UNIT 6: LO3: Gaming Essay

Do violent games account for violent people? That is a question often asked but has been left with two answers. Yes, they do as we are very impressionable, however the other side of the argument is that no, it is not solely down to the game, other factors need to be taken into account.

Professor Craig Anderson (an American professor from the department of Psychology) devised a study to find out whether or not gaming increases aggression in our bodies. He used two subjects for this experiment who both had to play the same game. Prior to gameplay they were both asked to select a level of noise that would be blasted to the other participant. After gameplay the winner was asked to do this same thing. They chose a much higher level of noise, after testing on the brain it was then clear to see that aggression and frustration and jumped from 4% to 9%. The issue with this study however is that only two people took part therefore having an impact on its reliability. It was also argued that yes gaming does account for higher stress levels etc. but what link does this have to violence and involving yourself in a violent nature? A similar study was done by Dr Doug Gentile. He accumulated 257 college students (a more reliable study as more subjects were used) and asked half of them to play a violent game, and the other half to take part in a non-violent game. After gameplay each player was exposed to a graphically violent video. During this their heart rate was being measured in order to test fear and stress levels. The players of the non-violent game had an 80% increase in stress levels whereas the players of the violent game had an increase of just 12% when watching the video. This concludes the fact that when playing a violent game we are not affected by graphic violence as we are already exposed to it. Somewhat considering it as the norm. It was then said that we are more likely to partake in violence after violent gameplay. There is a theory called ‘The Hypodermic Needle Theory’ which suggests all media forms are like a syringe. They inject information and ideologies into our mind and because we as humans are so impressionable we take it all in and use these in our daily lives. So why wouldn’t it be the same with violent games?

The other side of the argument states that yes games probably are a slight influence when it comes to violence however other factors such as personal life, mental health state etc. need to be taken into consideration. Dr Andrew Przybylski (from the University of Oxford) conducted a study using a non-violent game to see if aggression and stress levels were increased. He used ‘Tetris’, a common game. There is an alternative game similar to tetris named ‘Basket’. With tetris randomly selecting pieces for your next move basket 70% of the time chooses the worst possible peace. This is therefore bound to increase the stress levels. Each player (of both games) had to place their hand in ice cold water for 25 seconds before gameplay. After gameplay they were then asked how long the next player should have their hands in the water for. On average everybody who played standard tetris suggested the original 25 seconds. However everyone who played the alternative ‘basket’ suggested an additional seven seconds. Aftyer testing the brains of each player it was concluded that gaming does increase stress and frustration however has no direct link to violence. So why do people think violent games make violent people?

Moral panic is a term thrown around in the media, it is used to describe the exaggerated state of everyone after an event occurs due to media. ‘Copycat violence’ is the term used when people re-enact the violence they have seen in the media. For example Grand Theft Auto is one of the most popular games among a relatively young audience. Despite it being age rated 18+. In Thailand it was reported that a young teenager was charged with robbery and possession of a weapon. Due to the severity of the crime it was stated that he “could face the death penalty or life imprisonment if convicted”. He was arrested in August 2008 after the body of a taxi driver was found covered in blood and not alive. This resulted in a moral panic as everyone then assumed it was solely down to the game. Therefore in Thailand they made it illegal to reproduce, distribute and possession of this game to its material. Anybody who held this game could face arrest, no questions asked. However it will be argued that the mental health state of the boy may also be a reason as to why these crimes took place.

Another example of this slightly closer to home would be the game ‘Manhunt 2’. Attempted released in 2007 this game was the first game in a decade to be banned

in the UK. The game was described as ‘brutal’. The original ‘Manhunt’ game caused massive controversy and was blamed for the murder of 14 year old Stefan Pakeerah. The boy was stabbed and beaten to death, it was said that ‘Manhunt’ was a massive influence in this murder. However some suggest that robbery was the intention behind this attack therefore the game wouldn’t have been an influence. Rockstar North – the maker of Manhunt – stated that it is clear that the games are rated for 18+ and is for mature audiences only. Therefore the game itself shouldn’t be blamed. It is suggested that parents should be aware that an over 18 rated game would consist of these mature themes therefore should not allow their children under this age group to play this

game. There is an age rating for a reason.

Despite all of the events that have taken place to suggest gaming isn’t good for people it has actually been proven that games can benefit our minds. Gaming in general is considered rather anti-social and the reason behind certain violent actions, however studies show that playing games increases our reaction times.

When playing a game you have to be on the ball in order not to lose. Therefore you need to focus and act quickly. Psychologists suggest that we then bring this skill into the real world. Not only this, games have been said to improve hand eye coordination and overall vision. It was tested that sufferers of cataracts can improve their vision by playing shooting games. Due to the fast paced action our eyes are forced to move at a similar pace to the game. Therefore exercising our eyes and brain improving overall vision.

There are a couple of theories can help answer the question ‘do violent games make violent people’. The hypodermic needle theory suggests that all media platforms inject ideas into our minds, it argues that media is such a big influence on us therefore we take what we see/hear and incorporate that into our daily lives. The audience is passive and are directly influenced by the message producers are trying to portray. In the gaming world we see ‘copycat crime’ (as mentioned before in previous examples). Another example would be in 2008; it is reported that again due to a ‘Grand Theft Auto’ game 6 teens went out on what was described as an ‘all night crime spree’. Raiding the streets of Ney York armed with crowbars and baseball bats; the teens went mugging shops as well as smashing vehicles and buildings with the said weapons. NYPD stated that is was obvious they were emulating the characters of the game. This example as when as many others is said to prove the hypodermic needle theory. As without playing the game they perhaps wouldn’t have gone out and committed such crimes. The ‘Uses & Gratifications Theory’: this is the antithesis to the Hypodermic Needle Theory. The uses and gratification theory focuses more on what we as an audience do with the media we are exposed to, rather than what it does to us. Blumer & Katz studied this and stated that we all have different reasons to consume different types of media. We seek out media to fulfil a certain need therefore we are choosing what media we expose ourselves to. This suggests that more violent people would seek out the violent media and indulge in that to fulfil a need. However it is argued that this completely rules out any other psychological reason as to why we have consumed the media that we have. It focuses solely on the fact that if we enjoy something, we’ll do it. Incorporated into the gaming world if someone likes violent games, they’ll play them, if they don’t, they won’t.

So, do violent games account for violent individuals? No I don’t believe they do. However I feel they are an influence and it depends on the individual. Do they have a violent background? Are they exposed to violence on a daily basis? If this is the

case then they are obviously more likely to bring this into their lives than someone who doesn’t see violence to that extent. It is not fair to blame the games solely however I do feel violent games need to be careful in terms of the extent of violence. As we are very impressionable. Parents also need to be careful when their young children are wanting to play an 18+ game as the violence involved in them isn’t necessarily suitable for the eyes of a child so young.