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

#501

Post by paulryanrogers » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 2:24 AM UTC

buran77 wrote: post #457

rcoveson wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not comparing apples to apples. E-sports leagues will penalize you if you audaciously disrespect your opponents. Also, the majority of the most popular e-sports don't include extreme game play distractions like kill cams. In League of Legends, CS:GO, Overwatch, and Dota, a kill does not disrupt the killer's animations (it would be infuriating if it did). Comparing the tea-bagging that occurs in online Halo pla…

You were very selective with your reading of my comment, discarding any bit that inconvenienced your uncharitable and wrong interpretation. Not sure if this is bad faith or a reading comprehension issue. Throughout my comment I made a few things explicitly clear. That I don't blame the gamers, rather the game devs for including the option and the leagues for choosing to play games that have this. And that many games…

Personally I don't mind if games want to include humiliation as a mechanic. My larger point is that people will be jerks no matter the arena.

Still, it is possible that games with such mechanics--or graphic violence generally--may amplify bad behavior elsewhere. My guess though is this can never be conclusively proven true or false as there are just so many confounding factors.

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

#502

Post by Macha » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 2:26 AM UTC

rgblambda wrote: post #313

giantg2 wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, what's your interior house walls made of? I'm not saying don't barricade yourself. Just that if you have an attacker in your house who is intent of killing you ("beating you to death") and an average police response of 5 minutes or more, they can get into any room in a typical house. You can barricade the door, but anyone who knows about construction knows drywall is easy enough to get through. Most interior do…

Sometimes I forget how America centric HN is. The internal walls in my house are made of stone. But it's an old house. Most in my country are made of brick.

I live in a brick terraced house in a country where brick houses are the norm. Most of the internal walls, and even the dividing wall with my neighbours are drywall. The only brick walls are the front, back, divider with one neighbour and a wall that was formerly an exterior wall prior to an extension 50 years or so ago. The doors themselves are pretty solid but the doorframes and hinges would give way long before that mattered

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

#503

Post by chiefalchemist » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 2:28 AM UTC

vlunkr wrote: post #464

chiefalchemist wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does that indicate that I have a violent desire is to go out and shoot people? Absolutely not. Perhaps. But does it mean you're more tolerant of violence? And that others such as yourself eventually aggregate to have a collective impact on the broader culture? And what about 10 or 20 years from now, will your non-desire to shoot people still not exist? Neuro-plasticity effectively dictatess we are what we consume,…

We've seen similar concerns about slasher movies, rap music, and even video games, which have been around and been violent for more than 20 years. To my knowledge none of those concerns have ever amounted to anything.

Has any _one_ of those things been proven to be dangerous? Not really.

Has the collective impact of multiple violences been studied?

Put another way: Will a mouthful of soda do you in? Not really. But multiply that exposure to sugar across different drinks and processed foods multiple times per day and before you know there's an obesity crisis. But the mouthful of soda is proven to be safe.

We are what we consume - physically, emotionally, intellectually, and so on. That's been confirmed time and again as well.

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

#504

Post by mc32 » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 2:35 AM UTC

nyhc99 wrote: post #496

mc32 wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s a reflection that we have not a general framework worked out. We also don’t seem to entirely want to know “the truth”. For example the entertainment media on the one hand say that entertainment does not influence people via depictions of violence, etc., to emulate such things. On the other hand they say that how people are portrayed for positive role models “I could be that person” they are necessary and…

There's a great reason to discourage one and not the other: There are lots of people out there who have been victims of sexual violence, and these depictions would do emotional harm to them. On the other hand, there are exactly zero people out there who have been victims of lethal violence and might now be hurt if they play your game.

Those who had loved ones and close relatives would beg to differ on not being victims who suffer.

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

#505

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 2:38 AM 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…

[deleted]

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

#506

Post by AntiImperialis3 » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 2:40 AM UTC

Studies backed by the tobacco industry showed that there were no adverse effects and doctors recommended them for a long time. How is this different?

As long as there is a lot of money in video games, there will be enough scientists whose research budget will be covered by interest groups with representatives from the video game companies... and the research will largely continue to show that video games are good for people.

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

#507

Post by Thorrez » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 2:47 AM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #374

Thorrez wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 regar…

>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.

You have this same problem with fighting back. You have to hope you're a better fighter, if you're not you will be pummeled. The benefit of running is that very quickly you will reach other people, so you don't have to run very far. With fighting it could continue for a long time and you might get fatigued before the bully. When I took Taekwondo, my instructor said the best thing to do if you're about to get into a fight is run.

How many scenarios at school are there were 2 kids are alone and no one can see them or is in earshot? One technique that might be good, is to teach kids who are worried about being bullied that they should try to stay in a group, or within earshot of others, so they can call for help if they get attacked. And to be aware of surroundings and the environment so that they always have an escape route, they don't get stuck in a corner. Avoiding being stuck in a corner could also help if you're fighting, it gives you more maneuverability. This advice would help weak kids too, not just strong kids.

>Incidents without proof generally result in no action from the school due to that lack of proof, so the bully will continue tormenting you.

What if you create a diary with times and dates of each incident?

Also, what if you can record proof? Start an audio recorder (and inform the bully if you're in an all-party consent state).

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

#508

Post by Jeff_Brown » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 3:11 AM UTC

raindropm wrote: post #491

Last time I play Assassin's Creed:Origin, I have to stop halfway because I'm tired of all those senseless killing. I feel bad and sad for those virtual Roman soldier I've killed, how can that even happened? (P.S. I'm not the only one) I think part of it is because videogames graphics and animation these day is so realistic(and it will keep getting more real) All the blood and gore and violence and how you kill someon…

It's conceivable that this study's results apply only to video games with sufficiently unrealistic depictions of violence. The newest Assassin's Creed depicts human violence more realistically than anything I've ever seen before. It's still not quite there, but once we get there, maybe the psychological effects will be different.

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

#509

Post by tomnipotent » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 3:34 AM UTC

chiefalchemist wrote: post #500

tomnipotent wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps No, which is the entire premise of the linked article we're discussing. > And what about 10 or 20 years from now, will your non-desire to shoot people still not exist? Perhaps, but it will have considerably less to do with video games than other life factors. > Neuro-plasticity effectively dictatess we are what we consume, we are what we do This isn't what neuro-plasticity means. It means your brain can per…

Neuro-plasticity means what it says: the brain is moldable. It's not static. It's not set in stone. Prior to neuro-plasticity the brain was perceived as being set in stone, so to speak. The brain is a result of how you "exercise" it, or not. It's the result of what you feed it, or not. It's not static. Neuro-plasticity enables stroke victims to recover. And the depth and breadth of that recovery is a function of how…

I think we're agreed on the definition of neuroplasticity, just not that it defines you somehow. It's like saying "you are what you eat", which is mostly nonsensical.

Exercising your brain causes structural changes, whereby neuronal circuity is "rewired" to create more optimal paths. Stroke victim recovery is functional, in which parts of the brain take over responsibilities for what was damaged (but it's not "transferred", you still need to learn it all over again).

Neither, however, somehow magically define you as a person just because your brain decided some optimizations would help with repetitive tasks or worst-case decided cortical remapping was necessary to recover from injury.

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

#510

Post by esperent » Wed, Dec 30, 2020, 3:34 AM UTC

chiefalchemist wrote: post #503

vlunkr wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've seen similar concerns about slasher movies, rap music, and even video games, which have been around and been violent for more than 20 years. To my knowledge none of those concerns have ever amounted to anything.

Has any _one_ of those things been proven to be dangerous? Not really. Has the collective impact of multiple violences been studied? Put another way: Will a mouthful of soda do you in? Not really. But multiply that exposure to sugar across different drinks and processed foods multiple times per day and before you know there's an obesity crisis. But the mouthful of soda is proven to be safe. We are what we consume - p…

In the absence of studies, you could look at different cultures to see whether this holds up. For example, in most European countries, levels of violence are very low, and the likelihood/desire for an average person to own a weapon is also low (aside from hunters/the Swiss). Compare this to the US where violence is comparatively more common and gun ownership is high.

Do Europeans consume large amounts of violent media? As a European, I can tell you the answer is yes. I don't know how much compared to the US, but I basically grew up on violent video games and I have a large number of friends who love horror films that depict far, far worse than anything in a game I ever played. I suspect the media we consume is pretty similar to the media in the US. And yet, less violence. So, an obvious hypothesis is that the tendency to enact violence comes from elsewhere in culture than media.

The best suggestion I've come across is from Pinker's History of Violence book. He suggests that levels of violence correlate with an "honor culture" - as in, godfather style "you disrespected my mother now I gotta kill your brother", to varying degrees. In the US, especially ex-confederate states, an honor culture still persists, while in Europe and northern US states we have progessed to a "law and order" culture with correspondingly lower levels of violence. If you're interested in this topic, I highly recommend reading the book. It gives a much better description of this topic than I can here, and once you've spent some time thinking about it, hopefully, you'll come to recognize that blaming media for violence is shallow thinking. Communities and culture cause violence, or prevent it. Media is just fantasy.