Violent Gaming Speech

TxsAJ

Giving a speech on the idea that Violent Gaming does not Cause Violent Behaviors. Thus, I need 3 main topics. What do you guys think are most important? Thus far, I was thinking

1) Shootings are often falsely blamed on Violent Gaming influences
2) Videogames do not lead to desensitization.
3) Parental involvement is key to a child's behavior, with proper involvement violent gaming does not lead to malcontent behaviors.

Sentry

http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=75597

what a coincidence... this topic is currently alive and well in D&D. You can probably get some good stuff there.

Kate of Lokys

Be careful how you phrase your argument. Numerous studies have shown that playing violent games actually does tend to increase physiological arousal and violent thoughts, at least in the short-term (ie, immediately after playing the games). The link between that and actual violent actions, however, is indeed extremely tenuous.

If I were you, I'd structure my arguments something like this...

1. A Brief History of Blaming the Media - describe video games as just the latest in a series of scapegoats, starting way back in ancient Greece ("oh noes books are corrupting our youth!"), and progressing through music, films, even comic books - there was a famous case here in Canada about a century ago in which two teenaged boys claimed they hijacked a car and shot the driver because they read about doing that in a comic book.

2. A Dismissal of Spurious Claims Regarding Violence in Games - bring up those studies I mentioned above, then proceed to demonstrate their complete lack of applicability to real-life situations. Violent crime is down all across North America, despite the increasing violence levels in games. If Jackie was right, we should all be shooting each other in the streets by now, but we're not. Also, you can talk about the ridiculous stretching of the truth when it comes to reporting on video games, including rampant factual inaccuracies like "One of the Columbine killers named his shotgun 'Arlene,' after a character from the ultra-violent video game 'DOOM.'" (lolwut?).

3. A Rebuttal to the "Won't Somebody Think of the Children?!" Argument - answer the aforementioned argument by pointing out the existence of a rating system; games *aren't* just for children anymore, they're adult entertainment. Parents should be aware of what their children play, just as they should be aware of what they watch on TV.

TxsAJ

Kate of Lokys wrote: »

Be careful how you phrase your argument. Numerous studies have shown that playing violent games actually does tend to increase physiological arousal and violent thoughts, at least in the short-term (ie, immediately after playing the games). The link between that and actual violent actions, however, is indeed extremely tenuous.

If I were you, I'd structure my arguments something like this...

1. A Brief History of Blaming the Media - describe video games as just the latest in a series of scapegoats, starting way back in ancient Greece ("oh noes books are corrupting our youth!"), and progressing through music, films, even comic books - there was a famous case here in Canada about a century ago in which two teenaged boys claimed they hijacked a car and shot the driver because they read about doing that in a comic book.

2. A Dismissal of Spurious Claims Regarding Violence in Games - bring up those studies I mentioned above, then proceed to demonstrate their complete lack of applicability to real-life situations. Violent crime is down all across North America, despite the increasing violence levels in games. If Jackie was right, we should all be shooting each other in the streets by now, but we're not. Also, you can talk about the ridiculous stretching of the truth when it comes to reporting on video games, including rampant factual inaccuracies like "One of the Columbine killers named his shotgun 'Arlene,' after a character from the ultra-violent video game 'DOOM.'" (lolwut?).

3. A Rebuttal to the "Won't Somebody Think of the Children?!" Argument - answer the aforementioned argument by pointing out the existence of a rating system; games *aren't* just for children anymore, they're adult entertainment. Parents should be aware of what their children play, just as they should be aware of what they watch on TV.

I agree with you completely. Doing my research it's been nearly impossible to find data supporting my argument. Thankfully it's just a required public speaking course.

SanderJK

www.gamepolitics.com has at least in the past kept up some detailed trackrecords about research on the subject.

.Tripwire.

TxsAJ wrote: »

2) Videogames do not lead to desensitization

Just wanted to address this point. If you do talk about it, I've found it easier to concede that videogames do lead to desensitization, but it's desensitization to fake violence. The average human needs to be credited with the ability to distinguish reality from what is obviously entertainment on a screen. It's not 1900 anymore.

Hevach

Find a copy of Grand Theft Childhood for the science end of things. There was another psychologist quoted on GP recently who criticized other studies because he's found that controlling for exposure to family violence removed the weak correlation between video games and violent behavior.

It would be a lot of work really tracking down all the school shootings, but the big two, Columbine and Virginia Tech, are quite well documented, and in both cases the claims of a video game connection were pretty thoroughly rejected (in the case of Columbine, they were thrown out of court, as well).

Also, just read some documentation for the PS3, 360, and Wii, and emphasize the ESRB's detailed rating scheme, as well as the inclusion of parental control features on all three current-gen consoles.