200-Plus Scholars Speak Out Against American Psychological Association's Violence/Gaming Study

from the dissension-in-the-ranks dept

We've been covering stories here about studies and claims linking real-world violence and video games for about as long as I've been a reader/writer. An even cursory review of our own record can only lead a reader to conclude that such links are, at best, nebulous, and are perhaps less likely than likely to exist. When coupled with some recent and fascinating revelations about just how easy it is to get a study to say exactly what you want it to say, and to get that study published and reported in supposedly reputable arenas, we're left with the troubling impression that such studies linking violence and gaming are more back-patting endeavors than they are true intellectual efforts.

With that in mind, you may have heard of a recent American Psychology Association report that strongly affirms the link between gaming and aggression, which is in this context meant to be synonymous with violence. This was the product of the APA's task force for studying the existence of such a link. It might represent a scientific victory for those who have long claimed that such a link exists, were it not for the predictably massive problems associated with the task force, the studies it took into account, and the methodology for the conclusions it drew. These problems are evidenced by the over two hundred academics who have submitted an open letter to the APA sharing their collective concerns over how this all went down.

One of those signees, Stetson University psychology professor Chris Ferguson, spoke with Game Informer, detailing the problems with the task force. Among those problems are details such as the task force being mostly comprised of scholars who have demonstrated in the past a willingness to link violence and aggression, the measures they used for aggression, and task force members having previously publicly supported legislation aimed at keeping games away from children.

Ferguson tells me that of the seven task force members, four had at anti-media leanings, with another that uses aggression measures that have been called into question by some factions of the psychology community. "To some degree, they're really commenting on their own product," he says. "I think people interpret these things as neutral. You have to remember that they are commenting on their own product. These are people looking at their own research and declaring it beyond further debate. All of us would love to do that, but we don't really get that chance, nor should we."

He also notes that all seven members of the task force were over the age of 50, citing a correlation between views on media and age. "I point that out because there is solid evidence that age is a correlate for attitudes about video games, even amongst scholars," Ferguson explains. "Age and negative attitudes toward youth predict anti-game attitudes."
For those of us that worship at the altar of science, this serves as a welcome reminder that science is only as good as those conducting it. Bias is omnipresent and omnidirectional and it is something we must always be vigilant against. For instance, cited in the open letter is the fact that the APA previously stated as a matter of policy that violent games should see a reduced exposure to children and that the APA had already made recommendations to the gaming industry about exactly how violence should be portrayed in games, specifically suggesting that real-world consequences should be visited upon violent actors in digital media.

In other words, as the letter states, the APA task force essentially reached the conclusion that the APA's previous work and recommendations were on point, using a hand-picked team comprised of researchers perfectly biased to reach just that conclusion. Adding to the letter's concern over some of the sloppy methodology for drawing the task force's conclusions is the kind of simple real-world analysis of data that has me wondering just how any of this made it past the APA's review to begin with.
Ferguson and his colleagues also point to data evidencing a decrease in youth violence, which contradicts assertions that media (video games and non-interactive forms) are a public health concern. Ferguson cites colleagues at Oxford, Villanova, Western Michigan University, and more that have presented recent findings in peer-reviewed journals. These studies indicate that there is no connection between violent video games and aggression. A study by Patrick Markey at Villanova indicates that "participants who were not angry tended to be relatively unaffected by exposure to violent video games."
In other words, at the exact moment that the APA suggests violence and video games are linked, and at the exact moment that violent video games have exploded in popularity and dissemination, violence amongst youth (and the general public) is trending downward. One would think that if a link existed, we might see some evidence of it outside of ham-fisted studies utilizing questionable methodologies.

But, alas, this is the way of things. And you should expect this to continue, probably right up to the point when most of the research of this issue is being done by a generation in which gaming was prevalent in their youth. Then the studies will likely show something more interesting than a self-created echo-chamber of moral outrage.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: academics, scholars, studies, video games, violence
Companies: american psychological association


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 6:03am

    In other words, at the exact moment that the APA suggests violence and video games are linked, and at the exact moment that violent video games have exploded in popularity and dissemination, violence amongst youth (and the general public) is trending downward.

    According to their twisted logic this automatically means games are making the world less violent*. MOAR BULLETS AND BLOOD PLEASE!

    *I personally believe it, I've restrained myself from beating the crap out of some idiots while gladly impaling virtual thugs in Madworld. offline, no swearing morons spoiling my gory fun.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:02am

      Re:

      I can't remember the name of it, but wasn't it determined the cause of the drop in violence was directly correlated to roe vs wade? That decision allowed women to terminate unwanted pregnancies, which resulted in a LOT LESS unwanted kids, many of whom would have grown up in less than ideal circumstances. Violence is directly attributable to the ability of the parent to love and care for a child. You grow up in a shitty environment without affection, you become a bastard. Turns out, if you let women decide if/when they are capable of raising a child you wind up with good people. Has nothing to do with video games, just proper parenting.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Geno0wl (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 6:55am

    Not all Games

    Lest also not forget there are more than one type of video game.
    In the Article they say "85% of games played by youth contain violence"...how do they get that number, what metric did they use?
    There is violence in gaming, but are you really going to compare the violence in Super Smash Brothers to Halo to Hotline Miami to Resident Evil?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:07am

      Re: Not all Games

      I'm reminded of the old adage that 85% of all statistics are pulled out of thin air. The percentage certainly matches.

      On the other hand, violence seems to be *the default* in modern games. Mario stomps on his enemies and sets them on fire. Kirby gobbles them up. Minecraft has suicide bomber critters and sniper skeletons. It's hard to think of a popular game with no element of violence.

      Oh! Got one: SimCity.

      P.S. Please note that I'm definitely *not* against presence of violence in games. I like to play violent games myself -- and I definitely not think of myself more violent because of it.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Geno0wl (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:16am

        Re: Re: Not all Games

        Violence is the "default" part of most games because...well...violence is exciting!
        Why do we play games? To be excited and escape our doll-drum lives. So of course most games contain some grade of violence.
        But they key there is the "grade" of violence. There is a whole host of difference between stomping a goomba, shooting a gun, and chainsawing somebody in half.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:51am

          Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

          Violence is spread across the gaming industry because it is very hard to create meaningful and engaging conflict without violence. Without some conflict there isn't much to resolve over the course of a game and it tends to play out more as a story than a game where your actions will affect the resolution.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Mason Wheeler (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 8:09am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

            it is very hard to create meaningful and engaging conflict without violence

            ...unless you're Alexey Pajitnov, of course. :P

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            nasch (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 10:53am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

            Violence is spread across the gaming industry because it is very hard to create meaningful and engaging conflict without violence. Without some conflict there isn't much to resolve over the course of a game

            There are interesting puzzle games that do not contain any violence. Any sports game modeled after a non-violent sport will be non-violent. There are probably other areas I haven't thought of too.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Mason Wheeler (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 12:40pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

              Any sports game modeled after a non-violent sport will be non-violent.

              While I agree with you, this particular example is not helping your case.

              Don't believe me? Quick, name a popular sports videogame. First one that comes to mind is about football, an inherently violent sport. So is the second, and the third...

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                nasch (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 3:47pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

                I was thinking of Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort (which does include a couple of violent sports), and soccer and basketball games. The fact that the first games you thought of are football does not invalidate my point.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:25am

        Re: Re: Not all Games

        I could get Godzilla to destroy my cities in SimCity, so there was violence there too.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:25am

        Re: Re: Not all Games

        I could get Godzilla to destroy my cities in SimCity, so there was violence there too.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 1:10pm

        Re: Re: Not all Games

        Ironically EA's latest generation of SimCity did increase the desire to do violence (to EA executives anyway.)

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        MrTroy (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:44pm

        Re: Re: Not all Games

        It's hard to think of a popular game with no element of violence.

        Candy crush? I realise the title is a bit misleading.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          That One Guy (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 10:22pm

          Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

          What are you talking about, that game is downright brutal to the bank accounts of it's players.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            MrTroy (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 10:37pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

            I still remember the day that I saw that a free game was #1 top grossing in the Google store. I never will understand why people will pay so much money on a single player game... I mean $5 will either get you one or more full games that you can play through to completion, or a single-use tool that may or may not let you pass the current level... and by the way, the next level is even harder.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              That One Guy (profile), 25 Aug 2015 @ 5:43am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

              Sunk Costs plus very finely tuned 'gameplay' designed to make players feel 'rewarded', and therefor invested, so that they're more likely to pay.

              Sure, it's a few bucks for the next bit of 'help', but you've spend so much time in the game, and it's only a few bucks, you spend that much on a coffee and/or snack... Standard(if more than a little sleazy) sales trick, keep the individual costs low, and people will only pay attention to the smaller amounts, rather than realize just how huge the overall amount has risen to.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              John Fenderson (profile), 25 Aug 2015 @ 8:28am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

              "never will understand why people will pay so much money on a single player game"

              Why do you limit this comment to single player games? Multiplayer games don't get off the hook here either.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Aug 2015 @ 10:05am

                HATS! HATS! HATS! HATS! HATS!

                How very true.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                MrTroy (profile), 25 Aug 2015 @ 5:29pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

                "never will understand why people will pay so much money on a single player game"

                Why do you limit this comment to single player games? Multiplayer games don't get off the hook here either.


                I didn't mean to let multiplayer games off the hook, just that I understand why people pay for multiplayer games - the "prestige" of being seen at the top of the leaderboards.

                Not that I could ever see myself spending *that much* on any game; I'm happy to drop $5 or $10 on a game that I enjoy, but sending the rest to my mortgage means I got to pay it off in 10 years instead of 35.

                @That One Guy: And maybe that's the rub. I wonder how many of these games would rake in so much money if kids were taught how to budget, and why living on credit is so bad, in school? (Never mind the rest of the economy...)

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  John Fenderson (profile), 26 Aug 2015 @ 6:44am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not all Games

                  "just that I understand why people pay for multiplayer games - the "prestige" of being seen at the top of the leaderboards."

                  Ahh, I understand. What you said. I'll never understand why peple pay for the "prestige" of leaderboards. Personally, I hate leaderboards and consider them a "feature" that makes the game less desirable (unless you can opt out of them).

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Mason Wheeler (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:19am

    *sigh*

    I thought we'd worked this out years ago. For the benefit of anyone who's still somehow missed it, the correlation runs in the other direction. The reason you see so many examples of violent video games together with violent kids is because the games attract violent kids. They don't create them.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Lord_Unseen (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 8:59am

      Re:

      There's even less correlation than that. Take the media's favorite punching back for example, Grand Theft Auto. GTA V sold 15 million copies within the first ten days after its release. There's a whole lot more been sold since then. What does that mean? It means, if you grab a random teenager/20-something, the odds are good that they have a copy of GTA V. Add in all the other violent games (older versions of GTA, the Saints Row series, Manhunt, Etc.) and it would be far more surprising if a violent kid didn't have at least one of them.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      tqk (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 9:51am

      Re:

      The reason you see so many examples of violent video games together with violent kids is because the games attract violent kids.

      Even that's overstating it. They attract lots of people, not just violent ones. Everyone enjoys pretend violence. Everyone enjoys seeing bad guys get their comeuppance. We all enjoy morality plays. "Good guys always win. Bad guys always lose."

      I think this is all trumped up BS from weasel politicians trying to exploit a made up issue. The Columbine kids played violent video games. Blame the video games! I suspect damned near every kid in that school played video games, but only those two malcontents shot up the school.

      I love WWII and Vietnam War histories, Gladiator, and Chronicles of Riddick, yet I'm about the last person you'll catch anywhere near an angry confrontation.

      There is no correlation between the two. It's made up by exploiters relying on the ignorance and credulity of their audience.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Mason Wheeler (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 12:37pm

        Re: Re:

        Even that's overstating it. They attract lots of people, not just violent ones. Everyone enjoys pretend violence.

        You appear to be reading an "only" into my statement that, if you look closely, I never actually wrote. Violent video games attract violent kids (which is why you see a strong correlation there)... and they attract plenty of other people as well, and there's never been any evidence that they somehow magically turn them into murderers.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:24am

    Odd how they come up with that. Let me tell you my experiences with gaming. I love the very types of games this sort of report claims leads to violence. The war game, a sniper game, etc. Sometimes I sort of feel edgy. I'll go spend to some time in this or that game, killing the bad guys (what ever they are in that particular game) and when I get done, my aggressions are gone. I don't feel like doing this in real life, I don't feel I've got to get in my neighbor's face over some matter, I don't need to go rob a bank, I don't need to create road rage on the highway. Instead I'm all laid back.

    Games have a reset, you can start over. Real life doesn't. If you can't tell the difference between a game and RL your problems are more than a game and the game isn't the root cause.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    avideogameplayer, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:25am

    Hasn't this topic been beaten to death already?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:29am

    As a time traveler from 1806 I'm much more worried about this thing called "moving pictures." Books can describe a violent act but a movie actually shows you what it is. So far I'm only up to halfway through 1935 in my research, but I'm dismayed to find that there are instances of both people punching one another and even guns being used. At least they display everything in black and white. Imagine if you could see color! They might even show red blood! Horrific!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Tom Czerniawski, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:44am

    The APA says video games cause violence? I guess their shrinks were playing violent games before they helped the CIA torture its detainees...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:51am

      Response to: Tom Czerniawski on Aug 24th, 2015 @ 7:44am

      Yeah their involvement in the torture program destroyed their reputation to me way before this idiotic study. Just another nail in the coffin.

      Only way APA will redeem itself is if some country gets the remote chance to try the officials who set up the torture program and the APA decides to testify against them.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:49am

    Well Said!!!

    For those of us that worship at the altar of science, this serves as a welcome reminder that science is only as good as those conducting it. Bias is omnipresent and omnidirectional and it is something we must always be vigilant against.

    Science has become the new religion for a lot of people. There is an extremely dogmatic approach to a lot of things in the scientific community that is not of a scientific origin.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      tqk (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 10:11am

      Re: Well Said!!!

      Science has become the new religion for a lot of people. There is an extremely dogmatic approach to a lot of things in the scientific community that is not of a scientific origin.

      There are foolish, credulous, ignorant, and outright biased people in all walks of life including science, agreed. Why should this be a surprise to anyone? Remember Eugenics and phrenology (Gall's craneology)? The same people who designed the bomb in the Manhattan Project wanted it to be used against the Nazis and were horrified to hear it would be continued to attack Japan after the Nazis were defeated. That seems pretty odd whatever you think of the bomb.

      Bad science, like bad speech, can be corrected with good science or good speech respectively. We don't have to respect bad science just because it calls itself science.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 1:54pm

      "Science" is not a new religion

      Science is an old religion.

      Or to word it better, ideologies that are allegedly backed by scientific understanding of the world (rather than revealed in sacred scripture) is not a new fad. It's been around.

      Social Darwinism for example took the notion of natural selection and suggested that we were doing the species a favor by subjecting our folks to harsher conditions in the workplace. While there are plenty of problems with the notion, the biggest one is the is/ought fallacy. Just because harsher conditions will compel species do (over many, many generations) adapt, migrate or die out doesn't mean that human beings should make things harder for each other. In fact, cooperation, technology and specializations are tools we use to adapt.

      That said, science doesn't say what we should do. It's not an ideology in and of itself. Science predicts chains of consequences, and if we decide we want a specific outcome, we can look to science to draw a map there.

      /nitpicky rant

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 25 Aug 2015 @ 5:34am

        Re: "Science" is not a new religion

        Science is no religion at all.

        Religion is the continued belief in a model of the world in opposition to observed facts. Science is the evaluation of observed facts to construct a model of the world.

        Just because some people who call themselves scientists break the scientific rules and behave more along the lines of religious beliefs does not make science itself a religion. Science cannot work if conducted as a religious world view, it would be selfcontradictory.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Mason Wheeler (profile), 25 Aug 2015 @ 6:46am

          Re: Re: "Science" is not a new religion

          That is a very strange definition of religion, and one I don't think any religious person (or any dictionary, for that matter) would agree with.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            nasch (profile), 25 Aug 2015 @ 7:35am

            Re: Re: Re: "Science" is not a new religion

            That is a very strange definition of religion, and one I don't think any religious person (or any dictionary, for that matter) would agree with.

            That may be his observation of religion, but it certainly isn't what the word means.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Uriel-238 (profile), 25 Aug 2015 @ 10:02am

          Opiate of the masses?

          If you're going to be critical about how we define science (even scarequote science) then you're going to have to be more consistent about how you define other things such as religion.

          Some religions may coincidentally fit into your definition, but that's not the definition that all religions fit.

          But while the intelligentsia may regard science with the balance of respect and skepticism that it deserves (or attempt at least to determine that balance) there are a lot of folk who take science as gospel, even pseudoscience or unscientific opinions by people who allegedly practice science sometimes.

          So ideologies are often driven by science, or notions that are attributed to science. And in this way, they compare to religions.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:56am

    Even if there were actually a connection between video games and aggression, it would be insignificant compared the connection between aggressive sports and aggression. In my high school, it was the jocks who were starting fights and bullying people all the time. I went home and played (sometimes violent) video games to relax and escape from high school life, not to make me more aggressive.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 9:02am

      Re:

      Yea, I think its better said that already violent people PREFER violent games, in the same way a violent person would sign up for sports before a nonviolent person.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Zonker, 24 Aug 2015 @ 4:23pm

      Re:

      Yeah, it's good that sports like hockey don't promote violence otherwise we'd have to endure regular fights breaking out on the ice almost every game. We'd even have to institute something like a penalty box to handle the situation. How barbaric!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        tqk (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 4:38pm

        Re: Re:

        Anyone suggesting hockey isn't a violent game has never watched a hockey game. Perhaps they also missed the riot when Vancouver lost too. There's a joke about a person who went to a boxing match only to watch a hockey game break out for a reason.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 8:13am

    For all of the controls, checks and, balances that the Scientific Method tries to instill to make sure that experiments and research are reliable and unbiased it depends on people being scrupulous about their work and often to keep doing the work to make sure that the results aren't a fluke.

    The biggest problem with science has always been that people do it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Sheogorath (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 8:17am

    Among those problems are details such as the task force being mostly comprised of scholars who have demonstrated in the past a willingness to link violence and aggression, the measures they used for aggression, and task force members having previously publicly supported legislation aimed at keeping games away from children.
    That's just nuts, they don't even have correlation on their side.
    In other words, at the exact moment that the APA suggests violence and video games are linked, and at the exact moment that violent video games have exploded in popularity and dissemination, violence amongst youth (and the general public) is trending downward.
    Because violent games are cathartic, allowing one to relieve one's feelings in a safe environment. At least, that's how I've always used them.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Bruce E (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 8:26am

    Science is the art of...

    Science is the art of not fooling oneself. The rest is all details.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 8:42am

      Re: Science is the art of...

      Very true. It's important that a scientist is willing to build the most unbiased experiment possible, and to then let the process and the results speak for itself, instead of making it the ultimate tool in confirmation bias.

      Based on that I would say that science is 90% ethical, and the other half, mental.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 9:10am

        Re: Re: Science is the art of...

        ...process and the results speak for itself...

        Key point here: for anything to be accepted in the scientific community both process and results must be replicatable. In other words: any scientist in the world must be able to perform the same process and get the same result every time for it to be accepted. If the same process produces different results the objective can still be considered scientific theory but will never be considered scientific fact.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 8:43am

    Sounds to me like the seven are out to sell some books.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 9:11am

    Old Problem, Not Just Games

    Remember how the violence depicted in the old radio show Zorro has caused people to mame and kill others for decades. Remember how the violence described in books has caused an unimaginable amount of malicious harm and deaths. Lets not even get started on devastation to humanity that has been caused by music, tv and movies.

    As a responsible society we should only ever mention puppies, rainbows and unicorns.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 25 Aug 2015 @ 5:39am

      Re: Old Problem, Not Just Games

      As a responsible society we should only ever mention puppies, rainbows and unicorns.


      Ah, I know that level of Diablo 3. Never slaughtered that many fluffy things in my life before.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 10:54am

    ...the APA had already made recommendations to the gaming industry about exactly how violence should be portrayed in games, specifically suggesting that real-world consequences should be visited upon violent actors in digital media.
    This from the APA, the organization that helped the government torture people for 15 years... and whose real-world consequence for doing so was to have to promise to try a little harder not to do it in the future?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 11:25am

    I'm curious to see the brain activity associated with a sports fan. Then I would like to see the comparison when the team is winning vs losing. I'm sure you'd see similar results.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 12:45pm

      Re:

      It's long been noted by New Zealand emergency doctors that when the national rugby team loses the beaten wives start coming in.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 11:35am

    Statistics and their lies

    Any study and/or survey that does NOT publish their full methodology and ALL data collected along with complete CV's of the researchers and authors should be treated with the full value it deserves, poorly written fiction that cannot even attract file sharers who cannot read.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Uriel-238 (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 1:44pm

    Is there a study yet...

    For how media that endorses torture sways officials to implement pro-torture policies?

    Or a review of how the APA was slow to condemn their members who worked as consultants on the US Extrajudicial Detention and Interrogation Program?

    Not that the psychology sector, the study of psychology or common regard of crazy people need any more kicks in the teeth, but if they wanted to talk about how media is dangerous for a society, the thing with torture has shown to have more of a negative influence than video games on kids or (for that matter) lolicon art on pedophiles.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 24 Aug 2015 @ 3:06pm

    Criminal Acts In Games

    Would a game depicting acts of rape and other sexual offences be considered less morally worthy than one depicting acts of murder and other such (non-sexual) violence?

    Is it because the offences in one case are morally worse than in the other case?

    If not, why not?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:24pm

      Criminal acts in games...

      ...usually are against designated bad guys. Most games reward attacks, sexual or otherwise) against enemy mooks and then either disregard, ignore or penalize attacks against innocent civilians.

      I suppose there are exceptions like Custer's Revenge, but for the most part they also are of the same quality.

      Interestingly, in most games enemy mooks are male. And most female mooks are zombies.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 3:49pm

    Tim, I hope you realize what you've just done. You've defended games/gamers against undeserved and unsolicited attacks from people that are for the most part full of shit. I'm pretty sure this makes you a gamergater. Prepare your slander receptacles for overload, because the usual pattern of the anti-GG folks involves massive dogpiling and lies across as much of social media as they can reach.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Uriel-238 (profile), 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:18pm

      You're not a true gamergater...

      ...until you make a claim such as Women in game development are going to turn all games, including COD into Gone Home.

      Not that we couldn't use more games like Gone Home, and fewer COD titles.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 24 Aug 2015 @ 4:37pm

    The 200 wrote a letter in 2013 regarding an APA policy statement from 2005

    Timothy, Timothy, Timothy. Check your fucken facts. Stop just writing what you think other people wrote, read it first, read it again so you understand it.
    Pause for a moment and think that if you were a real journalist you'd have to be finding these stories for yourself, or at least fact checking the ones you find -y'know, to see if they're correct.
    Then you can write your stuff.

    Idiot.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    craig, 24 Aug 2015 @ 7:45pm

    200-Plus Scholars Speak Out Against American Psychological Association's Violence/Gaming Study

    No wonder they got this wrong too. They are still in shock because they helped TORTURE PEOPLE!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 25 Aug 2015 @ 12:15pm

    There are important facts missing from this story

    They are the dates that give it context.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 26 Aug 2015 @ 5:59am

    What about ending violence in Hollywood movies?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.