

While not a professional game developer himself, he's utilized his web dev skills and desire to help others by creating a resource where expert game designers can share what they've learned with the next generation of aspiring game makers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
10 Reasons Why Video Games are Good for You, Sometimes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
See 10 reasons why video games are good for you with our comprehensive list debunking the notion that video game are only harmful. View various studies that show how gaming can be helpful.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why violent video games are good for kids

# data[].attributes.subject
Why violent video games are good for kids

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Shutterstock

Each year, many young people's Christmas lists are packed with violent video games that commandeer minds and eyeballs for hours on end. Although it's easy to skip those items and opt for presents that seem more productive - they'll just love Jenga and Scrabble - the do-gooder approach to gift-giving might warrant a rethink.

According to research cited by Vice, not only do violent games help users skirt violent behavior, but the games can actually have beneficial effects. A study conducted in 2014, at Stetson University in Florida, shows that the playing of death-bloated video-games actually caused real-life violence to decrease. Vice speculates that the pixelated mayhem gives "gamers an outlet for their aggression, or [keeps] potentially violent people safely at home."

Games loaded with action-oriented sequences can even enhance motor skills. Steady playing of "Unreal Tournament," a first-person shooter game, has, according to researchers at New York University in Shanghai, led to speedier reactions during road tests on driving simulation software.

And, if you fear that buying games for your juvenile relative will turn him into a solitary delinquent, John Velez, a researcher at Texas Tech University, allays those worries. In 2015, according to Vice, he found that war games enhance social skills. Velez has concluded that team-play games of this ilk - such as Halo and TimeSplitters - led participants to treat each other, whether teammates or opponents, with surprisingly high degrees of decency.

While plenty of people in the worlds of psychiatry and psychology have targeted computer games as a cause of societal ills, there are at least 230 academics in the field who disagree. Three years ago, in 2013, they put forth a letter opposing commonly held beliefs among members of American Psychological Association's Task Force on Violent Media. They asked for reconsideration of the view that games cause violence. In fact, according to a study recently published in the International Journal of Communication, teenage gamers excel at math while those who are into social media show below average scores.

But before forsaking traditionally good influences for the lure of joysticks, high-resolution monitors and a crate of Visine, consider the common-sense advice proffered by psychosocial researcher Andrew K. Przybylski, Ph.D.: "The small positive effects observed for low levels of regular electronic play do not support the position that games provide a universal solution to the challenges of development and modern life."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why violent video games are good for kids

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Each year, many young people's Christmas lists are packed with violent video games that commandeer minds and eyeballs for hours on end. Although it's easy to skip those items and opt for presents t...

# data[].attributes.headline
Video game play may provide learning, health, social benefits, review finds

# data[].attributes.subject
Video game play may provide learning, health, social benefits, review finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Video game play may provide learning, health, social benefits, review finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Playing video games, including violent shooter games, may boost children’s learning, health and social skills.

# data[].attributes.headline
Social Media, Movies, and Television Affect Human Behavior

# data[].attributes.subject
Social Media, Movies, and Television Affect Human Behavior

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ratings for movies and television shows guide parents and guardians to filter what their children watch. According to wikipedia, movies are rated because there may be violence, sexual content, and language. Other than movies and shows, social media can affect teens too.

"Because of the amount of consumption of film-based media, the influence on their developing minds is considerable, according to researchers, says Angeliki Coconi on oureverydaylife.

Coconi explains that since films are a major part of culture, teens have made it a major part of their lives.

Kim Kardashian, along with her sisters Khloe, and Kourtney and half-sisters Kendall and Kylie, are featured in Kardashian's reality tv show "Keeping up with the Kardashians (KUWTK)." Kim Kardashian, has 100 million followers on Instagram. Followers have commented on her posts either siding with Kardashian, or expressing other opinions on what she should be doing to positively influence young girls.

According to Susan Harrow on Huffingtonpost, an Instagram user commented on Kardashian's post saying, "You flaunt your curves, you show off your body and don't care what the haters have to say. You're a mom, and a lot of moms don't love their bodies so I applaud and bow down to you at the same time."

Another Instagram user said, "I pray my kids don't grow up to do what she has done with her body and past. Amen."

Fans mimic their idols in how their dress, eat, even act," says edictive.co m, a blog about the Influence of Film on Modern Society.

Harrow said that girls should be proud of themselves and shouldn't have to show off for others to admire, as Kardashian does with her posts.

Values influence the filmmaker's views. Though movies may depict fantasies of perfect lives, some movies include lessons about greed and loyalty.

"I think movies can influence people in a bad way because they give them an unrealistic view on society that they feel like they need to live up to," said Savannah Knaak, a sophomore at Arrowhead.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Social Media, Movies, and Television Affect Human Behavior

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ratings for movies and television shows guide parents and guardians to filter what their children watch. According to wikipedia, movies are rated because there may be violence, sexual content, and language. Other than movies and shows, social media can affect teens too. "Because of the amount of consumption of film-based media, the influence on their...

# data[].attributes.headline
The frustrating, enduring debate over video games, violence, and guns

# data[].attributes.subject
The frustrating, enduring debate over video games, violence, and guns

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the wake of two mass shootings earlier this month in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, the societal role of video games grabbed a familiar media spotlight. The El Paso shooter briefly referenced Call of Duty, a wildly popular game in which players assume the roles of soldiers during historical and fictional wartime, in his "manifesto." And just this small mention of the video game seemed to have prompted President Donald Trump to return to a theme he's emphasized before when looking to assign greater blame for violent incidents.

"We must stop the glorification of violence in our society," he said in an August 5 press conference. "This includes the gruesome and grisly video games that are now commonplace. It is too easy today for troubled youth to surround themselves with a culture that celebrates violence."

Trump's statement suggesting a link between video games and real-world violence echoed sentiments shared by other lawmakers following the back-to-back mass shootings. It's a response that major media outlets and retailers have also adopted of late; ESPN recently chose to delay broadcasting an esports tournament because of the shootings - a decision that seems to imply the network believes in a link between gaming and real-world violence. And Walmart made a controversial decision to temporarily remove all video game displays from its stores, even as it continues to openly sell guns.

But many members of the public, as well as researchers and some politicians, have counterargued that blaming video games sidesteps the real issue at the root of America's mass shooting problem: a need for stronger gun control. The frenzied debate over video games within the larger conversation around gun violence underscores both how intense the fight over gun control has become and how easily games can become mired in political rhetoric.

But this isn't a new development; blaming video games for real-world violence - any kind of real-world violence - is a longstanding cultural and political habit whose origins date back to the 1970s. It's also arguably part of a larger recurring wave of concern over any pop culture that's been perceived as morally deviant, from rock 'n' roll to the occult, depending on the era. But as mass shootings continue to occur nationwide and attempts to stop them by enacting gun control legislature remain divisive, video games have again become an easy target.

The most recent clamor arose from a clash among several familiar foes. In one corner: politicians like Trump who cite video games as evidence of immoral and violent media's negative societal impact. In another: people who play video games and resist this reading, while also trying to lodge separate critiques of violence within gaming. In another: scientists at odds over whether there are factual and causal links between video games and real-world violence. And in still another: members of the general public who, upon receiving alarmist messages about games from politicians and the news media, react with yet more alarm.

What is new, however, is that recent criticism of the narrative that video games lead to real-world violence seems particularly intensified, and it's coming not just from gamers but also from scientists, some media outlets, even mass shooting survivors: David Hogg, who became a gun control advocate after surviving the 2018 mass shooting in Parkland, Florida, unveiled a new March for Our Lives gun control initiative in August, pointedly stating in his announcement on Twitter, "We know video games aren't to blame."

And on all sides is a sense that frustration is growing because so little has changed since the last time we had this debate - and since the time before that and the time before that.

There's no science proving a link between video games and real-world violence. But that hasn't quelled a debate that's raged for decades.

Historically, video games have played a verifiable role in a handful of mass shootings, but the science linking video games to gun violence is murky. A vast body of psychology research, most of it conducted before2015, argues strenuously that video games can contribute to increases in aggression. Yet much of this research has been contested by newer, contradictory findings from both psychologists and scholars in different academic fields. For example, Nickie Phillips, a criminologist whose research deals with violence in popular media, told me that "most criminologists are dismissive of a causal link between media and crime," and that they're instead interested in questions of violence as a social construct and how that contributes to political discourse.

That type of research, she stressed, is likely to be less flashy and headline-grabbing than psychology studies, which are more focused on pointing to direct behaviors and their causes. "Social meanings of crime are in transition," Phillips said. "There's not a single variable. As a public, we want a single concrete explanation as to why people commit atrocities, when the answers can be very complex."

The debate over the science is easy to wade into, but it obscures just how preoccupied America is with dangerous media. The oldest moral panic over a video game may be the controversy over a 1976 game called Death Race, which awarded players points for driving over fleeing pedestrians dubbed "gremlins." The game became mired in controversy, even sparking a segment on 60 Minutes. Interestingly, other games of the era that framed their mechanics through wartime violence, like the 1974 military game Tank, failed to cause as much public concern.

In his 2017 book Moral Combat: Why the War on Violent Video Games Is Wrong, psychologist Patrick Markey points out that before concerned citizens fixated on video games, many of them were worried about arcades - not because of the games they contained, but because they were licentious hangouts for teens. (Insert " Ya Got Trouble " here.) By the 1980s, "Arcades were being shut down across the nation by activist parents intent on protecting their children from the dangerous influences lurking within these neon-drenched dungeons," Markey writes.

Then came the franchise that evolved arcade panic into gameplay panic: Midway Games' Mortal Kombat, infamous for its gory "fatality" moves. With its 1992 arcade debut, Mortal Kombat sparked hysteria among concerned adults that led to a 1993 congressional hearing and the creation of the Entertainment Software Rating Board, or ESRB. The fighting game franchise still incites debate with every new release.

"Like people were really going to go out and rip people's spines out," Cypheroftyr, a gaming critic who typically goes by her internet handle, told me over the phone regarding the mainstream anxiety around Mortal Kombat in the 1990s. Cypheroftyr is an avid player of shooter games and other action games and the founder of the nonprofit I Need Diverse Games.

"I'm old enough to remember the whole Jack Thompson era of trying to say video games are violent and they should be banned," she said, referencing the infamous disbarred obscenity lawyer known for a strident crusade against games and other media that has spanned decades.

Cypheroftyr pointed out that after the Columbine shooting in April 1999, politicians "were trying to blame both video games and Marilyn Manson. It just feels like this is too easy a scapegoat."

Politicians have long seized on the idea that recreational fantasy and fictional media have an influence on real-world evil. In 2007, for example, Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) blamed "music and movies and TV and video games" for being full of "pornography and violence," which he argued had influenced the Columbine shooters and, later, the 2007 Virginia Tech shooter.

Video games seem especially prone to garnering political attention in the wake of a tragedy - especially first-person shooters like Call of Duty. A stereotype of a mass shooter, isolated and perpetually consuming graphic violent content, seems to linger in the public's consciousness. A neighbor of the 2018 Parkland shooter, for instance, told the Miami Herald that the shooter would play video games for up to 12 to 15 hours a day - and although that anecdotal report was unverified, it was still widely circulated.

A 2015 Pew study of 2,000 US adults found that even though 49 percent of adult Americans play video games, 40 percent of Americans also believe in a link between games and violence - specifically, that "people who play violent video games are more likely to be violent themselves." Additionally, 32 percent of the people who told Pew they play video games also said they believe gaming contributes to an increase in aggression, even though their own experience as, presumably, nonviolent gamers would offer at least some evidence to the contrary.

"I find it more plausible that America's long-standing culture of gun violence has affected video games ... than the other way around" -game developer Naomi Clark

One person who sees a correlation between violent games and a propensity for real-world violence is Tim Winter. Winter is the president of the Parents Television Council, a nonpartisan advocacy group that lobbies the entertainment industry against marketing graphic violence to children. He spent several years overseeing MGM's former video game publishing division, MGM Interactive, and moved into advocacy when he became a parent. Growing up, his children played all kinds of video games, except for those he considered too graphic or violent.

In a phone interview, Winter told me his view aligns with the research supporting links between games and aggression.

"Anyone who uses the term 'moral panic' in my view is trying to diminish a bona fide conversation that needs to take place," Winter said. "It's a simple PR move to refute something that might actually have some value in the broader conversation."

During our conversation, he compared the connection between violent media and harmful real-world effects to that between cigarettes and lung cancer. If you consume in moderation, he argues, you'll probably be fine; but, over time, exposure to violent media can have "a cumulative negative effect." (In fact, studies of infrequent smokers have shown that their risk of coronary disease is roughly equal to that of frequent smokers, and their risk of cancer is still significantly higher than that of nonsmokers.)

"What I believe to be true is that the media we consume has a very powerful impact on shaping our belief structure, our cognitive development, our values, and our opinions," he said.

He added that it would be foolish to point to any one act of violence and say it was caused by any one video game - that, he argued, "would be like saying lung cancer was caused by that one specific cigarette I smoked."

"But if you are likely to smoke packs a day over the course of many years, it has a cumulative negative effect on your health," he continued. "I believe based on the research on both sides that that's the prevailing truth."

The debate endures because gun control isn't being addressed - and games are an easy target

Like many people I spoke with for this story, Winter believes that the debate about gun violence has remained largely at a standstill since Columbine, while the number of mass shootings nationwide has continued to increase.

"If you look at the broader issue of gun violence in America, you have a number of organizations and constituencies pointing at different causes," he said. "When you look back at what those arguments are, it's the same arguments that have been made going back to Columbine. Whether it's gun control, whether it's mental illness, whether it's violence in media culture - whatever the debate is about those three root causes, very little progress has been made on any of them."

The glorification of violence is so culturally embedded in American media through TV, film, games, books, and practically every other available medium that there seems to be very little impetus to change anything about America's gun culture. We can define " gun culture" here as the addition of an embrace of gun ownership and a nationwide oversupply of guns to what Phillips described as " a culture of violence " - one in which violence "becomes our go-to way of solving problems - whether that's individual violence, police violence, state violence."

"There's a commodification of violence," she said, "and we have to understand what that means."

Naomi Clark, an independent game developer and co-chair of New York University's Game Center program, agreed. "I find it more plausible that America's long-standing culture of gun violence has affected video games, as a form of culture, than the other way around," she told me in an email. "After all, this nation's cultural traditions and attachments around guns are far older than video games."

In light of incidents like Walmart's removal of video game displays after the recent mass shootings while continuing to advertise guns, the connection between the shootings and America's continued valorization of guns feels extremely stark. "We could ban video games tomorrow and mass shootings would still happen," Cypheroftyr told me.

"What's new about the current debate is that the scapegoat of videogaming has never been more nakedly exposed for what it is," gaming sociologist Katherine Cross wrote in an email, "with Republicans and conservatives manifestly fearful of blaming systematic white supremacism, Trump's rhetoric, or our nation's permissive and freewheeling gun culture for the recent rash of terrorism."

Because of the sensitivity around the issue of gun control, it's easy for politicians to score points with constituents by focusing a conversation on games and sidestepping other action. "Politicians often blame video games because they are a safe target," Moral Combat author Markey told me in an email. "There isn't a giant video game lobby like other potential causes of mass shootings (like the NRA [National Rifle Association]). So [by targeting games], a politician can make it appear they are doing something without risking losing any votes."

And the general public is often susceptible to this rhetoric, both because it's emotional and because it may feed what they think they already know about games - even if that's not a lot. "The narrative that violence in video games contributes to the gun violence in America is, I think, a good example of a bad idea that seems right to people who don't look too closely at the facts," Zak Garriss, a video game writer and designer who's worked on a wide range of games, told me in an email.

"Video games are a global industry, dwarfing other entertainment industries in revenue in markets comprised of gamers from the UK, Germany, France, Japan, the US, and basically anywhere there's electricity. Yet the spree shooting phenomenon seems to be seriously and uniquely a US issue right now. It's also worth noting that the ratings systems across these countries vary, and in the case of Europe, are often more liberal in many regards than the US system," Garriss said.

He also pointed out that this conversation frequently overshadows the important, innovative work that many games are engaged in. "Games like Stardew Valley, Minecraft, or Journey craft experiences that help people relax, detox after a day, bond with friends," he said. "Games like Papers, Please, That Dragon Cancer, or Life Is Strange interrogate the harder and the darker elements of the human experience like love, grief, loneliness, and death."

In other words, a conversation that focuses on games and guns alone dismisses the vital cultural role that video games play as art. "Play video games and you can jump on giant mushrooms, shoot a wizard on the moon, grow a farm, fall in love, experience nearly infinite worlds really," Garriss told me. "If games have a unifying organizing principle, I'd say it's to delight. The pursuit of fun."

He continued: "To me, the tragedy, if there is one, in the current discourse around video games and violence, lies in failing to see the magic happening in the play. As devs, it's a magic we're chasing with every game. And as players, I think it's a magic that has not just the potential but the actual power to bring people together, to aid mental health, to make us think, to help us heal. And to experience delight."

But for some members of the public, games' recreational, relaxational, and artistic values might be another thing that make them suspect. "If they don't play games or 'aged out of it,' they might see them as frivolous or a waste of time," Cypheroftyr says. "It's easy to go, 'Oh, you're still playing video games? Why are you wasting your life?'"

That idea - that video games are a waste of time - is another longstanding element of cultural assumptions around games of all kinds, Clark, the game developer, told me. "Games have been an easy target in every era because there's something inherently unproductive or even anti-productive about them, and so there's also a long history of game designers trying to rehabilitate games and make them 'do work' or provide instruction."

All of this makes it incredibly easy to fixate on video games instead of addressing difficult but more relevant targets, like NRA funding and easy access to guns. And that, in turn, makes it a complicated proposition to extricate video games from conversations about gun violence, let alone limit the conversation around violent games to people who might actually be in a position to create change, like the people who make the games in the first place.

Yet what's striking when you drill down into the community around gaming is how many gamers agree with many of the arguments politicians are making. As a fan of shooter games, Cypheroftyr told me she routinely plays violent games like Call of Duty and the military action role-playing game (RPG) The Division. "I'm not out here trying to murder people," she stressed. But like the Parents Television Council's Winter, Cypheroftyr and many of the other people I spoke with agree that the gaming industry needs to do a lot more to examine the at times shocking imagery it perpetuates.

Many members of the gaming community are already discussing game violence

Multiple people I spoke with expressed frustration that the conversation about video games' role in mass shootings is obscuring another, very important conversation to be had within the gaming community about violent games.

Clark told me that the public's lack of nuance and an insistence on a binary reading of the issue is part of the problem. "Most people are capable of understanding that causes are complex," she said, "that you can't just point to one thing and say, 'This is mostly or entirely to blame!'"

But she also cautioned that the gaming community's reactionary defensiveness to this lack of nuance also prevents many video game fans from acknowledging that games do play a role within a violent culture. "That complexity cuts both ways," she told me. "Even though it's silly to say that 'games cause violence,' it's also just as silly to say that games have nothing to do with a culture that has a violence problem."

"Even though it's silly to say that 'games cause violence,' it's also just as silly to say that games have nothing to do with a culture that has a violence problem" -game developer Naomi Clark

That culture is endemic to the gaming industry, added Justin Carter, a freelance journalist whose work focuses on video games and culture.

"The industry does have a fetishization of guns and violence," Carter said. "You look at games like Borderlands or Destiny and one of the selling points is how many guns there are." The upcoming first-person shooter game Borderlands 3, he pointed out, boasts "over a billion" different guns from its 12 fictional weapons manufacturers, all of which tout special perks to get players to try their guns. These perks serve as marketing both inside and outside the game; the game's publisher, 2K Games, invites players to exult in violence using language that speaks for itself:

Deliver devastating critical hits to enemies' soft-and-sensitives, then joy-puke as your bullets ricochet towards other targets. ...

Step 1: Hit your enemies with tracker tags. Step 2: Unleash a hail of Smart Bullets that track towards your targets. Step 3: Loot!

Deal guaranteed elemental damage with your finger glued to the trigger ...

"There are very few [action/adventure] games that give you options other than murdering people," Cypheroftyr said. "Games don't do enough to show the other side of it. You shoot someone, you die, they die, you reset, you reload, and nothing happens."

"I know that if I shoot people in a game it's not real," she added. "99.9 percent of people don't need to be told that. I'm not playing out a power fantasy or anything, but I've become more aware of how most games [that] use violence [do so] to solve problems."

An insistence from game developers on blithely ignoring the potential political messages of their games is another frustration for her. "All these game makers are like, there's no politics in the game. There's no message. And I'm like ... did you just send me through a war museum and you're telling me this?!"

The game Cypheroftyr is referencing is The Division 2, which features a section where players can engage in enemy combat during a walkthrough of a Vietnam War memorial museum. While she loves the game, she told me the fact that players use weapons from the Vietnam War era while in a war museum belies game developers' frequent arguments that such games are apolitical.

Another game Cypheroftyr has found disturbing in its attempt to background politics without any real self-reflection is the popular adventure game Detroit Become Human, which displays pacifist Martin Luther King Jr. quotes alongside gameplay that allows players to choose extreme violence as an option. "You can take a more pacifistic approach, but you may not get the ending you want," she explained.

She noted, too, that the military uses video games for training as part of what's been dubbed the " military-entertainment complex," with tactics involving shooter games that some ex-soldiers have referred to as "more like brainwashing than anything." The US Army began exploring virtual training in 1999 and began developing its first tactics game a year later. The result, Full Spectrum Command, was a military-only version of 2003's Full Spectrum Warrior. Since then, the military has used video games to teach soldiers everything from how to deal with combat scenarios to how to interact with Iraqi civilians.

The close connection between games and sanctioned real-world violence, i.e., war, is hard to deny with any plausibility. "When someone insists that these two parts of culture have absolutely nothing to do with each other," Clark said, "it smacks of denial, and many game developers are asking themselves, 'Do I want to be part of this landscape?' even if they have zero belief that video games are causing violence."

For all the gaming industry's faults when it comes to frankly addressing gaming's role in a violent culture, however, many people are quick to point out that critiques of in-game violence can also come from the video games themselves. In Batman: Arkham Asylum, for example, researchers Christina Fawcett and Steven Kohm recently found that the game "directly implicate[s] the player in violence enacted upon the bodies of criminals and patients alike." Other games shift the focus away from the perpetrators to the victims - for example, This War of Mine is a survival game inspired by the Bosnian War that focuses not on soldiers but on civilians dealing with the costs of wartime violence.

But acknowledging that critiques of violent games are coming from within the gaming community doesn't play well as part of the gun control debate. "It's far too easy to scapegoat video games as low-hanging fruit instead of addressing the real issues," Cypheroftyr said, "like the ease with which we can get weapons in this country, and why we don't do more to punish the perpetrators [of gun violence]." She also cites the cultural tendency to excuse masculine aggression early on with a "b"boys will be boys" mentality - which can breed the kind of entitlement that leads to more violence later on.

All these factors combine to make the conversation around violent video games inherently political and part of a larger ongoing debate that ultimately centers on which media messages are the most responsible for fueling real-world violence.

The conversation surrounding violent games implicates violent gaming culture itself - which, in turn, implicates politicians who rail against games

Games journalist Carter told me he feels the gaming community needs to, in essence, reject the whole debate entirely because at this point in its life cycle, it's disingenuous.

"We've been through enough shootings that you know the playbook, and it's annoying that gamers and people in the industry will take this as a position that needs defending," he told me. "It's not a conversation worth having anymore solely on post-traumatic terms."

Discussions about video game violence need to be held mainly within the games community, Carter said, and held "with people who are actually interested in figuring out a solution instead of politicians looking to pass off the blame for their ineptitude and greed."

But some gamers told me they don't trust the gaming community to frame the conversation with appropriate nuance. All of them cited Gamergate's violent male entitlement and the effect that its subsequent bleed into the larger alt-right movement's misogyny and white supremacy have had on mainstream culture at large.

"The framing of that rhetoric that began in Gamergate as part of the 'low' culture of niche internet forums became part of the mainstream political discourse," criminologist Phillips pointed out. "The expression of their misogyny and the notion of being pushed out of their white male-dominated space was a microcosm of what was to come. We're talking about 8chan now, but [the growth of the alt-right] was fueled by gaming culture." She points to Gamergate as an example of the complicated interplay between gaming culture, online communities full of toxic, violent rhetoric, and the rise of online extremism that's increasingly moving offline.

Gaming sociologist Cross agreed. "At this moment, there is urgent need to shine a light on video game culture, the fan spaces that have been infiltrated by white supremacists looking to recruit that minority of gamers who rage against 'political correctness,'" she told me.

"We treat video games as unreal, as unserious play, and that creates a shadow over gaming forums and fan communities that has allowed toxicity to take root. It's also allowed neo-Nazis to operate mostly unseen. That is what needs to change."

The resulting shadow over gaming has spread far and wide - and found violent echoes in the rhetoric of Trump himself. "Look at what the person in the very highest office of the US is cultivating," Cypheroftyr said. "Toxic masculinity, this idea that men, especially white men, have been fed that they're losing 'their' country."

"While video games do not influence us in a monkey-see-monkey-do manner, they do, like all media, shape how we see the world," Cross argues. "Republicans, in broaching that possibility, open themselves up to the critique that their leader, who makes frequent use of both old media and social media, might also be influential in a toxic way."

And this, ultimately, may be why the current debate around video games and violence feels particularly intense: The extremes of toxic gaming culture are fueling the attitudes of toxic alt-right culture, which in turn fuels the rhetoric of President Trump and many other right-wing politicians - the same rhetoric that many white supremacist mass shooters are using to justify their atrocities.

So when Trump rails against violence in video games, as he's now done multiple times, he's protesting a fictionalized version of the real-life violence that his own rhetoric seems to tacitly encourage. If we are to accept the argument that media violence as represented by games is capable of bringing about real-world violence, then surely no media influence is more powerful or full of dangerous potential than that wielded by the president of the United States.

In 2018, Vice's gaming vertical Waypoint devoted a week to " guns and games"; in a moving piece outlining the intent of the project, editor Austin Walker observed that unlike real-world violence, "in big-budget action games, and especially games that give the player guns and plentiful ammunition, violence is cheap and endlessly repeatable."

Yet now, barely a year later, mass shootings and other incidents of real-world violence have also begun to seem endlessly repeatable. Perhaps that is why, at last, the urgency of shifting our cultural focus from fixing violence in games to fixing violence in the real world feels like it is finally outstripping the incessant debate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The frustrating, enduring debate over video games, violence, and guns

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We asked players, parents, developers, and experts to weigh in on how to change the conversation around gaming.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new study shows that playing video games can sharpen important life skills, including communication, adaptability and resourcefulness.

# data[].attributes.headline
Video Games Can Be Positive ... it is up to you

# data[].attributes.subject
Video Games Can Be Positive ... it is up to you

# data[].attributes.headline
What Can We Learn from Violent Videogames?

# data[].attributes.subject
What Can We Learn from Violent Videogames?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fears that violent videogames will cause people to be more violent are understandable, but unsupported by current research - social and developmental factors are better predictors of violent behavior. In fact, some violent videogames may actually lead to the development of empathy, understanding, and even moral behavior.

On October 1, 2015, a gunman walked into his classroom at Umpqua Community College and methodically began murdering his classmates one-by-one. It feels as if these kinds of mass violence are becoming more common. Columbine (1999). Virginia Tech (2007). Fort Hood (2009). Aurora (2012). Newtown (2012). Fort Hood (again: 2014). Charleston (2015). Those are just the ones most people remember; they don't include the other 34 mass shootings since 1984. Collectively, these mass shootings have claimed 372 lives and injured 412, not including the immeasurable injury done to the families and communities of those murdered.

Just as these events seem to be becoming more commonplace, the tenor of the discussions they prompt have also fallen into a routine. Why did it happen? What can we do to prevent it? In our search for answers, it is only natural that we look for definitive explanations to make sense of the incomprehensible. Was the shooter angry? Taking revenge? Mentally ill? On drugs?

Did the shooter play videogames?

It might seem odd to mention this last question in the same breath as the others, but it is in part because of these mass murders that one of the constant themes in the academic, political, and social debate about videogames in popular culture has been whether and to what extent violent videogames promote aggressive behavior. This debate has been around longer than videogames, however, having surfaced first with film (1900s) and radio (1930s), ¹ then comic books (Fredric Wertham's 1954 Seduction of the Innocent, which led to the formation of the Comic Code Authority that same year) and later television (The Family Viewing Hour, a policy overturned by the courts in 1977). Seen in this context, videogames are just the latest media to raise age-old concerns.

Our tendency to view new media with suspicion is a good thing; many would argue that we do not do enough of this now with the shift to a digital economy (e.g., Jeron Lanier's Who Owns the Future), our use of social media (e.g., Jon Ronson's So You've Been Publicly Shamed), our loss of privacy and control of our genetic code, and the abuse of social media by employers and law enforcement (e.g., Lori Andrews' I Know Who You Are and I Saw What You Did), or the spiritual and humanistic implications of technology (e.g., Noreen Herzfeld's In Our Image). Yet, this tendency to overgeneralize can also blind us to the potential benefits of new media and even prevent us from understanding the way that media may in fact lead to the very outcomes we fear.

This article is based on three premises:

First, questions about the impact of violent media on behavior are legitimate; we should be critical of the messages we consume and which we put in front of our children.

Second, our policies and decisions in this regard should be based on evidence rather than anecdotal or conventional wisdom.

Third, we should strive to be as open to the potential for videogames to promote positive attitudinal and behavioral outcomes as we are to their negative consequences. This is true even (and in some cases, especially) for violent videogames.

The first two premises are related, so I will start with what we do know about whether videogames increase violent behavior.

Do Games Teach Violence and Aggression?

Several good publications help introduce this complex area of study, ² and I will highlight some of the key findings here. We must start by examining our common beliefs about popular culture media (like videogames) and aggression. In the case of media and violence, the common-sense theory posits that the more you experience violence, the more likely you will become violent. This assertion, however, is not borne out by the literature. Human beings are not passive receptors but active processors of our environments. We continually strive to "make sense" of the messages around us, placing them in social, emotional, cultural, and political contexts. This is why commercial advertisements do not necessarily lead us to purchase the advertised product and why, despite having watched hundreds of hours of The Three Stooges and The Road Runner, I (and thankfully, most other people) have yet to poke my family or friends in the eyes or drop anvils on them from a great height. However, this also explains why people who have trouble distinguishing fantasy and reality, who cannot regulate their emotions, or who lack social/emotional awareness ³ may also be more likely to seek out violent media or to act out in violent ways. This points out another weakness of studies that have found correlational associations linking violence and media consumption: they do not control for other explanatory factors. For example, boys are disproportionately attracted to videogames and more likely to act aggressively than are girls. Thus, correlational studies might document this sex-aggression relationship or other "hidden" correlations rather than media-aggression effects. ⁴

In Schwarzenegger (later, Brown) vs. Entertainment Merchants Association and Entertainment Software Association (ESA), the ESA sued to overturn a State of California law that restricted the sale of violent videogames to minors. California contended that it had the right to protect the health and well-being of minors, while the ESA contended that the lack of a causal link between violent media, including videogames, made the issue one of free speech. This case might represent the best-informed public debate to date on the issue of violent videogames and aggression. Amicus briefs filed on both sides of the case pulled all the relevant research known at the time and subjected it to intense scrutiny and debate. Among the dozens of briefs filed on behalf of the ESA was an amicus brief authored by a coalition of states and territories and 82 psychologists, criminologists, medical scientists, and media researchers, ⁵ all of whom contended that the State of California had misrepresented the science on videogames and that there was no causal link in the research. Ultimately, the argument by the ESA won out, first in District Court, later on appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and finally in the U.S. Supreme Court. Each court ruled that there was insufficient evidence of a causal link between violent videogames (or any media, for that matter) and violent behavior or aggression.

This complex case involved many different issues and arguments, but the Supreme Court's 7-2 ruling hinged in three main points: videogames, "like the protected books, plays, and movies that preceded them...communicate ideas..." which "suffices to confer First Amendment protection; that current rating systems are sufficient to prevent minors from purchasing mature games and that...filling the remaining modest gap in concerned-parents' control can hardly be a compelling state interest." Moreover, there was no "compelling" link between violent videogames and aggression or violence in children.

Many are uncomfortable with the free speech component of the decision; when it comes to our children, safety feels more important than free speech (consider our views on cyberbullying today as a case in point). The second point is perhaps a bit more palatable because it seems to strike a balance between regulation (albeit self-imposed, and with at times questionable definitions of what qualifies a game for a rating of "Teen" vs. "Mature") ⁶ and parental control. Ultimately, no law can substitute for parental involvement in what their children consume and, more importantly, what meaning they make from it. Still, wherever you come down on this issue as a parent, teacher, administrator, politician, or citizen, the third point is the most salient and should serve to remove any qualms we have over the first two issues: There is no compelling evidence linking videogames (or TV, movies, magazines, plays, or books) to violence and aggression in children.

This case illustrated the error, to which people on both sides of the debate are prone, of oversimplification. The case ultimately hinged on whether evidence exists for the "dosing" model of violence and aggression. The dosing model holds that the presence of violence (any kind) leads to violent behavior, and that the more violence one is exposed to (time, intensity), the more likely one is to become more violent. As the hundreds of sources cited in the above-referenced amicus brief illustrates, the dosing model is too simplistic to predict violence or aggression. Teen violent crime has actually decreased over the last 20 years at the same time that videogame play has increased. If one plots the number of per capita gun-related murders against per capita spending on videogames, several interesting things become apparent. First, only China spends less per capita (~$5) on videogames than the United States (~$42); Germany, Australia, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, and Canada spend $45-$65, while South Korea and the Netherlands spend more than $100 per capita. Yet the United States has three times more gun murders than any other country, including South Korea (zero murders per 100,000) and the Netherlands (0.4 per 100,000). See table 1.
Table 1. Rank-ordered list of top 10 countries by videogame sales and corresponding gun homicides per capita*

*New Zoo Games Market Research
** United National Office on Drugs and Crime: Global Study on Homicide (2013)

Mass Shootings and Videogames

This has not stopped us from looking to videogames in our painful search to explain tragedies like Columbine, Aurora, Virginia Tech, and Sandy Hook. The killers responsible for the murders at Columbine, Aurora, and Sandy Hook reportedly played a lot of videogames, although the shooter at Virginia Tech did not. Yet, the Sandy Hook killer mostly played nonviolent games (he spent the most time playing Super Mario Brothers and Dance Dance Revolution), and the shooter at Aurora played mostly role-playing games (fantasy-based games that feature armed combat against primarily monsters) like World of Warcraft, Neverwinter Nights, and Diablo, which do not feature guns. Of all the perpetrators of these horrific mass shootings, only the Columbine shooters actually played games that involve using guns to shoot people. The more common thread? All were mentally ill at the time of the shootings and all had access to guns. And, by the way, less than eight percent of violent crime committed by the mentally ill is the direct result of their mental illness, lest we commit another overgeneralization about causes of violence. ⁷

Videogames could have been part of their illness, of course. Suffering from a serious psychosis conceivably could lead to seeking out experiences and media that reinforce that psychosis and color one's perceptions of what those experiences mean. But it is another thing entirely to reverse the order and suggest that the medium or the experiences caused the illness. Being around young children does not cause people to become pedophiles; being a pedophile makes people seek out environments with young children.

Laboratory Studies vs. Real Life

Virtually every piece of research showing a link between media such as videogames and aggression comes from laboratory settings in which conditions are carefully controlled and in which aggression is measured by paper-and-pencil statements about aggression, not actual aggression. As such, the most we can conclude from these studies is that under some conditions, we can create people who self-report as more aggressive; there is no evidence that those people then go out and behave any differently as a result. The largest-scale meta-analysis to report a link between videogames and aggression included only a few studies with real-world incidents of aggression, and those relied on self-reported measures of aggression rather than observed acts. ⁸ The authors concluded that "These are not huge effects - not on the order of joining a gang vs. not joining a gang. But it is one risk factor for predicting future aggression and other negative outcomes" (emphasis added).

People do not exist in laboratories; we exist in societies and cultures with complex social systems of rules, expectations, and messages that ameliorate violence-tinged media messages. The vast majority of us can navigate these waters without becoming violent, a fact made evident by the lack of increased violent crime in those who read Grimm's Fairy Tales (stuffing witches in ovens, chopping people up, cannibalism), watched the Looney Tunes, or enjoyed The Three Stooges. Clearly, and thankfully, the relation between violent media messages and violent behavior is more complex and less direct than we fear.

One Small Factor

My argument is not that violent media cannot lead to violent behavior, only that the ways in which it does (and does not) are complex and nuanced. After all, videogame researchers like me can hardly argue that videogames can promote positive behaviors if we are not willing to acknowledge the conditions under which they can lead to undesired behavior as well. So what is the truth that lies between these two positions? We do not (yet) know enough about human beings to provide a definitive answer to this question. No one would disagree that it is possible to create a violent human being by exposing him or her to long-term, consistent messages of violence without any socialization to counteract it; we need only look to the tragic cycle of familial and domestic violence for evidence of that.

If we believe the evidence that suggests games can desensitize those with crippling phobias to the stimuli that trigger their feelings of panic, we can hardly argue that media cannot also desensitize someone to violence. By the same token, however, we must recognize that all the evidence we have shows that media do not desensitize most people. We should not accept that violent videogames (or any other medium) are anything but one small factor in a complex societal issue.

The Right Question

The question we should ask is not whether violent videogames can make people violent - they can, under the right circumstances. That set of circumstances is poorly understood, however, and thankfully quite rare. The real question of interest lies in determining the circumstances and mechanisms by which such changes can occur. This is much more than an academic pursuit; it has the potential to change our society in ways we cannot yet imagine. By asking how instead of whether or if games can create such sociological and behavioral changes, we shift the focus from a dosing model (exposure = change) to a social/cultural/cognitive/emotional explanation of how and under what circumstances beliefs and actions can be changed.

In retrospect, it seems obvious that context determines how people process media messages. For example, we already recognize that violence committed in self-defense is different than unprovoked violence. We provide social venues in which violence is not just allowed, but encouraged (e.g., MMA and American football) - violence that would result in arrest if demonstrated in other social contexts. If we recognize that the context of the violence makes a difference in these examples, we must also accept that violent videogames are subject to the same contextual influences.

Context does not just reduce the likelihood of becoming more aggressive as a result of violent media; it can actually result in positive behavioral outcomes. Research spanning the last 25 years has found that playing a violent videogame with another player (not against them) actually reduced aggression and increased prosocial behavior, ⁹ has provided evidence of a kind of cathartic effect for violent videogames (players are less aggressive after taking on the role of an avenging assassin in a videogame), ¹⁰ and that those who played an automobile racing game were more aggressive (as measured by biometric measures of arousal rather than paper-and-pencil tests) than those who played a shooter game in which they had to kill other human beings. ¹¹ The researchers in the latter study hypothesized that the racing game tapped into real experiences (e.g., road rage, near accidents), whereas players had no related cognitive-emotional experiences to tap into with the shooting game.

Do Videogames Have Special Powers?

Many studies like those described here highlight the importance of the psychological, cognitive, and emotional characteristics of the individuals who consume the media and their social contexts. In this respect, videogames enjoy a distinct advantage over books and movies as media. In life, we are limited to our own experiences; our ability to develop empathy, tolerance, and a strong moral compass are limited to those experiences and the meaning we make within our social contexts. Books and movies, on the other hand, can provide a potentially unlimited set of experiences to make sense of and thus can build empathy through exposing us to virtual experiences of other people who think, act, and behave in ways different from us. The knowledge we gain in the process, by seeing that the ways "different" people, look, sound, and behave does not necessarily lead to "better" or "worse" people, can make us more tolerant and understanding of diversity.

Movies, as a kind of visual storytelling, seem to work in the same way as books; movies like Sophie's Choice (based on the book by the same name) would not work if the viewer did not identify with her in spite of the horrific act of filicide. Yet movies create a layer between the viewer and the medium by forcing a representation of place, time, and characters on the viewer, whereas books force the reader to generate these things. This cognitive act invests the reader in the narrative in some ways more deeply than film can and does so in ways that are correspondingly more connected to our own experiences (since we are most likely to generate people, places, and spaces like those we have experienced). Books also allow us to pause and reflect on decisions that characters make with which we may disagree or find unpalatable, whereas movies are time-based (remote controls notwithstanding) and proceed at their own pace, with less time to consider what we would do next. In both cases, however, we do not really have any control over what happens, and that means we can never really develop a full appreciation of the consequences of one decision over another. We might be sure that we would decide differently ourselves, but without the ability to try, we cannot know how we would feel or come to believe. Videogames do not suffer from this limitation - they allow us to experience both sides of a decision through replayability. Because videogames are dynamic, our choices lead to different outcomes and possibilities, thus promoting a desire to replay.

Can Violent Videogames Make Us More Moral?

In well-defined moral and ethical situations, the inability to experience both sides of an ethical or moral dilemma may have less consequence than with morally and ethically ambiguous situations. What happens, for example, when the protagonist in a book or movie commits acts considered unethical or immoral? Whether "justified" by the context (e.g., revenge, self-preservation), we wonder how we would have behaved and, more importantly, how we would have felt about making each choice. Our sense of morality is developed, in part, through exposure to dilemmas, our exploration of the possible choices, and our evaluation of the consequences of those choices, which involves our emotional responses.

By allowing us to choose what "we" do as the main character, videogames offer us the opportunity to explore all sides of such dilemmas, to experience the results of our choices through observable consequences in the game world, and to evaluate our own reaction to them. ¹² This sense of agency, combined with directly observable consequences and replayability, makes videogames just as effective at promoting morality and ethics as for promoting violence. Dozens of digital game-based learning (DGBL) researchers work in this area, ¹³ but one example shared with me by my colleague, Bob DeSchutter, is illustrative.

In the game Fallout 3, a post-apocalyptic world destroyed by nuclear war, one of the side quests leads to a community that has evolved for many generations in an isolated environment. At the center of their culture is a tree that holds religious significance for them. This tree turns out to be a human mutant, Harold, who is trapped inside this tree, which began growing out of his head many years ago and in which he is now completely encased. When the player meets Harold, he begs to be put out of his physical and spiritual misery. The community, however, believes such requests are spiritual tests, which they have ignored for years. The community wants Harold's bounty and wisdom (he has given birth to a rich ecosystem) to be spread across the world. The player can choose to commit murder in order to end Harold's suffering, knowing that doing so will also remove the spiritual center of a culture and guarantee the rest of the world remains barren. Or, the player can choose the good of the community, thus ensuring that Harold's torture will never end. There is no right or wrong answer to such moral dilemmas, and forcing the player not just to contemplate the decision but to actually make it and see (and feel) the results is a powerful experience not possible in other media. Because players can replay the scenario and choose differently, they can also explore both sides of the issue; what the game designers then program in as the consequences can play a significant role in helping to make meaning of the experience from a societal perspective.

What (Else) Can We "Learn" from Videogames?

The potential for videogames to promote positive behavioral outcomes is not limited to morality or ethics. Researchers like Ian Bogost, with his work on persuasive games, have shown how games can help us understand complex social problems from a personal perspective and make us more empathetic. For example, his game Fat World places the same geographic and economic constraints on the player as experienced by those who live in poor urban areas. Without access to reliable transportation, players are limited to food in their immediate surroundings, which comprise neighborhood shops with fewer healthy options and a significantly higher-per-capita presence of fast-food restaurants. With price disparities between healthy and unhealthy food and a limited food stamp budget, players must choose whether to buy high quantities of inexpensive, unhealthy food to last their family for a week or more expensive healthy food that may last only a few days. Thus, the game play shows how obesity and diabetes do not necessarily result from conscious choices or lack of willpower, but from complex socio-demographic factors beyond the control of individuals.

In a similar vein, researchers like Pam Kato have shown how games can make us healthier and live longer. Her game, Re-Mission, helped children with cancer understand the effects of their chemotherapy on their cancer (by letting them travel throughout their bodies and "kill" cancer cells using guns that deliver chemotherapy agents) and resulted in significantly higher adherence to their chemotherapy programs. This and hundreds of other studies and researchers have given rise to a field of study called games for health, with its own conferences, journals, and organizations.

Researchers like Jane McGonigal have shown how alternate reality games (ARGs), games that mix the real world with virtual components, can solve social problems. Her games Evolve (identifying and solving local social problems) and World Without Oil (finding solutions to the world's future energy needs) and those of hundreds of other researchers have resulted in millions of people voluntarily working to find solutions to a wide range of social problems.

Researchers like Bob DeSchutter, founder of the Gerontoludic Society, are building games for the elderly, not for cognitive training purposes (which have received dubious empirical support) but for ethical, quality-of-life, and aesthetic reasons. His games and projects have promoted intergenerational familial connections by supporting shared storytelling and shared game play and broadened the already significant games-for-aging arena. And virtual worlds like Snow World (a game for burn victims that has been clinically shown to improve pain management) and an NIH-funded clinical trial of another game shown to reduce PTSD symptoms ¹⁴ have extended the power of game technology to the counseling and therapy domains.

Concluding Thoughts

Once again, my argument is not that violent videogames cannot promote aggressive behavior, nor that their ability to promote positive outcomes outweighs that risk. The mere presence of violence in a videogame, however, is insufficient to make any judgment about its potential for good or harm. If we accept that videogames can promote negative outcomes, we must also accept that the opposite is also true. Just as our technologies and definitions of learning have evolved, so must our research questions and practices continue to change. If we are honest with ourselves, we have known for some time that the answer to whether violence in any medium is "good" or "bad" is "it depends." It depends on a variety of social, developmental, emotional, and contextual factors. It depends on the set of circumstances that each person, as an active participant in the meaning-making process, brings to the table. It depends on things we have not yet discovered. In defining these conditions and factors, we will have to leave our preconceived notions and prejudices behind and accept that positive and negative effects may result from "good" or "bad" media. If we fail to remain open to all such possibilities, even those that go against our personal beliefs, we put at risk the very outcome we are trying to achieve - a more just, fair, and moral world for future generations. If we succeed, videogames (even, or perhaps especially, violent ones) may help point the way to a better world.

Notes

1. Ellen Wartella and Byron Reeves, "Historical trends in research on children and the media: 1900-1960," Journal of Communication, Vol. 35 (Spring 1985): 118-33.

2. Craig A. Anderson, Akiko Shibuya, Nobuko Ihori, Edward L. Swing, Brad J. Bushman, Akira Sakamoto, Hannah R. Rothstein, and Muniba Saleem, "Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in Eastern and Western countries: A meta-analytic review," Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 136, No. 2 (March 2010): 151-173; Christopher J. Ferguson, Violent Crime: Clinical and Social Implications (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2010); and Christopher John Ferguson, "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: A Meta-analytic Review of Positive and Negative Effects of Violent Video Games," Psychiatric Quarterly, Vol. 78, No. 4 (December 2007): 309-316.

3. Because of mental or developmental disability or mental illness, for example. See Richard J. Davidson, Katherine M. Putnam, and Christine L. Larson (2000). "Dysfunction in the neural circuitry of emotion regulation-A possible prelude to violence," Science, Volume 289, No.5479: 591-594.

4. E.g., Christopher J. Ferguson, John Colwell, Boris Mlačić, Goran Milas, and Igor Mikloušic, "Personality and media influences on violence and depression in a cross-national sample of young adults: Data from Mexican-Americans, English and Croatians," Journal of Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 27, No. 3 (May 2011): 1195-1200.

5. Court brief of social scientists, medical scientists, and media effects scholars as amici curiae in support of respondents.

6. I've seen one case where a game earned a rating of Teen for "comic mischief" involving throwing ice cream at your friends, while a recent Batman title earned the same rating despite portraying frequent, personal beatings (including personal strangulation and head stomps) of bad guys and a dirty-talking Catwoman with her suit unzipped to show significant cleavage.

7. Jillian K. Peterson, Jennifer Skeem, Patrick Kennealy, Beth Bray, and Andrea Zvonkovic, "How often and how consistently do symptoms directly precede criminal behavior among offenders with mental illness?" Law and Human Behavior, Vol. 38, No. 5 (October 2014): 439-449.

8. See note 2.

9. S. B. Silvern, P. A. Williamson, and T. A. Countermine, "Video game play and social behavior: Preliminary findings,"paper presented at the International Conferenceon Play and Play Environments (1983b).

10. Christopher J. Ferguson and Stephanie M. Rueda, "The Hitman study: Violent Video Game Exposure Effects on Aggressive Behavior, Hostile Feelings, and Depression," European Psychologist, Vol. 15 No. 2 (2010): 99-108.

11. Sarah L. Pearson and Simon Goodson, "Video games and aggression: Using immersive technology to explore the effects of violent content," Proceedings of the North East of England Branch of the BPS Annual Conference, June 26-27, 2009, Sheffield, UK.

12. This might be more accurately characterized as co-authoring, since the design decisions made by the game designers also control and constrain the narrative.

13. Karolien Poels and Steven Malliet, eds. Vice city virtue: Moral issues in digital game play (Leuven, Belgium: Acco, 2011); and Jose P. Zagal, "Ethically Notable Videogames: Moral Dilemmas and Game Play," Breaking new ground: Innovation in games, play, practice and theory, Proceedings of the 2009 DiGRA conference (2009).

14. Daniel Pine, MD, of the NIMH Emotion and Development Branch, Yair Bar-Haim, PhD, School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, and colleagues, report on their findings July 24, 2015, National Institute of Mental Health.

Richard Van Eck is associate dean for Teaching and Learning and the founding Dr. David and Lola Rognlie Monson Endowed Professor in Medical Education at the University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences. He has studied digital games since his doctoral studies at the University of South Alabama, where he worked on two award-winning science and problem-solving digital games (Adventures in Problem Solving and Ribbit's Big Splash). His recent work has included consulting on evaluation and game design on several digital STEM games, including PlatinuMath, Project NEO, Project Blackfeather, and Contemporary Studies of the Zombie Apocalypse. He is a frequent keynote speaker and author on the educational potential of videogames at such venues as TEDx Manitoba and SXSW. He also publishes and presents on intelligent tutoring systems, pedagogical agents, authoring tools, and gender and technology.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
what can we learn from violent videogames?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Can We Learn from Violent Videogames?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fears that violent videogames will cause people to be more violent are understandable, but unsupported by current research - social and developmental

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the last year, the role that video games play in our households has grown for many of us due to COVID-19 quarantines and lockdowns. This has reinvigorated debates about the uses and effects of games that rarely focus on the positive. However, let's be clear, there are a range of positive outcomes associated with video game play - many of which we have seen first-hand over the last year within our own families. Here are a few of those benefits that just don't get enough attention:

Mood Management and Mental Well-being

As humans, we have been playing since the beginning of time. Within ancient, ruined cities researchers often find card decks and dice found among the rubble. Play has been important for humans of all ages throughout time; it's not something that is only critical for child development like many people assume. Not only is play crucial to mental well-being, including enhancing creativity and happiness, but it has also been associated with reduced depression and anxiety (see here, here, and here).

Far too often we forget that video games are at their core playful. All video games are designed to be entertaining, engaging, and fun!

Play has such a strong influence on our well-being because of the role it can play in mood management and repair. Mood management and mood repair strategies refer to techniques that a person can use to shift their mood from a negative mood to one of greater contentment of happiness. From sadness to happiness. Or high stress to lower stress.

In fact, research has found video games to be a particularly efficient vehicle for mood management. This is because good games (well-designed games) engage players in a way that meets basic psychological needs as humans. They give you a sense autonomy (you are free to make your own choices and have control), competence (you can achieve things, be successful), and relatedness (connecting with other villagers and your friends via online play). These three components - autonomy, competence, and relatedness - are universal and thought to be essential for psychological health and well-being of an individual. Having these needs met, while also having the added element of playfulness, makes us feel good, happy, and satisfied.

Far too often we forget that video games are at their core playful. All video games are designed to be entertaining, engaging, and fun!

Social Connection

Video games are a great way to foster social relationships, particularly online. Due to their interactivity, connecting online through a video game is uniquely different from connecting socially online through an online forum or social media. They provide us with a way to actively engage with others, collaborate or compete with them and have shared experiences which is particularly notable now as COVID-19 has kept us (and continues to keep us) physically distanced and less able to have traditional shared experiences, like play dates and dinner parties.

In and of itself, socialization is a key component of our wellbeing. One of the key reasons for that is how it reduces our sense of loneliness,

which can have a range of negative effects on our physical and mental health including increased stress and depression. In fact, research has found that loneliness and social isolation is twice as harmful to a person's physical and mental health than obesity. Shared experiences can provide a buffer for these effects and have also been found to be related to increased self-esteem, decreased feelings of depression, anxiety, and isolation and an increased sense of belonging.

Video games are a fantastic vehicle for shared experiences as they can connect us in a fun, safe social space. This is, at least partially, why games such as Animal Crossing (Everyone) and Among Us (Everyone 10+) have been so popular over the last year.

"Unintentional" Learning

While claims about the effects of video game use often focus on what negative thoughts, attitudes, and behaviors they might teach players, often with little supporting evidence, in more recent years researchers have turned their attention to the potential positive "unintentional" learning experiences that can occur when playing games. I refer to it here as "unintentional learning" because the things we are talking about - learning new information and new skills - are not the explicit goal of the games they are playing, but rather an "unintentional consequence" of playing them.

While it may not seem obvious at first, video games are fantastic vehicles for learning new skills. Part of the reason for this is that they induce a state of flow. Often referred to as being "in the zone", players experience flow states when in-game challenges are balanced with the skill level of the player. When in a state of flow, players become hyper focused on the in-game task and are determined to overcome it because their skills are being challenged. It is in this state that various kinds of learning can occur. Games are also great learning tools because people want to play them. On top of that, playing together with others can socially reinforce the activity, making them want to play more.

What can be learned playing video games you ask? Research has found video game play can promote the acquisition of a variety of skills and abilities including creative thinking, problem solving, adaptability and resourcefulness, and leadership skills.

The link between video game play and creative thinking may not be particularly surprising, as most video games require players to develop new solutions to different problems in a short amount of time. Overcoming various in-game challenges can promote thinking outside the box and help develop more complex problem-solving skills.

Leadership skills are also often discussed in the context of unintentional learning when playing online games. Online games provide a particularly unique opportunity to observe, learn, and lead groups of all sizes, ages, and backgrounds. Experimenting with and experiencing success in leadership roles online have been found to cross over into other offline contexts.

Players can also unintentionally gain knowledge while playing video games, the nature of which depends on the video game they are playing. For example, you can learn about history playing games like Age of Empires (Everyone 10+, Teen), or what it takes to be a successful city planner by playing the popular simulation series Sim City (Everyone 10+), or the wonders of the world, key world leaders, and world history through Sid Meier's Civilization (Everyone 10+).

While there will likely always be discussions of "how much is too much" and "are games impacting our children problematically", it is important to keep in mind the other side of the coin: Video games can, and do, have a proven range of positive impacts on those who play them. From mood management and stress release to social connection and learning, video games are fantastic tools to have in our family toolkit... especially when advised to stay safely 6-feet away from those around us.

Dr. Rachel Kowert is a research psychologist, Research Director of Take This, and science content creator Psychgeist. Dr. Kowert has dedicated her career to studying video games and the gamers who love them. She has published numerous books and scientific articles on the topic and has been featured by the Wall Street Journal, Polygon, The Science of Us and NPR among others. Her latest book, A Parent's Guide to Video Games, won an INDIES award in the science category. To learn more about Rachel and her work, visit www.rkowert.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There are a range of benefits associated with video game play, many of which we have seen over the last year within our own families.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find out how media violence impacts kids, and get tips on choosing quality, age-appropriate media. Advice from Common Sense Media editors.

# data[].attributes.headline
Violence in the media: Psychologists study potential harmful effects

# data[].attributes.subject
Violence in the media: Psychologists study potential harmful effects

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Violence in the media: Psychologists study potential harmful effects

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Early research on the effects of viewing violence on television—especially among children—found a desensitizing effect and the potential for aggression. Is the same true for those who play violent video games?

# data[].attributes.headline
Violence in Media: A Complicated Relationship

# data[].attributes.subject
Violence in Media: A Complicated Relationship

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Violence in Media: A Complicated Relationship

# data[].attributes.headline
Stop Blaming Violent Video Games For Mass Shootings

# data[].attributes.subject
Stop Blaming Violent Video Games For Mass Shootings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Stop Blaming Violent Video Games For Mass Shootings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
American children watch an average of four hours of television daily.

# data[].attributes.headline
Do Violent Video Games Lead to Violence?

# data[].attributes.subject
Do Violent Video Games Lead to Violence?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Neuroethics Viewpoint

Author:
Philip M. Boffey
Published:
November 1, 2019

A long-standing debate over whether violence depicted in video games can trigger real-world violence has taken on renewed vigor in the wake of mass shootings in recent years. The gunman who killed 22 people and injured 24 others at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, on August 3 made a fleeting reference to video game soldiers, indicating that he was familiar with video violence, and many politicians were quick to blame video games for this and other mass shootings. Yet it seems clear that the El Paso gunman was primarily motivated by ethnic hatred. His manifesto said the attack was "a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas."

The main reason to worry about video games is a slew of studies claiming to find a link between violence in video games and real-world aggression, but countervailing studies have found no persuasive link. The main reason to be skeptical of a causal link is that video games have spread widely around the world without driving other countries to the levels of violence in this country.

Then there is the question of what can be done to sanitize video violence without violating First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech, which the Supreme Court has applied to works of art, films, and video games that many might find repugnant. A Supreme Court decision in 2011 struck down a California law that sought to ban the sale or rental of violent video games to minors on the grounds that its vague and ill-defined language violated the First Amendment rights of the entertainment merchants.

I have no personal experience with violent video games but the amount of violence depicted in some current video games is astounding. The gore was graphically described by Justice Samuel Alito in a concurring opinion to the 2011 Supreme Court decision. In obvious disgust, he wrote that victims are killed with every imaginable implement, including machine guns, clubs, hammers, and chainsaws, among others. Victims are dismembered, decapitated, disemboweled, set on fire, and chopped into little pieces. They cry out in agony and beg for mercy. Blood gushes, splatters, and pools. Severed body parts and gobs of human remains are graphically shown.

Some games exploit antisocial themes, he continued. There are games in which a player can re-enact the killings at Columbine High School and Virginia Tech. The goal of one game is to rape a mother and her daughter, of another game to rape Native-American women. There is an ethnic cleansing game in which players can choose to gun down African-Americans, Latinos, or Jews.

Fortunately, there is no hard evidence yet that such games lead to mass murders or grisly killings. Indeed, most correlation studies show at most a small effect.

The late Justice Antonio Scalia, writing for the majority in the 2011 Supreme Court decision, scoffed at the notion that violent video games cause real-world violence. Most of the research studies suffer from admitted flaws in methodology, he wrote. "They show at best some correlation between exposure to violent entertainment and minuscule real-world effects, such as children feeling more aggressive or making louder noises in the few minutes after playing a violent game than after playing a nonviolent game."

Professional societies have struggled with the issue and waged battles within their ranks without reaching a clear conclusion.

In 2007, the American Medical Association's (AMA) Council on Science and Public Health issued a report likening excessive use of video games to a gambling addiction, although it acknowledged there was insufficient research to be sure it was an addiction. The council urged the AMA to contact the American Psychiatric Association (APA) about including internet and video game addiction in the next edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a text used by psychiatrists around the world. But when the recommendations were put to a vote at the AMA's annual meeting, the delegates backed away and simply called for more research and a review of a video game ratings system that was set up when in the wake of Senate hearings in 1993 to help parents decide whether to let their children play a video game.

The APA was also split internally. The association's official position, expressed in a resolution adopted in August 2015, is that the link between violent video game exposure and aggressive behavior is "one of the most studied and best established." However, that aggressiveness included insults, threats, hitting, pushing, hair pulling, biting, and other forms of verbal and physical aggression. There was insufficient research on whether violent video games cause lethal violence. Studies have also shown that video game use is associated with a decrease in empathy and other socially desirable behavior.

A component of the association, the APA's division for media psychology and technology, was much more dismissive of any causal link. In a policy statement on June 22, 2017, it found "scant evidence" of any causal connection between playing violent video games and actually committing violent activities" and "little evidence" that playing such games "produces violent criminal behavior."

The warring positions on the issue were judged closer to agreement than most think in a recent analysis. A paper published in Perspectives on Psychological Science on June 12 used what it called "novel analyses" to determine whether conflicting results of meta-analyses were an artifact of reporting practices that masked an underlying consensus. The paper found that "all of the meta/analyses do in fact point to the conclusion that, in the vast majority of settings, violent video games do increase aggressive behavior but that these effects are almost always quite small."

That judgement was consistent with views expressed in separate articles by Benedict Carey and Kevin Draper in the New York TImes on August 5, just after the mass murders in El Paso and Dayton Ohio.

One respected organization, the National Center for Health Research, a non-profit non-partisan organization that critiques medical research, leans in the direction of worrying about triggering lethal assaults. It published an article on "Violent Video Games and Aggression" which found that: "Very few studies have looked at whether playing violent video games increases the chance of later delinquency, criminal behavior, or lethal violence. Such studies are difficult to conduct and require very large numbers of children. It makes sense that since playing violent video games tends to increase the level of aggressive behavior it would also result in more lethal violence or other criminal behaviors, but there is no clear evidence to support that assumption."

That paper and many others stress that video game exposure is only one of many risk factors for aggressive behavior and violence. Various scholars point to such factors as racism and ethnic hatred, certain psychiatric disorders, adverse social environments, and easy access to guns and other lethal weapons, which may be the most critical factor of all.

Focusing on violent video games as the cause of mass shootings almost certainly distracts legislators and government officials from the pressing need to deal with more fundamental causes. It is a moral imperative for federal and state legislators, government officials, and all others concerned with lethal violence to confront the underlying problems and not take symbolic refuge in blaming violent video games.

-
The views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not imply endorsement by The Dana Foundation.
Phil Boffey is former deputy editor of the New York Times Editorial Board and editorial page writer, primarily focusing on the impacts of science and health on society. He was also editor of Science Times and a member of two teams that won Pulitzer Prizes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Do Violent Video Games Lead to Violence?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Neuroethics Viewpoint Author: Philip M. Boffey Published: November 1, 2019 A long-standing debate over whether violence depicted in video games can trigger real-world violence has taken on renewed vigor in the wake of mass shootings in recent years.