Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior • Hacker News Board

Re: Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

#371

Post by svara » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 8:47 PM UTC

wussboy wrote: post #259

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a story recently about a real-life event that started out a lot like the scenario in Lord of the Flies , i. e. a group of children stranded on an island. It turns out their society started looking after their weakest and made decisions based on consent. Meanwhile, the book just confirms everyone's beliefs not only about children but mankind itself, namely of a Hobbesian/Darwinian/Randian rule-of-the-stronge…

I think Hobbes and Darwin would both object to being grouped in with Rand. Hobbes would say the world is violent therefore we should take measures to protect ourselves (with a neutral external force or Leviathan). Darwin would say that ruthless competition has driven genetic change, but would never say that this ruthless competition was intrinsically good or should be encouraged. Rand, on the other hand, showed casua…

"Competition" in the Darwinian context is often understood in a too narrow way anyway.

Organisms can become more fit by carving out a specialized niche for themselves where they don't have to compete. Or by becoming more cooperative as a species.

The association with ruthless domination of others can be misleading.

Re: Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

#372

Post by mkr-hn » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 8:48 PM UTC

adamredwoods wrote: post #350

seangrogg wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To take this even further, with the increasing popularity of games, if violent video games were linked to violence itself we should theoretically see pronounced numbers of streaming personalities (at least those involved in competitive games, which trend towards violence as a win condition) engaged in violent acts. Gaming communities such as Twitch, competitive game conferences such as Evo, events such as Riot's worl…

There is evidence of gaming personalities committing suicide. There is evidence of gamers doxxing, and even worse, swatting.

There is evidence of astronauts who've walked on the moon punching people. Does walking on the moon make people violent?

Re: Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

#373

Post by mamon » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 8:51 PM UTC

adamredwoods wrote: post #350

seangrogg wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To take this even further, with the increasing popularity of games, if violent video games were linked to violence itself we should theoretically see pronounced numbers of streaming personalities (at least those involved in competitive games, which trend towards violence as a win condition) engaged in violent acts. Gaming communities such as Twitch, competitive game conferences such as Evo, events such as Riot's worl…

There is evidence of gaming personalities committing suicide. There is evidence of gamers doxxing, and even worse, swatting.

But is gaming at fault here? Or maybe "gaming personalities" are simply people for which real life sucks, so they try to alleviate their pain by gaming a lot? Maybe gaming was the thing that delayed their suicide by months/years?

Re: Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

#374

Post by giantg2 » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 8:58 PM UTC

Thorrez wrote: post #364

giantg2 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No, bullying cannot be solved by the victims, otherwise it would not be a problem in the first place." How do you think that works if zero tolerance policies punish the aggressor and victim equally, essentially preventing the victim from defending themself? And by your reasoning, then bullying shouldn't exist today because the school policies should prevent it, yet it's more rampant than ever. I was bullied once. Ev…

>How do you think that works if zero tolerance policies punish the aggressor and victim equally, essentially preventing the victim from defending themself? Sorry, I don't really understand your point. eeZah7Ux seemed to me to be saying that the victim should run and report it to the school. I don't see how a zero tolerance policy would punish the victim in that case.

The main problem is that it's your word against their's. So if nothing happened that would be caught on video, say just verbal bullying or it was in a blind spot, then nothing will be done because there's no proof.

Now the scenarios I've been talking about are where the bullying has become physical. Most schools that have a zero tolerance policy will punish both people who were involved in the fight/pushing/etc regardless of who started it, again it's mostly due to lack of proof, but the policy expressly forbids any violence. So even if someone punches you first and continues to attack you, the policy means that if you punch back you are in violation too and will be punished. So if you are in a corner and can't run away, the policy says you just have to take it without fighting back or get punished for defending yourself.

So the same will be for your scenario of running and telling the school. For one, you have to escape that bully and hope you're faster than them (before you get trapped/ tackled and it turns physical) or you both end up being punished. Then you have to have some sort of evidence that shows you were innocent and the bully person was unprovoked. Incidents without proof generally result in no action from the school due to that lack of proof, so the bully will continue tormenting you.

Re: Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

#375

Post by nitwit005 » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:00 PM UTC

afandian wrote: post #117

I'm one of those people who is entirely bemused by violent videogames and films (I'm sure there are plenty of people who would be bemused by my pastimes too). I'm not trying to argue to stop anyone doing it, but I would really like to understand it better. Many video games are essentially simulators of things that we're prevented from doing in reality, because of the laws of nature or society. Whether that's dropping…

It's not true that violent games are trying for realism with the violence. There are a couple of series that went down that path, such as Soldier of Fortune, but most of them don't feature anything beyond blood and "rag doll" physics.

The stories of most of these games are close to a hero fantasy. Having the people you shot scream in terrible agony as their organs fell out wouldn't exactly work with that theme.

Re: Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

#376

Post by ABCLAW » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:05 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #170

mywittyname wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, part of this is probably also some degree of us intuitively knowing the answer. If you have a friend group of 10 people, 4 of which regularly work out. You will probably notice that those 4 friends have less body fat and are more toned than the other 6. At that point, if a study came out saying that working out had no impact on body physique, you'd reflexively question the results. That might sound ridiculous…

There's some truth here, but it's important not to use anecdotes too much to guide intuition because the sample size is often too small and too biased. For example, I have a group of 10 friends. All 10 of them (including myself) got covid, and we all agree it is no worse than the flu. I mean, yeah, we couldn't smell or taste for a few days, but we all recovered within a week. Therefore... I should reflexively questio…

I think there's a fetish for this "don't trust your anecdotes" reply, when the reality is more nuanced.

People will trust their anecdotes because in general they are right to. They don't need a double blind study to figure out that placing their hand on a heated element is a bad idea.

The question is whether the Bayesian confidence an individual places on their anecdotal knowledge is appropriate or not. In this case, plenty of people have a ton of personal experience with the subject matter, a ton of friends and colleagues with experience, and little to no evidence to suggest the contra factual is true.

Does that mean they're certainly right? No. But it certainly lowers the bar to evaluating yet further evidence of the position already held; why waste the time? If a study was released that was solid evidence that games did cause a significant uptick in violence, then examination would be warranted.

I know a bunch of people are going to take a contrarian position, but we operate in the real world with the same time complexity restrictions as the machines we work on. You don't need a double blind study to determine how to position your head while tying your shoelaces in the morning.

Re: Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

#377

Post by giantg2 » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:11 PM UTC

rgblambda wrote: post #370

giantg2 wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is quite interesting. I'm failing to see how you could be missing my point. >>Still, are the interior doors more durable than the external doors? "Yes." I doubt this. They might be equal, but I doubt the exterior door would be weaker than the interior one. It's simply not logical. "Locate the entrance to the attic. Then the room I am in, despite not knowing the layout to the house. Then smash a hole in the ceiling…

>> I doubt the exterior door would be weaker than the interior one. It's simply not logical. Maybe you're referring to the locks in which case you have a point. But exterior doors in my area tend to have big glass panels on them. >> If you can smash it down, why not up? Are they bringing a ladder as well? >>Who said you wouldn't need to notice? Because then you would know exactly where they are and you could escape m…

"Maybe you're referring to the locks in which case you have a point. But exterior doors in my area tend to have big glass panels on them."

Locks, sure. But those don't mean much if you have doors and door frames made of wood and they aren't either extremely heavy or reinforced.

"Are they bringing a ladder as well?"

A ladder or chair from your own home should work fine. You might be suprised at how often burglars use tools they find in the target house.

"Because then you would know exactly where they are and you could escape more easily."

Not if they're making entry to the attic right outside the room you're in so they can work on that and watch the door.

You're really derailing the entire conversation with trivial what-ifs that aren't even related to the original point. None have offered any evidence refuting the point that if someone wants beat you to death, the police will be too slow to save you.

Re: Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

#378

Post by seangrogg » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:12 PM UTC

adamredwoods wrote: post #350

seangrogg wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To take this even further, with the increasing popularity of games, if violent video games were linked to violence itself we should theoretically see pronounced numbers of streaming personalities (at least those involved in competitive games, which trend towards violence as a win condition) engaged in violent acts. Gaming communities such as Twitch, competitive game conferences such as Evo, events such as Riot's worl…

There is evidence of gaming personalities committing suicide. There is evidence of gamers doxxing, and even worse, swatting.

There's evidence of academic stress leading to suicide. Does that infer a causal link between academia and violence?

Re: Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

#379

Post by lordCarbonFiber » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:13 PM UTC

yazboo wrote: post #80

I have noticed that many social science articles posted on Hacker News bring out critical comments about study design, doubts about the strength of the study's conclusions, that kind of thing. This submission, on the other hand, is a link to some kind of gaming news website, which links to an abstract for an article in a Cyberpsychology (?) journal which costs $60 to access, and there is widespread and uncritical agr…

Link to the paper for anyone that wants to look more critically at the study. https://sci-hub.do/https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.10...

Re: Ten year study: No link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

#380

Post by simias » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:14 PM UTC

Blikkentrekker wrote: post #336

simias wrote: post #251

I doubt there's any kind of direct link between video games and people becoming violent, but I do think it reflects poorly on our societies that we seem to be fine with young kids shoot each other in the face with realistic weapons in CS:GO and Call of Duty but if you show one women's nipple it's unacceptable. While it probably doesn't directly incite violence in well balanced individuals, it does in my opinion trivi…

> I doubt there's any kind of direct link between video games and people becoming violent, but I do think it reflects poorly on our societies that we seem to be fine with young kids shoot each other in the face with realistic weapons in CS:GO and Call of Duty but if you show one women's nipple it's unacceptable. So the problem is that the weapons be realistic? I've always noted that rather extreme violence has always…

Yeah, I do find the realism troubling at times. I think it's a bit obscene when kids teabag each other in some middle-east inspired CoD map when a few thousand kilometers from where they're playing people wearing similar garbs kill each other in similar places with similar weapons.

It's something fairly unique to videogames too. Imagine the outrage if some American propaganda war movie à la Black Hawk Down showed American military personnel engaging in 360 noscope kill streaks, trying to rack up headshot combos.