violence in video games argumentative essay

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essay Examples >
• Essays Topics >
• Essay on Law

Free Argumentative Essay About Violence in Video Games

Type of paper: Argumentative Essay

Topic: Law , Violence , Criminal Justice , Children , Games , Video Games , Virtual Reality , Family

Words: 2000

Published: 05/12/2021

ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS

Introduction

Neither constitution nor any parents can stop children from playing video games, as children will find some or other way to play video games. Law Excessive amount of violence in Video games is one of many debated topics in our society. A number of people say that it affects behaviour of children in a substantial manner. These people advocate to ban the games that cater violence on the other hands, a huge number of people do not agree with such logic. They oppose any such step and argue in favour of games even if they portray violence. Court said that “ The negation of the ban itself will likely have minimal impact, as kids would have found their way to violent games in any case” (Tassi). Children should be given freedom to play video games as first ammendment protects the right of individuals, and particpaion of parents can protect them from playing violent vide games, terefore government should not put a ban on video games.

Thesis Statement: This paper intends to discuss the violence in video games and analyses whether violent video games affect children in a negative manner. The paper also discusses the legality of these games in perspective of the first amendment of the US constitution.

Gentile et al. mentioned that the majority of US teenagers play video games on a regular basis. Some of these games are extremely violent and may affect the behaviour of the children in a negative manner. It is difficult to believe that the children who are in constant touch of these video games are unaffected by their negative impacts. “most evidence suggests that amount of play affects school performance, whereas violent content affects aggressive outcomes” (Gentile et al., 6). Children have a tendency to learn, and they learn from these games too. If the characters of any game are involved in extremely violent activities, there are chances for a player to act accordingly.

Experts suggest that violent games adversely affect the children, and it is not very surprising if their behaviour is affected by these games. According to Tassi the voices to ban violent games are not new, and people have been raising their voices to ban violent games since a long time. Author mentioned “The ban was in place that would make it a crime to sell violent games to minors” (Tassi). Violent games like ‘Death Race’ and ‘Mortal Kombat’, Doom, Grand theft auto and ‘Night Trap’ have attracted huge public cries after they were released, and people witnessed their effects on their children. “Playing violent games increases aggressive behaviors, increases aggressive cognitions, increases aggressive emotions, increases physiological arousal, and decreases prosocial behaviors” (Gentile et al., 7).

Playing violent video game require a high amount of attention and intense participation. Liptak mentioned that modern games and controls also involve very active participation on mental as well physical level. Author mentioned that “The court has affirmed the constitutional rights of game developers, adults keep the right to decide what’s appropriate in their houses” (Liptak). In the light of these facts, it is difficult to say that violent games do not affect children in negative ways. Children participate in these games with very enthusiasm and act as their favourite actors who are usually very violent. When children see their favourite characters killing and hurting others, they feel amused. It may inspire children to act in a similar manner (Dill& Dill).

There are people who argue in favour of video games and suggest that video games are just a mean of entertainment, and they cannot affect the behaviour of children in negative ways. Tassi, in his article, advocates these video games by presenting a number of arguments in favour of video games and suggest that video games enhance the sharpness of the human brain. There are a number of people who argue that video games, including violent ones, enhance the fertility of the human brain. Bartholow & Anderson mentioned that “The results confirmed our hypothesis that playing the violent game would result in more aggression than would playing the nonviolent game” (Bartholow & Anderson, 283).

Saunders, in his study, analyses the subject and its relation with the first amendment. US Supreme Court ruled that these video games are protected by the provisions of the first amendment and it is not logical to put any kind of ban of them. The Supreme Court held that even if these games depict extreme violence, these games cannot be banned as they are protected by the first amendment of the US constitution. Author mentioned that “In Ashcroft v. ACLU" the Court addressed the community standards portion of the test for sexual obscenity and its extension to "harmful-to-minors" statutes" (Saunders, 260). It was held that these games are not different from the old books, cartoons or movies, and it will not be wise to ban only video games.

While deciding a popular case, US Supreme Court struck down a law of California state law that banned video games that were found catering violence and sex. The law advocated to prevent the sale of video games to children that portrayed violent attacks, killings and sexual attacks, “Because speech about violence is not obscene,” (Liptak). Lawmakers said that it was a necessary step to stop children from accessing the games that depict violence and sex. Author gave example by saying that “The details of the murderous spree of Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris at Columbine High can be found at a variety of sources. The tie to video games is found in the fact that Harris and Klebold were said to play violent video games for hours and were fanatics with regard to the video game Doom” (Saunders, 52). It was said that such depictions affect the behaviour of children in an adverse manner.

Justice Antonin Scalia of the US Supreme Court held while striking down the above said law that “Like the protected books, plays, and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas -- and even social messages -- through many familiar literary devices (such as characters, dialogue, plot, and music) and through features distinctive to the medium (such as the player's interaction with the virtual world). That suffices to confer First Amendment protection” (Tassi).

The Supreme Court respected the reasonable concern of California authorities but at the same time suggested the law making authority to act reasonably and in accordance with the law. The Supreme Court said that the entertainment rights of people cannot be oppressed merely on the context of protecting children. Justice Antonin Scalia said that protecting children “does not include a free-floating power to restrict the ideas to which children may be exposed” (Liptak).

Finally, I believe that video games do not impact children in negative manner. A number of people believe that children who play games are also better performers in their study and they do exceedingly well in sports as well as in extracurricular activities. I also observed that children who play video games have a better understanding of circumstances including odd ones. Video game player children are proved to be good drivers than non-players of the video games. Apart from this aspect, the issue involves the first amendment of the US constitution that ensures the right of entertainment and putting any ban on the violent video games amounts to violating this provision. The US Supreme Court has reiterated the constitution makers.

Annotated Bibliography

Bartholow, Bruce D., & Anderson, Craig A. "Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggressive Behavior: Potential Sex Differences." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 38 (3) (2002): 283–290. The article describes the impact of violence shown in the video games on different genders. The article is based on a research study conducted to analyze the impact of video games on behaviour of people. The study revealed that people who play violent video games show the aggressive behaviour. However, people who play non-violent video games do not shows aggressive behaviour. Dill, Karen E. & Dill, Jody C. "Video game violence: A review of the empirical literature." Aggression and Violent Behavior, Volume 3 (4) (1998): 407–428. Gentile, Douglas A., Lynchb, P. J., Linder, J. R., & Walsh, David A.z. "The effects of violent video game habits on adolescent hostility, aggressive behaviors, and school performance." Journal of Adolescence, Volume 27 (1) (2004): 5–22. The article is focused on the research study conducted to analyse the impact of violence presented in video games. The article covers various aspects associated with the subject such as video games habits, video game usage and impact of video game on children behaviour at home, in school and on education. Liptak, A. "Justices Reject Ban on Violent Video Games for Children." 27 June 2011. The New York Times. 11 May 2014, <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/us/28scotus.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0>. The article focuses on the removal of the ban from sales of video games in California. The article described the judgement given by the Supreme Court in favour of children who want to play with video games. The article focuses on various positive aspects associated with the video games, and how video games help children in improving their learning and overall personality. Saunders, Kevin W. "Regulating Youth Access to Violent Video Games: Three Responses to First Amendment Concerns." Law Review Michigan State University-Detroit College of Law, 51 (2003): 52-113. This report critically analyses first amendment with respect to restricting children access to the violent video games. The report provides detailed analysis on all major aspects of the subject. The report analyses violence presented in other media, and factors that cause violence in video games. The report also presents an analysis of evolution of video games. Saunders, Kevin W. "The Need for a Two (or More) Tiered First Amendment to Provide for the Protection of Children." Chicago-Kent Law Review, Vol. 79 (2004): 257-277. This article describes the possible legal and general ways to protect children from violence presented in different forms of media including video games. The author mentioned about limiting the access of children to the internet and other entertainment contents, especially when law can not limit the children. The focus is placed on parents, their willingness and steps they can take to protect their children. Tassi, P. "Supreme Court Strikes Down California's Violent Video Game Ban." 27 June 2011. Forbes. 11 May 2014 <http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2011/06/27/supreme-court-strikes-down-californias-violent-games-ban/>. The article emphasizes on how amendment one support videogames. The article also makes a comparison between video game and other learning materials. The article discusses how the new decision taken by the Supreme Court will change the general perception of people and reduce the lawsuits.

Works Cited

Bartholow, Bruce D., & Anderson, Craig A. "Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggressive Behavior: Potential Sex Differences." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 38 (3) (2002): 283–290. Dill, Karen E. & Dill, Jody C. "Video game violence: A review of the empirical literature." Aggression and Violent Behavior, Volume 3 (4) (1998): 407–428. Gentile, Douglas A., Lynchb, P. J., Linder, J. R., & Walsh, David A.z. "The effects of violent video game habits on adolescent hostility, aggressive behaviors, and school performance." Journal of Adolescence, Volume 27 (1) (2004): 5–22. Liptak, A. "Justices Reject Ban on Violent Video Games for Children." 27 June 2011. The New York Times. 11 May 2014 <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/us/28scotus.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0>. Saunders, Kevin W. "Regulating Youth Access to Violent Video Games: Three Responses to First Amendment Concerns." Law Review Michigan State University-Detroit College of Law, 51 (2003): 52-113. Saunders, Kevin W. "The Need for a Two (or More) Tiered First Amendment to Provide for the Protection of Children." Chicago-Kent Law Review, Vol. 79 (2004): 257-277. Tassi, P. "Supreme Court Strikes Down California's Violent Video Game Ban." 27 June 2011. Forbes. 11 May 2014 <http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2011/06/27/supreme-court-strikes-down-californias-violent-games-ban/>.

Cite this page

Share with friends using:

Removal Request

Finished papers: 215

This paper is created by writer with

ID 283832471

If you want your paper to be:

Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate

Original, fresh, based on current data

Eloquently written and immaculately formatted

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Get your papers done by pros!

Other Pages

Pilgrimage literature reviews, comics book reviews, avatar book reviews, divergent book reviews, ebola virus book reviews, restaurants book reviews, pedagogy book reviews, watergate scandal book reviews, peer pressure book reviews, world economy book reviews, freakonomics book reviews, example of essay on religious studies 3, do polymorphisms of adrenergic receptor signaling pathways affect outcomes of patients report example, example of book review on supply chain management, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia research paper example, example of knowledge breadth and depth course work, free technology essay example 2, no mans land movie review, conceptual framework research papers examples, just war military ethics essay examples, good taking responsibility case study example, free meat industry essay sample, beliefs and practices of zen buddhism essay examples, gdp is not an appropriate measure of well essay, concussion in football annotated bibliographies example, free argumentative essay on synthesis analysis essay, good example of the problem of religious films essay, free essay on chm reflection, berry essays, colgate essays, colman essays, darrach essays, externalize essays, aerating essays, stephen v essays, pg e essays, detoxifying essays, dnase essays, chemoautotroph essays, fibrillin essays, constellation brands essays.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

Argumentative Essay On Violent Video Games

For years, violent video games has became a popular genre in the video game industries, and while violent video games has became increasingly popular, adults questioned if violent video games has a harmful mental effect on children, which can possibly lead to teen violence. The debate between video games and violence , has became a critical topic because of the aggressive behavior that violent video games causes, and the menacing environment that is illustrated in the games. Many that criticize these video games, judges that the calamities caused by teens was fueled by violent video games because of the excruciating mindset that the video game illustrates towards the player. Despite all these criticism towards the irrational atmosphere illustrated by violent video games, unbiased research have proved that violent video game only cause aggressive behavior, while all these atrocious events caused by teens was mainly caused by the individual 's mental illness or villainous behavior. Conversely, many consider that teen violence was encouraged by video games, but research has proven that video games isn’t even a aspect to the reason behind teen violence, instead violent video games only cause one to be ambitious, and aggressive because of the competitiveness displayed in video games. With abundant experiments and common sense, video games were proved to only affect a person’s aggression , Richard Ryan, a motivational psychologist at the University of Rochester said “in sports,

The Straw Man Fallacy: The Use Of Fallacy In Writing Reasons

A fallacy is the use of poor, or invalid, reasoning for the construction of an argument. In other words, it is an argument that makes an error in logic or assumptions that should not have been made. In the formal setting, an argument is two sides presenting their sides argument using logic and deductive reasoning. In the book “Writing Arguments,” authors John Ramage, John Bean, and June Johnson compare several fallacies. The authors describe the straw man fallacy as an argument when a writer constructs a misinterpreted version of an argument that distorts its original meaning and intentions in order to criticizes it as if it were the real argument (401).

Do Video Games Kill Analysis

The article “Do Video Games Kill” written by Karen Sternheimer responds to one of the most sought-after question; are video games the cause for “young killers”? (220) Sternheimer believes the influence of video games on today’s youth maybe spiraling out of control. She focuses most of the blame on the media, politicians and the Juvenile Justice System. Sternheimer suggests that there are other factors to blame for violent behavior: poverty, the neighborhood, unemployment, family violence, divorced parents and mental illness (218). While juvenile crimes have declined, and personal backgrounds effect actions, it cannot be proven that video game violence has no to little effect on America’s youth.

Critical Analysis Of Shooting In The Dark By Benedict Carey

In his article “Shooting in the Dark,” Benedict Carey argues that video games depict explicit or violent content stimulate aggressive behavior within gamers. He argues that video games like Mortal Kombat, Call of Duty, and Battlefield 3 increase aggressive urges and that exposure to these games leads to real-world hostilities. He mentions incidents like the young men who opened fire at Columbine High School and at the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado—video gamers who seemed to be acting out some “dark digital fantasy”—to uphold his position. He believes a dose of violent video games can cause people to act “more rudely” than they would otherwise. Although he describes how violent video games may stimulate aggressive or hostile behavior, Carey’s argument can be challenged because there are other factors that can influence individuals to act violent and hostile.

Steven Johnson's Everything Bad Is Good For You

The video gaming creates so many problems in our society. Johnson’s points, “The worst that can be said is that they sanction, and even promote aggression and violent responses to conflict. But what can be said with much greater certainty is this: most computer games are a colossal waste of time” (17). Johnson’s describes that the video gaming and the technology create aggression and violent behaviors in the users, and most games are just a waste of time. To illustrate, my 8-year-old nephew loves video games.

Violent Video Games Research Paper

Violent Video Games The culprit? While video games certainly have a decorated history of violence, they have been unfairly attributed for real life violence for way to long. Games with violent undertones have been in existence for nearly forty years. Attempts are continually made to focus on the violent effects that these video games supposedly have on players of all ages.

Violent Video Games Cause Less Violence

Violent video games have been blamed for everything from bullying to school shootings. Critics of these video games believe they cause people to commit violent acts in real life. These critics, mainly comprised of parents and other responsible adults, don’t agree with what the video games portray. Others say the video games cause less violence and are an outlet for anger and stress. Although violent video games have violent actions in them, teenagers should be able to play violent video games because there isn’t enough evidence to prove they make teens more aggressive, it could prevent violence, and violent video games are a fun and relaxing way to relieve stress and anger.

Violent Video Games Essay

What a great fun that I feel when I win a difficult video game, it is really exciting. It took me a very long period to forget the massage on the screen (GAME OVER ).But with the time I realized that Playing violent video games is no more likely to be damaging to young children’s behavior than those considered harmless, so that I choose some researches that can deal with case . More and more kids are playing video and computer games — especially ultra-violent ones that are top sellers. Research shows that children are also spending increasing amounts of time playing them: an average of 13 hours per week for boys and five hours for girls.

Argumentative Essay On Video Games

For many teenagers in our world today, playing video games may be a huge part of their daily lives. In contrast, many individuals think playing violent video games will not be safe for kids. However, research has shown that video games have solved some of science’s biggest problems. Teens could someday cure diseases. Also, kids who play violent games are being “exposed” to what war may be really like.

Persuasive Essay On Violent Video Games

There are games that literally replicate and give people the ability to score points for doing the very same thing that these students are doing inside schools, where you get extra points for finishing someone off who’s lying there begins for their life.” ( 6) There are several ideas that say young people benefit from these violent video games “Surprisingly, playing video games can help our physical, mental, and emotional health.” It helps them to improve hand eye coordination and thinking ability. These benefits are not worth the risk of being influenced by violent video games. (7) All in all the research and officials say that violent video games affect how children, teenagers and young adults act.

Children around the world play adult content video game And many parents say it is bad for their children; however video games can actually help their children learn. Approximately 90% of children in the United States play video games, and more than 90% of those games involve mature content that often includes violence (Park, 2014). There are those that believe video games are detrimental to society, however playing video games including those with mature content can actually be beneficial to both individuals and society by increasing knowledge expanding the ability to react positively at real life situations and improving cognitive thinking skills. Children that play video games not only have the potential to increase their ability to learn right from wrong, and to improve their cognitive thinking skills the game can also increase a child’s knowledge.

Over the years there has been a big controversy over whether video games are relatively good or extremely bad for children. Video games are super beneficial to a kid’s learning process and have been proven to increase social skills, productivity, and stress. The fear that video games are harmful to a child, is proven through countless experiments that they are actually great for their growth and brain capacity. Video games can increase the social skills in a child, Xbox and PlayStation provide great opportunities for cooperation and competition. Two different studies, one by Katherine Keyes and the other by Vinay Devnath, both have proved that the use of video games can increase the social skills that many children can’t grasp, “Video game playing is often a collaborative leisure time activity for school-aged children, and these results indicate that children who frequently play video games may be socially cohesive with peers and integrated into the school”( Keyes, PhD).

Argumentative Essay On Video Games Education

Video games education is a method of teaching by using electronic games as the learning material. Teenagers from fifteen to eighteen, who have been called as “K-20 students” [1] or Net Generation since mid-1990s, playing video games as pastime leisure and expose to digital multimedia more often compare to the older generation. The issues of implementing video games education has been the subject of debate within education and sociology communities due to its appeal to contemporary students. Discussion among sociology scholars focus on the aggressive behaviour and hostility of youngsters who are involved in a video game in a great length of time and a specific type of games [2]. However, some academics argue that video game becomes an interactive learning platform of social education, especially with players verses players (PVP) games.

Argumentative Essay On Media Violence

Media violence has become a controversial topic in the world today. Owing to the rising technology, children are beginning to show increasing violent behaviors. The debates on the effects of media ranging from screen media, video games, and books have a long history. Due to this, there is a speculation over what is the leading cause of the increasing violence in children. Some people argue that there is a relationship between media violence and real-life violence.

Do Video Games Promote Violence Essay

Research shows that at least 83% of children in the US aged between 8-12 years are involved in video gaming once a month. This elevated number of video gaming has had its fair share of effects on its consumers. For instance, video games have positively influenced children to work together in completing various tasks, and often improve a child’s thinking capacity, especially through solving puzzles (Anderson et al, 2007). However, the contentious issue has been the effects of violent games on children, which are often negative to their well-being. In short, violent video games increase the aggressiveness of a child, and may eventually cause mental ill health.

Positive And Negative Effects Of Video Games Essay

Some researches admit that violent games may cause adolescents to become tremendous. Studies showed that video games increase psychological awakening, it could also increase aggressive behavior, emotions and thoughts and finally let teenagers lose the sense of helping others. All these effects will be carried by aggressive young people. It’s true that video games are violent, but aggressive adolescents are more likely to be more attracted to it. Some games reward players for doing violent actions, so this will affect them negatively, letting them think that violence is normal.

More about Argumentative Essay On Violent Video Games

Related topics.

• Video game controversy
• Nonviolent video game
• Media violence research

October 2, 2018

Do Violent Video Games Trigger Aggression?

A study tries to find whether slaughtering zombies with a virtual assault weapon translates into misbehavior when a teenager returns to reality

By Melinda Wenner Moyer

Getty Images

Intuitively, it makes sense Splatterhouse and Postal 2 would serve as virtual training sessions for teens, encouraging them to act out in ways that mimic game-related violence. But many studies have failed to find a clear connection between violent game play and belligerent behavior, and the controversy over whether the shoot-‘em-up world transfers to real life has persisted for years. A new study published on October 1 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences tries to resolve the controversy by weighing the findings of two dozen studies on the topic.

The meta-analysis does tie violent video games to a small increase in physical aggression among adolescents and preteens. Yet debate is by no means over. Whereas the analysis was undertaken to help settle the science on the issue, researchers still disagree on the real-world significance of the findings.

This new analysis attempted to navigate through the minefield of conflicting research. Many studies find gaming associated with increases in aggression, but others identify no such link. A small but vocal cadre of researchers have argued much of the work implicating video games has serious flaws in that, among other things, it measures the frequency of aggressive thoughts or language rather than physically aggressive behaviors like hitting or pushing, which have more real-world relevance.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Jay Hull, a social psychologist at Dartmouth College and a co-author on the new paper, has never been convinced by the critiques that have disparaged purported ties between gaming and aggression. “I just kept reading, over and over again, [these] criticisms of the literature and going, ‘that’s just not true,’” he says. So he and his colleagues designed the new meta-analysis to address these criticisms head-on and determine if they had merit.

Hull and colleagues pooled data from 24 studies that had been selected to avoid some of the criticisms leveled at earlier work. They only included research that measured the relationship between violent video game use and overt physical aggression. They also limited their analysis to studies that statistically controlled for several factors that could influence the relationship between gaming and subsequent behavior, such as age and baseline aggressive behavior.

Even with these constraints, their analysis found kids who played violent video games did become more aggressive over time. But the changes in behavior were not big. “According to traditional ways of looking at these numbers, it’s not a large effect—I would say it’s relatively small,” he says. But it’s “statistically reliable—it’s not by chance and not inconsequential.”

Their findings mesh with a 2015 literature review conducted by the American Psychological Association, which concluded violent video games worsen aggressive behavior in older children, adolescents and young adults. Together, Hull’s meta-analysis and the APA report help give clarity to the existing body of research, says Douglas Gentile, a developmental psychologist at Iowa State University who was not involved in conducting the meta-analysis. “Media violence is one risk factor for aggression,” he says. “It's not the biggest, it’s also not the smallest, but it’s worth paying attention to.”

Yet researchers who have been critical of links between games and violence contend Hull’s meta-analysis does not settle the issue. “They don’t find much. They just try to make it sound like they do,” says Christopher Ferguson, a psychologist at Stetson University in Florida, who has published papers questioning the link between violent video games and aggression.

Ferguson argues the degree to which video game use increases aggression in Hull’s analysis—what is known in psychology as the estimated “effect size”—is so small as to be essentially meaningless. After statistically controlling for several other factors, the meta-analysis reported an effect size of 0.08, which suggests that violent video games account for less than one percent of the variation in aggressive behavior among U.S. teens and pre-teens—if, in fact, there is a cause-and effect relationship between game play and hostile actions. It may instead be that the relationship between gaming and aggression is a statistical artifact caused by lingering flaws in study design, Ferguson says.  

Johannes Breuer, a psychologist at GESIS–Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences in Germany, agrees, noting that according to “a common rule of thumb in psychological research,” effect sizes below 0.1 are “considered trivial.” He adds meta-analyses are only as valid as the studies included in them, and that work on the issue has been plagued by methodological problems. For one thing, studies vary in terms of the criteria they use to determine if a video game is violent or not. By some measures, the Super Mario Bros. games would be considered violent, but by others not. Studies, too, often rely on subjects self-reporting their own aggressive acts, and they may not do so accurately. “All of this is not to say that the results of this meta-analysis are not valid,” he says. “But things like this need to be kept in mind when interpreting the findings and discussing their meaning.”

Hull says, however, that the effect size his team found still has real-world significance. An analysis of one of his earlier studies, which reported a similar estimated effect size of 0.083, found playing violent video games was linked with almost double the risk that kids would be sent to the school principal’s office for fighting. The study began by taking a group of children who hadn’t been dispatched to the principal in the previous month and then tracked them for a subsequent eight months. It found 4.8 percent of kids who reported only rarely playing violent video games were sent to the principal’s office at least once during that period compared with 9 percent who reported playing violent video games frequently. Hull theorizes violent games help kids become more comfortable with taking risks and engaging in abnormal behavior. “Their sense of right and wrong is being warped,” he notes.

Hull and his colleagues also found evidence ethnicity shapes the relationship between violent video games and aggression. White players seem more susceptible to the games' putative effects on behavior than do Hispanic and Asian players. Hull isn’t sure why, but he suspects the games' varying impact relates to how much kids are influenced by the norms of American culture, which, he says, are rooted in rugged individualism and a warriorlike mentality that may incite video game players to identify with aggressors rather than victims. It might “dampen sympathy toward their virtual victims,” he and his co-authors wrote, “with consequences for their values and behavior outside the game.”

Social scientists will, no doubt, continue to debate the psychological impacts of killing within the confines of interactive games. In a follow-up paper Hull says he plans to tackle the issue of the real-world significance of violent game play, and hopes it adds additional clarity. “It’s a knotty issue,” he notes—and it’s an open question whether research will ever quell the controversy.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 13 March 2018

Does playing violent video games cause aggression? A longitudinal intervention study

• Simone Kühn 1 , 2 ,
• Dimitrij Tycho Kugler 2 ,
• Katharina Schmalen 1 ,
• Markus Weichenberger 1 ,
• Charlotte Witt 1 &
• Jürgen Gallinat 2  

Molecular Psychiatry volume  24 ,  pages 1220–1234 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

545k Accesses

102 Citations

2347 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Neuroscience

It is a widespread concern that violent video games promote aggression, reduce pro-social behaviour, increase impulsivity and interfere with cognition as well as mood in its players. Previous experimental studies have focussed on short-term effects of violent video gameplay on aggression, yet there are reasons to believe that these effects are mostly the result of priming. In contrast, the present study is the first to investigate the effects of long-term violent video gameplay using a large battery of tests spanning questionnaires, behavioural measures of aggression, sexist attitudes, empathy and interpersonal competencies, impulsivity-related constructs (such as sensation seeking, boredom proneness, risk taking, delay discounting), mental health (depressivity, anxiety) as well as executive control functions, before and after 2 months of gameplay. Our participants played the violent video game Grand Theft Auto V, the non-violent video game The Sims 3 or no game at all for 2 months on a daily basis. No significant changes were observed, neither when comparing the group playing a violent video game to a group playing a non-violent game, nor to a passive control group. Also, no effects were observed between baseline and posttest directly after the intervention, nor between baseline and a follow-up assessment 2 months after the intervention period had ended. The present results thus provide strong evidence against the frequently debated negative effects of playing violent video games in adults and will therefore help to communicate a more realistic scientific perspective on the effects of violent video gaming.

Similar content being viewed by others

No effect of short term exposure to gambling like reward systems on post game risk taking

Nicholas J. D’Amico, Aaron Drummond, … James D. Sauer

Increasing prosocial behavior and decreasing selfishness in the lab and everyday life

Andrew T. Gloster, Marcia T. B. Rinner & Andrea H. Meyer

Dynamics of the immediate behavioral response to partial social exclusion

J. F. Dewald-Kaufmann, T. Wüstenberg, … F. Padberg

The concern that violent video games may promote aggression or reduce empathy in its players is pervasive and given the popularity of these games their psychological impact is an urgent issue for society at large. Contrary to the custom, this topic has also been passionately debated in the scientific literature. One research camp has strongly argued that violent video games increase aggression in its players [ 1 , 2 ], whereas the other camp [ 3 , 4 ] repeatedly concluded that the effects are minimal at best, if not absent. Importantly, it appears that these fundamental inconsistencies cannot be attributed to differences in research methodology since even meta-analyses, with the goal to integrate the results of all prior studies on the topic of aggression caused by video games led to disparate conclusions [ 2 , 3 ]. These meta-analyses had a strong focus on children, and one of them [ 2 ] reported a marginal age effect suggesting that children might be even more susceptible to violent video game effects.

To unravel this topic of research, we designed a randomised controlled trial on adults to draw causal conclusions on the influence of video games on aggression. At present, almost all experimental studies targeting the effects of violent video games on aggression and/or empathy focussed on the effects of short-term video gameplay. In these studies the duration for which participants were instructed to play the games ranged from 4 min to maximally 2 h (mean = 22 min, median = 15 min, when considering all experimental studies reviewed in two of the recent major meta-analyses in the field [ 3 , 5 ]) and most frequently the effects of video gaming have been tested directly after gameplay.

It has been suggested that the effects of studies focussing on consequences of short-term video gameplay (mostly conducted on college student populations) are mainly the result of priming effects, meaning that exposure to violent content increases the accessibility of aggressive thoughts and affect when participants are in the immediate situation [ 6 ]. However, above and beyond this the General Aggression Model (GAM, [ 7 ]) assumes that repeatedly primed thoughts and feelings influence the perception of ongoing events and therewith elicits aggressive behaviour as a long-term effect. We think that priming effects are interesting and worthwhile exploring, but in contrast to the notion of the GAM our reading of the literature is that priming effects are short-lived (suggested to only last for <5 min and may potentially reverse after that time [ 8 ]). Priming effects should therefore only play a role in very close temporal proximity to gameplay. Moreover, there are a multitude of studies on college students that have failed to replicate priming effects [ 9 , 10 , 11 ] and associated predictions of the so-called GAM such as a desensitisation against violent content [ 12 , 13 , 14 ] in adolescents and college students or a decrease of empathy [ 15 ] and pro-social behaviour [ 16 , 17 ] as a result of playing violent video games.

However, in our view the question that society is actually interested in is not: “Are people more aggressive after having played violent video games for a few minutes? And are these people more aggressive minutes after gameplay ended?”, but rather “What are the effects of frequent, habitual violent video game playing? And for how long do these effects persist (not in the range of minutes but rather weeks and months)?” For this reason studies are needed in which participants are trained over longer periods of time, tested after a longer delay after acute playing and tested with broader batteries assessing aggression but also other relevant domains such as empathy as well as mood and cognition. Moreover, long-term follow-up assessments are needed to demonstrate long-term effects of frequent violent video gameplay. To fill this gap, we set out to expose adult participants to two different types of video games for a period of 2 months and investigate changes in measures of various constructs of interest at least one day after the last gaming session and test them once more 2 months after the end of the gameplay intervention. In contrast to the GAM, we hypothesised no increases of aggression or decreases in pro-social behaviour even after long-term exposure to a violent video game due to our reasoning that priming effects of violent video games are short-lived and should therefore not influence measures of aggression if they are not measured directly after acute gaming. In the present study, we assessed potential changes in the following domains: behavioural as well as questionnaire measures of aggression, empathy and interpersonal competencies, impulsivity-related constructs (such as sensation seeking, boredom proneness, risk taking, delay discounting), and depressivity and anxiety as well as executive control functions. As the effects on aggression and pro-social behaviour were the core targets of the present study, we implemented multiple tests for these domains. This broad range of domains with its wide coverage and the longitudinal nature of the study design enabled us to draw more general conclusions regarding the causal effects of violent video games.

Materials and methods

Participants.

Ninety healthy participants (mean age = 28 years, SD = 7.3, range: 18–45, 48 females) were recruited by means of flyers and internet advertisements. The sample consisted of college students as well as of participants from the general community. The advertisement mentioned that we were recruiting for a longitudinal study on video gaming, but did not mention that we would offer an intervention or that we were expecting training effects. Participants were randomly assigned to the three groups ruling out self-selection effects. The sample size was based on estimates from a previous study with a similar design [ 18 ]. After complete description of the study, the participants’ informed written consent was obtained. The local ethics committee of the Charité University Clinic, Germany, approved of the study. We included participants that reported little, preferably no video game usage in the past 6 months (none of the participants ever played the game Grand Theft Auto V (GTA) or Sims 3 in any of its versions before). We excluded participants with psychological or neurological problems. The participants received financial compensation for the testing sessions (200 Euros) and performance-dependent additional payment for two behavioural tasks detailed below, but received no money for the training itself.

Training procedure

The violent video game group (5 participants dropped out between pre- and posttest, resulting in a group of n  = 25, mean age = 26.6 years, SD = 6.0, 14 females) played the game Grand Theft Auto V on a Playstation 3 console over a period of 8 weeks. The active control group played the non-violent video game Sims 3 on the same console (6 participants dropped out, resulting in a group of n  = 24, mean age = 25.8 years, SD = 6.8, 12 females). The passive control group (2 participants dropped out, resulting in a group of n  = 28, mean age = 30.9 years, SD = 8.4, 12 females) was not given a gaming console and had no task but underwent the same testing procedure as the two other groups. The passive control group was not aware of the fact that they were part of a control group to prevent self-training attempts. The experimenters testing the participants were blind to group membership, but we were unable to prevent participants from talking about the game during testing, which in some cases lead to an unblinding of experimental condition. Both training groups were instructed to play the game for at least 30 min a day. Participants were only reimbursed for the sessions in which they came to the lab. Our previous research suggests that the perceived fun in gaming was positively associated with training outcome [ 18 ] and we speculated that enforcing training sessions through payment would impair motivation and thus diminish the potential effect of the intervention. Participants underwent a testing session before (baseline) and after the training period of 2 months (posttest 1) as well as a follow-up testing sessions 2 months after the training period (posttest 2).

Grand Theft Auto V (GTA)

GTA is an action-adventure video game situated in a fictional highly violent game world in which players are rewarded for their use of violence as a means to advance in the game. The single-player story follows three criminals and their efforts to commit heists while under pressure from a government agency. The gameplay focuses on an open world (sandbox game) where the player can choose between different behaviours. The game also allows the player to engage in various side activities, such as action-adventure, driving, third-person shooting, occasional role-playing, stealth and racing elements. The open world design lets players freely roam around the fictional world so that gamers could in principle decide not to commit violent acts.

The Sims 3 (Sims)

Sims is a life simulation game and also classified as a sandbox game because it lacks clearly defined goals. The player creates virtual individuals called “Sims”, and customises their appearance, their personalities and places them in a home, directs their moods, satisfies their desires and accompanies them in their daily activities and by becoming part of a social network. It offers opportunities, which the player may choose to pursue or to refuse, similar as GTA but is generally considered as a pro-social and clearly non-violent game.

Assessment battery

To assess aggression and associated constructs we used the following questionnaires: Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire [ 19 ], State Hostility Scale [ 20 ], Updated Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale [ 21 , 22 ], Moral Disengagement Scale [ 23 , 24 ], the Rosenzweig Picture Frustration Test [ 25 , 26 ] and a so-called World View Measure [ 27 ]. All of these measures have previously been used in research investigating the effects of violent video gameplay, however, the first two most prominently. Additionally, behavioural measures of aggression were used: a Word Completion Task, a Lexical Decision Task [ 28 ] and the Delay frustration task [ 29 ] (an inter-correlation matrix is depicted in Supplementary Figure 1 1). From these behavioural measures, the first two were previously used in research on the effects of violent video gameplay. To assess variables that have been related to the construct of impulsivity, we used the Brief Sensation Seeking Scale [ 30 ] and the Boredom Propensity Scale [ 31 ] as well as tasks assessing risk taking and delay discounting behaviourally, namely the Balloon Analogue Risk Task [ 32 ] and a Delay-Discounting Task [ 33 ]. To quantify pro-social behaviour, we employed: Interpersonal Reactivity Index [ 34 ] (frequently used in research on the effects of violent video gameplay), Balanced Emotional Empathy Scale [ 35 ], Reading the Mind in the Eyes test [ 36 ], Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire [ 37 ] and Richardson Conflict Response Questionnaire [ 38 ]. To assess depressivity and anxiety, which has previously been associated with intense video game playing [ 39 ], we used Beck Depression Inventory [ 40 ] and State Trait Anxiety Inventory [ 41 ]. To characterise executive control function, we used a Stop Signal Task [ 42 ], a Multi-Source Interference Task [ 43 ] and a Task Switching Task [ 44 ] which have all been previously used to assess effects of video gameplay. More details on all instruments used can be found in the Supplementary Material.

Data analysis

On the basis of the research question whether violent video game playing enhances aggression and reduces empathy, the focus of the present analysis was on time by group interactions. We conducted these interaction analyses separately, comparing the violent video game group against the active control group (GTA vs. Sims) and separately against the passive control group (GTA vs. Controls) that did not receive any intervention and separately for the potential changes during the intervention period (baseline vs. posttest 1) and to test for potential long-term changes (baseline vs. posttest 2). We employed classical frequentist statistics running a repeated-measures ANOVA controlling for the covariates sex and age.

Since we collected 52 separate outcome variables and conduced four different tests with each (GTA vs. Sims, GTA vs. Controls, crossed with baseline vs. posttest 1, baseline vs. posttest 2), we had to conduct 52 × 4 = 208 frequentist statistical tests. Setting the alpha value to 0.05 means that by pure chance about 10.4 analyses should become significant. To account for this multiple testing problem and the associated alpha inflation, we conducted a Bonferroni correction. According to Bonferroni, the critical value for the entire set of n tests is set to an alpha value of 0.05 by taking alpha/ n  = 0.00024.

Since the Bonferroni correction has sometimes been criticised as overly conservative, we conducted false discovery rate (FDR) correction [ 45 ]. FDR correction also determines adjusted p -values for each test, however, it controls only for the number of false discoveries in those tests that result in a discovery (namely a significant result).

Moreover, we tested for group differences at the baseline assessment using independent t -tests, since those may hamper the interpretation of significant interactions between group and time that we were primarily interested in.

Since the frequentist framework does not enable to evaluate whether the observed null effect of the hypothesised interaction is indicative of the absence of a relation between violent video gaming and our dependent variables, the amount of evidence in favour of the null hypothesis has been tested using a Bayesian framework. Within the Bayesian framework both the evidence in favour of the null and the alternative hypothesis are directly computed based on the observed data, giving rise to the possibility of comparing the two. We conducted Bayesian repeated-measures ANOVAs comparing the model in favour of the null and the model in favour of the alternative hypothesis resulting in a Bayes factor (BF) using Bayesian Information criteria [ 46 ]. The BF 01 suggests how much more likely the data is to occur under the null hypothesis. All analyses were performed using the JASP software package ( https://jasp-stats.org ).

Sex distribution in the present study did not differ across the groups ( χ 2 p -value > 0.414). However, due to the fact that differences between males and females have been observed in terms of aggression and empathy [ 47 ], we present analyses controlling for sex. Since our random assignment to the three groups did result in significant age differences between groups, with the passive control group being significantly older than the GTA ( t (51) = −2.10, p  = 0.041) and the Sims group ( t (50) = −2.38, p  = 0.021), we also controlled for age.

The participants in the violent video game group played on average 35 h and the non-violent video game group 32 h spread out across the 8 weeks interval (with no significant group difference p  = 0.48).

To test whether participants assigned to the violent GTA game show emotional, cognitive and behavioural changes, we present the results of repeated-measure ANOVA time x group interaction analyses separately for GTA vs. Sims and GTA vs. Controls (Tables  1 – 3 ). Moreover, we split the analyses according to the time domain into effects from baseline assessment to posttest 1 (Table  2 ) and effects from baseline assessment to posttest 2 (Table  3 ) to capture more long-lasting or evolving effects. In addition to the statistical test values, we report partial omega squared ( ω 2 ) as an effect size measure. Next to the classical frequentist statistics, we report the results of a Bayesian statistical approach, namely BF 01 , the likelihood with which the data is to occur under the null hypothesis that there is no significant time × group interaction. In Table  2 , we report the presence of significant group differences at baseline in the right most column.

Since we conducted 208 separate frequentist tests we expected 10.4 significant effects simply by chance when setting the alpha value to 0.05. In fact we found only eight significant time × group interactions (these are marked with an asterisk in Tables  2 and 3 ).

When applying a conservative Bonferroni correction, none of those tests survive the corrected threshold of p  < 0.00024. Neither does any test survive the more lenient FDR correction. The arithmetic mean of the frequentist test statistics likewise shows that on average no significant effect was found (bottom rows in Tables  2 and 3 ).

In line with the findings from a frequentist approach, the harmonic mean of the Bayesian factor BF 01 is consistently above one but not very far from one. This likewise suggests that there is very likely no interaction between group × time and therewith no detrimental effects of the violent video game GTA in the domains tested. The evidence in favour of the null hypothesis based on the Bayes factor is not massive, but clearly above 1. Some of the harmonic means are above 1.6 and constitute substantial evidence [ 48 ]. However, the harmonic mean has been criticised as unstable. Owing to the fact that the sum is dominated by occasional small terms in the likelihood, one may underestimate the actual evidence in favour of the null hypothesis [ 49 ].

To test the sensitivity of the present study to detect relevant effects we computed the effect size that we would have been able to detect. The information we used consisted of alpha error probability = 0.05, power = 0.95, our sample size, number of groups and of measurement occasions and correlation between the repeated measures at posttest 1 and posttest 2 (average r  = 0.68). According to G*Power [ 50 ], we could detect small effect sizes of f  = 0.16 (equals η 2  = 0.025 and r  = 0.16) in each separate test. When accounting for the conservative Bonferroni-corrected p -value of 0.00024, still a medium effect size of f  = 0.23 (equals η 2  = 0.05 and r  = 0.22) would have been detectable. A meta-analysis by Anderson [ 2 ] reported an average effects size of r  = 0.18 for experimental studies testing for aggressive behaviour and another by Greitmeyer [ 5 ] reported average effect sizes of r  = 0.19, 0.25 and 0.17 for effects of violent games on aggressive behaviour, cognition and affect, all of which should have been detectable at least before multiple test correction.

Within the scope of the present study we tested the potential effects of playing the violent video game GTA V for 2 months against an active control group that played the non-violent, rather pro-social life simulation game The Sims 3 and a passive control group. Participants were tested before and after the long-term intervention and at a follow-up appointment 2 months later. Although we used a comprehensive test battery consisting of questionnaires and computerised behavioural tests assessing aggression, impulsivity-related constructs, mood, anxiety, empathy, interpersonal competencies and executive control functions, we did not find relevant negative effects in response to violent video game playing. In fact, only three tests of the 208 statistical tests performed showed a significant interaction pattern that would be in line with this hypothesis. Since at least ten significant effects would be expected purely by chance, we conclude that there were no detrimental effects of violent video gameplay.

This finding stands in contrast to some experimental studies, in which short-term effects of violent video game exposure have been investigated and where increases in aggressive thoughts and affect as well as decreases in helping behaviour have been observed [ 1 ]. However, these effects of violent video gaming on aggressiveness—if present at all (see above)—seem to be rather short-lived, potentially lasting <15 min [ 8 , 51 ]. In addition, these short-term effects of video gaming are far from consistent as multiple studies fail to demonstrate or replicate them [ 16 , 17 ]. This may in part be due to problems, that are very prominent in this field of research, namely that the outcome measures of aggression and pro-social behaviour, are poorly standardised, do not easily generalise to real-life behaviour and may have lead to selective reporting of the results [ 3 ]. We tried to address these concerns by including a large set of outcome measures that were mostly inspired by previous studies demonstrating effects of short-term violent video gameplay on aggressive behaviour and thoughts, that we report exhaustively.

Since effects observed only for a few minutes after short sessions of video gaming are not representative of what society at large is actually interested in, namely how habitual violent video gameplay affects behaviour on a more long-term basis, studies employing longer training intervals are highly relevant. Two previous studies have employed longer training intervals. In an online study, participants with a broad age range (14–68 years) have been trained in a violent video game for 4 weeks [ 52 ]. In comparison to a passive control group no changes were observed, neither in aggression-related beliefs, nor in aggressive social interactions assessed by means of two questions. In a more recent study, participants played a previous version of GTA for 12 h spread across 3 weeks [ 53 ]. Participants were compared to a passive control group using the Buss–Perry aggression questionnaire, a questionnaire assessing impulsive or reactive aggression, attitude towards violence, and empathy. The authors only report a limited increase in pro-violent attitude. Unfortunately, this study only assessed posttest measures, which precludes the assessment of actual changes caused by the game intervention.

The present study goes beyond these studies by showing that 2 months of violent video gameplay does neither lead to any significant negative effects in a broad assessment battery administered directly after the intervention nor at a follow-up assessment 2 months after the intervention. The fact that we assessed multiple domains, not finding an effect in any of them, makes the present study the most comprehensive in the field. Our battery included self-report instruments on aggression (Buss–Perry aggression questionnaire, State Hostility scale, Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance scale, Moral Disengagement scale, World View Measure and Rosenzweig Picture Frustration test) as well as computer-based tests measuring aggressive behaviour such as the delay frustration task and measuring the availability of aggressive words using the word completion test and a lexical decision task. Moreover, we assessed impulse-related concepts such as sensation seeking, boredom proneness and associated behavioural measures such as the computerised Balloon analogue risk task, and delay discounting. Four scales assessing empathy and interpersonal competence scales, including the reading the mind in the eyes test revealed no effects of violent video gameplay. Neither did we find any effects on depressivity (Becks depression inventory) nor anxiety measured as a state as well as a trait. This is an important point, since several studies reported higher rates of depressivity and anxiety in populations of habitual video gamers [ 54 , 55 ]. Last but not least, our results revealed also no substantial changes in executive control tasks performance, neither in the Stop signal task, the Multi-source interference task or a Task switching task. Previous studies have shown higher performance of habitual action video gamers in executive tasks such as task switching [ 56 , 57 , 58 ] and another study suggests that training with action video games improves task performance that relates to executive functions [ 59 ], however, these associations were not confirmed by a meta-analysis in the field [ 60 ]. The absence of changes in the stop signal task fits well with previous studies that likewise revealed no difference between in habitual action video gamers and controls in terms of action inhibition [ 61 , 62 ]. Although GTA does not qualify as a classical first-person shooter as most of the previously tested action video games, it is classified as an action-adventure game and shares multiple features with those action video games previously related to increases in executive function, including the need for hand–eye coordination and fast reaction times.

Taken together, the findings of the present study show that an extensive game intervention over the course of 2 months did not reveal any specific changes in aggression, empathy, interpersonal competencies, impulsivity-related constructs, depressivity, anxiety or executive control functions; neither in comparison to an active control group that played a non-violent video game nor to a passive control group. We observed no effects when comparing a baseline and a post-training assessment, nor when focussing on more long-term effects between baseline and a follow-up interval 2 months after the participants stopped training. To our knowledge, the present study employed the most comprehensive test battery spanning a multitude of domains in which changes due to violent video games may have been expected. Therefore the present results provide strong evidence against the frequently debated negative effects of playing violent video games. This debate has mostly been informed by studies showing short-term effects of violent video games when tests were administered immediately after a short playtime of a few minutes; effects that may in large be caused by short-lived priming effects that vanish after minutes. The presented results will therefore help to communicate a more realistic scientific perspective of the real-life effects of violent video gaming. However, future research is needed to demonstrate the absence of effects of violent video gameplay in children.

Anderson CA, Bushman BJ. Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: a meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychol Sci. 2001;12:353–9.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Anderson CA, Shibuya A, Ihori N, Swing EL, Bushman BJ, Sakamoto A, et al. Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: a meta-analytic review. Psychol Bull. 2010;136:151–73.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ferguson CJ. Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children’s and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015;10:646–66.

Ferguson CJ, Kilburn J. Much ado about nothing: the misestimation and overinterpretation of violent video game effects in eastern and western nations: comment on Anderson et al. (2010). Psychol Bull. 2010;136:174–8.

Greitemeyer T, Mugge DO. Video games do affect social outcomes: a meta-analytic review of the effects of violent and prosocial video game play. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2014;40:578–89.

Anderson CA, Carnagey NL, Eubanks J. Exposure to violent media: The effects of songs with violent lyrics on aggressive thoughts and feelings. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;84:960–71.

DeWall CN, Anderson CA, Bushman BJ. The general aggression model: theoretical extensions to violence. Psychol Violence. 2011;1:245–58.

Sestire MA, Bartholow BD. Violent and non-violent video games produce opposing effects on aggressive and prosocial outcomes. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2010;46:934–42.

Kneer J, Elson M, Knapp F. Fight fire with rainbows: The effects of displayed violence, difficulty, and performance in digital games on affect, aggression, and physiological arousal. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;54:142–8.

Kneer J, Glock S, Beskes S, Bente G. Are digital games perceived as fun or danger? Supporting and suppressing different game-related concepts. Cyber Beh Soc N. 2012;15:604–9.

Sauer JD, Drummond A, Nova N. Violent video games: the effects of narrative context and reward structure on in-game and postgame aggression. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2015;21:205–14.

Ballard M, Visser K, Jocoy K. Social context and video game play: impact on cardiovascular and affective responses. Mass Commun Soc. 2012;15:875–98.

Read GL, Ballard M, Emery LJ, Bazzini DG. Examining desensitization using facial electromyography: violent video games, gender, and affective responding. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;62:201–11.

Szycik GR, Mohammadi B, Hake M, Kneer J, Samii A, Munte TF, et al. Excessive users of violent video games do not show emotional desensitization: an fMRI study. Brain Imaging Behav. 2017;11:736–43.

Szycik GR, Mohammadi B, Munte TF, Te Wildt BT. Lack of evidence that neural empathic responses are blunted in excessive users of violent video games: an fMRI study. Front Psychol. 2017;8:174.

Tear MJ, Nielsen M. Failure to demonstrate that playing violent video games diminishes prosocial behavior. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e68382.

Tear MJ, Nielsen M. Video games and prosocial behavior: a study of the effects of non-violent, violent and ultra-violent gameplay. Comput Hum Behav. 2014;41:8–13.

Kühn S, Gleich T, Lorenz RC, Lindenberger U, Gallinat J. Playing super Mario induces structural brain plasticity: gray matter changes resulting from training with a commercial video game. Mol Psychiatry. 2014;19:265–71.

Buss AH, Perry M. The aggression questionnaire. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1992;63:452.

Anderson CA, Deuser WE, DeNeve KM. Hot temperatures, hostile affect, hostile cognition, and arousal: Tests of a general model of affective aggression. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1995;21:434–48.

Payne DL, Lonsway KA, Fitzgerald LF. Rape myth acceptance: exploration of its structure and its measurement using the illinois rape myth acceptance scale. J Res Pers. 1999;33:27–68.

McMahon S, Farmer GL. An updated measure for assessing subtle rape myths. Social Work Res. 2011; 35:71–81.

Detert JR, Trevino LK, Sweitzer VL. Moral disengagement in ethical decision making: a study of antecedents and outcomes. J Appl Psychol. 2008;93:374–91.

Bandura A, Barbaranelli C, Caprara G, Pastorelli C. Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996;71:364–74.

Rosenzweig S. The picture-association method and its application in a study of reactions to frustration. J Pers. 1945;14:23.

Hörmann H, Moog W, Der Rosenzweig P-F. Test für Erwachsene deutsche Bearbeitung. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 1957.

Anderson CA, Dill KE. Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;78:772–90.

Przybylski AK, Deci EL, Rigby CS, Ryan RM. Competence-impeding electronic games and players’ aggressive feelings, thoughts, and behaviors. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2014;106:441.

Bitsakou P, Antrop I, Wiersema JR, Sonuga-Barke EJ. Probing the limits of delay intolerance: preliminary young adult data from the Delay Frustration Task (DeFT). J Neurosci Methods. 2006;151:38–44.

Hoyle RH, Stephenson MT, Palmgreen P, Lorch EP, Donohew RL. Reliability and validity of a brief measure of sensation seeking. Pers Individ Dif. 2002;32:401–14.

Farmer R, Sundberg ND. Boredom proneness: the development and correlates of a new scale. J Pers Assess. 1986;50:4–17.

Lejuez CW, Read JP, Kahler CW, Richards JB, Ramsey SE, Stuart GL, et al. Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk taking: the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). J Exp Psychol Appl. 2002;8:75–84.

Richards JB, Zhang L, Mitchell SH, de Wit H. Delay or probability discounting in a model of impulsive behavior: effect of alcohol. J Exp Anal Behav. 1999;71:121–43.

Davis MH. A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Cat Sel Doc Psychol. 1980;10:85.

Google Scholar  

Mehrabian A. Manual for the Balanced Emotional Empathy Scale (BEES). (Available from Albert Mehrabian, 1130 Alta Mesa Road, Monterey, CA, USA 93940); 1996.

Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Hill J, Raste Y, Plumb I. The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test revised version: A study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2001;42:241–51.

Buhrmester D, Furman W, Reis H, Wittenberg MT. Five domains of interpersonal competence in peer relations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988;55:991–1008.

Richardson DR, Green LR, Lago T. The relationship between perspective-taking and non-aggressive responding in the face of an attack. J Pers. 1998;66:235–56.

Maras D, Flament MF, Murray M, Buchholz A, Henderson KA, Obeid N, et al. Screen time is associated with depression and anxiety in Canadian youth. Prev Med. 2015;73:133–8.

Hautzinger M, Bailer M, Worall H, Keller F. Beck-Depressions-Inventar (BDI). Beck-Depressions-Inventar (BDI): Testhandbuch der deutschen Ausgabe. Bern: Huber; 1995.

Spielberger CD, Spielberger CD, Sydeman SJ, Sydeman SJ, Owen AE, Owen AE, et al. Measuring anxiety and anger with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 1999.

Lorenz RC, Gleich T, Buchert R, Schlagenhauf F, Kuhn S, Gallinat J. Interactions between glutamate, dopamine, and the neuronal signature of response inhibition in the human striatum. Hum Brain Mapp. 2015;36:4031–40.

Bush G, Shin LM. The multi-source interference task: an fMRI task that reliably activates the cingulo-frontal-parietal cognitive/attention network. Nat Protoc. 2006;1:308–13.

King JA, Colla M, Brass M, Heuser I, von Cramon D. Inefficient cognitive control in adult ADHD: evidence from trial-by-trial Stroop test and cued task switching performance. Behav Brain Funct. 2007;3:42.

Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc. 1995;57:289–300.

Wagenmakers E-J. A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychon Bull Rev. 2007;14:779–804.

Hay DF. The gradual emergence of sex differences in aggression: alternative hypotheses. Psychol Med. 2007;37:1527–37.

Jeffreys H. The Theory of Probability. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1961.

Raftery AE, Newton MA, Satagopan YM, Krivitsky PN. Estimating the integrated likelihood via posterior simulation using the harmonic mean identity. In: Bernardo JM, Bayarri MJ, Berger JO, Dawid AP, Heckerman D, Smith AFM, et al., editors. Bayesian statistics. Oxford: University Press; 2007.

Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A-G, Buchner A. G*Power3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39:175–91.

Barlett C, Branch O, Rodeheffer C, Harris R. How long do the short-term violent video game effects last? Aggress Behav. 2009;35:225–36.

Williams D, Skoric M. Internet fantasy violence: a test of aggression in an online game. Commun Monogr. 2005;72:217–33.

Teng SK, Chong GY, Siew AS, Skoric MM. Grand theft auto IV comes to Singapore: effects of repeated exposure to violent video games on aggression. Cyber Behav Soc Netw. 2011;14:597–602.

van Rooij AJ, Kuss DJ, Griffiths MD, Shorter GW, Schoenmakers TM, Van, de Mheen D. The (co-)occurrence of problematic video gaming, substance use, and psychosocial problems in adolescents. J Behav Addict. 2014;3:157–65.

Brunborg GS, Mentzoni RA, Froyland LR. Is video gaming, or video game addiction, associated with depression, academic achievement, heavy episodic drinking, or conduct problems? J Behav Addict. 2014;3:27–32.

Green CS, Sugarman MA, Medford K, Klobusicky E, Bavelier D. The effect of action video game experience on task switching. Comput Hum Behav. 2012;28:984–94.

Strobach T, Frensch PA, Schubert T. Video game practice optimizes executive control skills in dual-task and task switching situations. Acta Psychol. 2012;140:13–24.

Colzato LS, van Leeuwen PJ, van den Wildenberg WP, Hommel B. DOOM’d to switch: superior cognitive flexibility in players of first person shooter games. Front Psychol. 2010;1:8.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hutchinson CV, Barrett DJK, Nitka A, Raynes K. Action video game training reduces the Simon effect. Psychon B Rev. 2016;23:587–92.

Powers KL, Brooks PJ, Aldrich NJ, Palladino MA, Alfieri L. Effects of video-game play on information processing: a meta-analytic investigation. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013;20:1055–79.

Colzato LS, van den Wildenberg WP, Zmigrod S, Hommel B. Action video gaming and cognitive control: playing first person shooter games is associated with improvement in working memory but not action inhibition. Psychol Res. 2013;77:234–9.

Steenbergen L, Sellaro R, Stock AK, Beste C, Colzato LS. Action video gaming and cognitive control: playing first person shooter games is associated with improved action cascading but not inhibition. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0144364.

Download references

Acknowledgements

SK has been funded by a Heisenberg grant from the German Science Foundation (DFG KU 3322/1-1, SFB 936/C7), the European Union (ERC-2016-StG-Self-Control-677804) and a Fellowship from the Jacobs Foundation (JRF 2016–2018).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Center for Lifespan Psychology, Lentzeallee 94, 14195, Berlin, Germany

Simone Kühn, Katharina Schmalen, Markus Weichenberger & Charlotte Witt

Clinic and Policlinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany

Simone Kühn, Dimitrij Tycho Kugler & Jürgen Gallinat

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simone Kühn .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Supplementary material, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Kühn, S., Kugler, D., Schmalen, K. et al. Does playing violent video games cause aggression? A longitudinal intervention study. Mol Psychiatry 24 , 1220–1234 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-018-0031-7

Download citation

Received : 19 August 2017

Revised : 03 January 2018

Accepted : 15 January 2018

Published : 13 March 2018

Issue Date : August 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-018-0031-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Exposure to hate speech deteriorates neurocognitive mechanisms of the ability to understand others’ pain.

• Agnieszka Pluta
• Joanna Mazurek
• Michał Bilewicz

Scientific Reports (2023)

The effects of violent video games on reactive-proactive aggression and cyberbullying

• Yunus Emre Dönmez

Current Psychology (2023)

Machen Computerspiele aggressiv?

• Jan Dieris-Hirche

Die Psychotherapie (2023)

The effect of competitive context in nonviolent video games on aggression: The mediating role of frustration and the moderating role of gender

• Jinqian Liao
• Yanling Liu

Systematic Review of Gaming and Neuropsychological Assessment of Social Cognition

• Elodie Hurel
• Marie Grall-Bronnec
• Gaëlle Challet-Bouju

Neuropsychology Review (2023)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

The evidence that video game violence leads to real-world aggression

A 2018 meta-analysis found that there is a small increase in real-world physical aggression among adolescents and pre-teens who play violent video games. Led by Jay Hull, a social psychologist at Dartmouth College, the study team pooled data from 24 previous studies in an attempt to avoid some of the problems that have made the question of a connection between gaming and aggression controversial.

Many previous studies, according to a story in Scientific American, have been criticized by “a small but vocal cadre of researchers [who] have argued much of the work implicating video games has serious flaws in that, among other things, it measures the frequency of aggressive thoughts or language rather than physically aggressive behaviors like hitting or pushing, which have more real-world relevance.”

Hull and team limited their analysis to studies that “measured the relationship between violent video game use and overt physical aggression,” according to the Scientific American article .

The Dartmouth analysis drew on 24 studies involving more than 17,000 participants and found that “playing violent video games is associated with increases in physical aggression over time in children and teens,” according to a Dartmouth press release describing the study , which was published Oct. 1, 2018, in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences .

The studies the Dartmouth team analyzed “tracked physical aggression among users of violent video games for periods ranging from three months to four years. Examples of physical aggression included incidents such as hitting someone or being sent to the school principal’s office for fighting, and were based on reports from children, parents, teachers, and peers,” according to the press release.

The study was almost immediately called in to question. In an editorial in Psychology Today , a pair of professors claim the results of the meta-analysis are not statistically significant. Hull and team wrote in the PNAS paper that, while small, the results are indeed significant. The Psychology Today editorial makes an appeal to a 2017 statement by the American Psychological Association’s media psychology and technology division “cautioning policy makers and news media to stop linking violent games to serious real-world aggression as the data is just not there to support such beliefs.”

It should be noted, however, that the 2017 statement questions the connection between “serious” aggression while the APA Resolution of 2015 , based on a review of its 2005 resolution by its own experts, found that “the link between violent video game exposure and aggressive behavior is one of the most studied and best established. Since the earlier meta-analyses, this link continues to be a reliable finding and shows good multi-method consistency across various representations of both violent video game exposure and aggressive behavior.”

While the effect sizes are small, they’ve been similar across many studies, according to the APA resolution. The problem has been the interpretation of aggression, with some writers claiming an unfounded connection between homicides, mass shootings, and other extremes of violence. The violence the APA resolution documents is more mundane and involves the kind of bullying that, while often having dire long-term consequences, is less immediately dangerous: “insults, threats, hitting, pushing, hair pulling, biting and other forms of verbal and physical aggression.”

Minor and micro-aggressions, though, do have significant health risks, especially for mental health. People of color, LGBTQ people , and women everywhere experience higher levels of depression and anger, as well as stress-related disorders, including heart disease, asthma, obesity, accelerated aging, and premature death. The costs of even minor aggression are laid at the feet of the individuals who suffer, their friends and families, and society at large as the cost of healthcare skyrockets.

Finally, it should be noted that studies looking for a connection between game violence and physical aggression are not looking at the wider context of the way we enculturate children, especially boys. As WSU’s Stacey Hust and Kathleen Rodgers have shown, you don’t have to prove a causative effect to know that immersing kids in games filled with violence and sexist tropes leads to undesirable consequences, particularly the perpetuation of interpersonal violence in intimate relationships.

No wonder, then, that when feminist media critic Anita Saarkesian launched her YouTube series, “ Tropes vs. Women in Video Games ,” she was the target of vitriol and violence. Years later she’d joke about “her first bomb threat,” but that was only after her life had been upended by the boys club that didn’t like “this woman” showing them the “grim evidence of industry-wide sexism.”

Read more about WSU research and study on video games in “ What’s missing in video games .”

Video Games and Violent Behavior Essay (Critical Writing)

Researchers have been conducting research since 1950s to find out if exposing children to media violence leads to subsequent violence as they grow up. Out of 3500 studies, only 18 studies have shown a negative correlation (Cook, 2000). Since children learn about different things in their environment by imitation and observation, it is not easy to keep them away from the influence of the media.

When they watch violence on the media especially where dramatic heroes are involved, they accept that violence is a good way of resolving conflict. Some of the media outlets pass the message that the world is full of violence and justify why individuals should carry weapons to protect themselves and be more aggressive. Media violence insidiously causes the viewers to become insensitive to violence occurring in real life. Frequent playing of video games among children increases their chances of developing violent behavior (Cook, 2000).

Video games use graphic capabilities to show damaged body parts. They personalize the games by using digital images of recognizable personalities depicted as victims in the scenes. Research has shown that there is a high correlation between media violence and violence exhibited by young people.

Below the age of eight years, children are unable to make a distinction between fantasy and reality. To them, the violence they watch on screen is as real as what they witness in their homes and the larger communities. Adolescents are expected to develop abstract thought and social controls from their magical thinking as children. If this important developmental stage of children takes place in an environment that is violent, their minds become distorted .

Since the time video games came into existence, they have been replete with violence intended to inflict pain or cause death on other human beings. From the games that were developed some years ago to the ones that have just been developed, violence is treated as a central component in the games.

The process of determining if a certain video game contains violence is therefore an easy one. Some of the video games that were developed earlier and contained violence include Space Invaders and Wonder Boy. In space Invaders, the player shoots and kills many aliens in successive attacks while in Wonder Boy, violence is depicted when the hero kills monsters that disappear after their death. The hero is subjected to violence when the enemies shoot and throw stones at him.

When he dies, he falls while the enemies or the attackers disappear in a smoke explosion. This is one of the oldest video games that depict a lot of violence. When young people involve themselves in playing such video games, they eventually develop violence as they grow up. They are unable to differentiate between reality and fantasy and to them what happens in the video games should happen in real life (Cook, 2000).

Apart from the early video games that depicted violence, there are also modern video games that are full of violence. The video game Goldeneye 007 is one of the current video games depicting violence. In the game, the bad characters who are killed do not disappear but rather conduct some maneuvers after their death. It is a shooting video game and involves performing different maneuvers depending on where the character has been shot.

Characters shot on their feet move around clutching to their feet while those who are shot around the neck region go down on their knees holding the neck. In these games, there is splashing of blood when a character is shot. When explosives are used in the games, the characters burst into small pieces which are easily recognized. This makes the video games so real to young people who play them.

Kentucky, Paducah, Colorado and Jonesboro are some of the towns which experienced a spate of school shootings. It was discovered that the shooters were students who had developed the habit of playing video games. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were two students from Columbine High School who killed 13 people and wounded 23 others before they killed themselves. It was discovered that the two found great enjoyment in playing a bloody video game. Harris developed a customized form of the video with more weapons, two shooters and victims who had no ways of fighting back, features that were characteristic of real shootings .

The other way through which video games encourage violent behavior is the fact that the games contain passive gaming. To play and become the winner requires the player to take the role of the aggressor. As opposed to watching the violence on TV, in these video games the player is the one who commits the acts of violence.

This active involvement in the games has been described as a major way through which the thoughts of the players are altered hence increasing their chances of developing violent behavior. Secondly, instead of punishing violence in the video games, rewards are given to the winners. Some games like sniper and army games increase the level of the players according to the number of people he kills. Frequent watching of these games by young people distorts their thinking by convincing them that engaging in violence is a rewarding affair.

To understand the complex relationship between video games and violence, the General Aggression Model (GAM) was developed. It employs physiological responses, thoughts and feelings to determine how individuals respond to video games depicting aggression. It was identified that violent video games have an impact on the response exhibited by gamers. For instance, individuals who are not naturally violent respond with increased hostility and aggression after they watch violent video games.

The games turn into situational variables responsible for changing the perception of players towards acts of aggression. Apart from the short term effects associated with video games, the games may also contribute towards the development of long-term effects. For instance, watching violent video games may cause the development of aggressive attitudes and beliefs. In addition, players of violent video games may be eventually desensitized to aggressive behaviors .

To find out the relationship between video games and violent behavior, a survey was conducted during this study. In the survey, a group of 10 young men were allowed to play violent video games. They were compared with another group that did not play the video games. The results indicated that the group of young men that played violent video games exhibited high physical and verbal aggression towards their peers and even inanimate things when allowed to interact freely.

On the other hand, the group that did not play the video games did not exhibit such aggression. In addition, when the two groups were asked questions based on hypothetical stories, the answers were different. The answers given by the group that played the video games were in favor of violence while answers from the group that did not play the video games did not favor violence.

Such results are an indication that violent video games encourage young people to become violent. The results of this survey can be interpreted to mean that playing video games actually leads to violent behavior.

Cook, D. (2000). Testimony of the American Academy of Pediatrics on Media Violence. Web.

Kalning, K. (2011). Does Video Violence Make Teens Violent. Web.

Kirby, G., & Goodpaster, J. (2006). Thinking:an interdisciplinary approach to critical and creative thought. New York: Prentice Hall.

Pamf. (2011). The Impact of Video Games on Children. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, August 1). Video Games and Violent Behavior. https://ivypanda.com/essays/video-games-and-violent-behavior-critical-writing/

"Video Games and Violent Behavior." IvyPanda , 1 Aug. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/video-games-and-violent-behavior-critical-writing/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Video Games and Violent Behavior'. 1 August.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Video Games and Violent Behavior." August 1, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/video-games-and-violent-behavior-critical-writing/.

1. IvyPanda . "Video Games and Violent Behavior." August 1, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/video-games-and-violent-behavior-critical-writing/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Video Games and Violent Behavior." August 1, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/video-games-and-violent-behavior-critical-writing/.

• The Relationship between playing Violent Video Games and Children’s Aggressive Behavior - What do the Evidences Show?
• Do Violent Video Games Lead to Aggressive Behavior?
• Violent Video Games and How They Affect Youth Violence
• Do Violent Video Games make People Violent?
• Does Violence in Video Games Affect Youth?
• Do Violent Video Games Contribute to Youth Violence?
• Aliza Razell's "Disappear": Looking Through Gaze and Gender
• Aggression, Violence and Deviance
• Psychology of Aggression and Violence
• Research of Violence in the Media
• Understanding the Social Costs of Narcissism
• The Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy
• Personalistic and Naturalistic Approach in the History of Psychology
• The Personal Conflict Resolution
• Two Stages of Life Development

• Human Editing
• Free AI Essay Writer
• AI Outline Generator
• AI Paragraph Generator
• Paragraph Expander
• Essay Expander
• Literature Review Generator
• Research Paper Generator
• Thesis Generator
• Paraphrasing tool
• AI Rewording Tool
• AI Sentence Rewriter
• AI Rephraser
• AI Paragraph Rewriter
• Summarizing Tool
• AI Content Shortener
• Plagiarism Checker
• AI Detector
• AI Essay Checker
• Citation Generator
• Reference Finder
• Book Citation Generator
• Legal Citation Generator
• Journal Citation Generator
• Reference Citation Generator
• Scientific Citation Generator
• Source Citation Generator
• Website Citation Generator
• URL Citation Generator
• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• AI Writing Guides
• AI Detection Guides
• Citation Guides
• Grammar Guides
• Paraphrasing Guides
• Plagiarism Guides
• Summary Writing Guides
• STEM Guides
• Humanities Guides
• Language Learning Guides
• Coding Guides
• Top Lists and Recommendations
• AI Detectors
• AI Writing Services
• Coding Homework Help
• Citation Generators
• Editing Websites
• Essay Writing Websites
• Language Learning Websites
• Math Solvers
• Paraphrasers
• Plagiarism Checkers
• Reference Finders
• Spell Checkers
• Summarizers
• Tutoring Websites

Most Popular

Ai or not ai a student suspects one of their peer reviewer was a bot, how to summarize a research article, loose vs lose, how to cite a blog, apa paraphrasing, why teens should not be allowed to play violent video games essay sample, example.

Times when children would spend their entire free time playing with peers in the streets have mostly gone. Modern children and teenagers prefer calmer forms of entertainment, such as watching television, or in a large degree, playing video games. Although video games can contribute to a child’s development, many of them, unfortunately, are extremely violent. Moreover, games propagating murder and violence, such as Mortal Kombat, Outlast, Grand Theft Auto, and so on, are popular and are being advertised everywhere, making teenagers willing to play them; the fact that they are marked by the ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board) does not help much. However, considering the nature of such games, they should not be allowed for teens to play.

For the human brain, there is no big difference between a real-life situation, and an imaginary one; this is why we get upset even if we think about something unpleasant. For children and teens, who usually have a rich imagination, everything is even more intense. Virtual experiences for them may feel as real as daily life; this happens due to advanced technologies, making computer graphics look extremely close to reality, and also because players take a first-person role in the killing process (often with the view “from a character’s eyes”). If they would passively watch a violent game, it would make less harm than acting as a character who makes progress through a plot by murdering people and destroying what is in the character’s path. This situation is negative, as a child’s or teen’s brain forms new connections every day—they actually learn and memorize what is going on in their favorite games ( HuffingtonPost ).

Moreover, violent games directly reward violent behavior; many modern games do not simply make make players kill virtual reality characters of other players online, but also grant them with scores (experience) or points for successful acts of violence. These points are usually spent on making a player’s character even more efficient in killing, unlocking new cruel ways of murdering, and so on. Sometimes, players will be even praised directly, verbally; for example, in many online shooters, after conducting a killing, players hear phrases like “Nice shot!” encouraging further violence. This is much worse than watching TV, as TV programs do not offer a reward directly tied to the viewer’s behavior, and do not praise viewers for doing something anti-social ( ITHP ).

According the American Psychological Association, violent video games increase children’s aggression. Dr. Phil McGraw explains, “The number one negative effect is they tend to inappropriately resolve anxiety by externalizing it. So when kids have anxiety, which they do, instead of soothing themselves, calming themselves, talking about it, expressing it to someone, or even expressing it emotionally by crying, they tend to externalize it. They can attack something, they can kick a wall, they can be mean to a dog or a pet.” Additionally, there’s an increased frequency of violent responses from children who play these kinds of video games ( Roanna Cooper ).

Unfortunately, many modern games incorporate violence. Having youth play these video games are dangerous, as teenagers and children usually take a first person role in the killing process, and even get rewarded or praised for doing so. According to numerous studies, this leads to an increase of aggression in them.

John, Laura St. “8 Ways Violent Games Are Bad for Your Kids.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

“The Effects of Violent Video Games. Do They Affect Our Behavior?” ITHP. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

“Children and Violent Video Games.” Dr. Phil.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

Follow us on Reddit for more insights and updates.

Comments (0)

Welcome to A*Help comments!

We’re all about debate and discussion at A*Help.

We value the diverse opinions of users, so you may find points of view that you don’t agree with. And that’s cool. However, there are certain things we’re not OK with: attempts to manipulate our data in any way, for example, or the posting of discriminative, offensive, hateful, or disparaging material.

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

More from Best Persuasive Essay Examples

May 28 2023

How does outdoor exercises impact our health and well-being? Essay Sample, Example

Should Screen Time Be Limited? Essay Sample, Example

Why Video Games are Good for the Brain. Essay Sample, Example

Related writing guides, writing a persuasive essay.

Remember Me

What is your profession ? Student Teacher Writer Other

Forgotten Password?

Username or Email

Argumentative Essay On Video Game Violence

Show More Videogames and violence have always been a controversial topic but the argument has always been misconstrued in favor of the idea that video game violence affects youth, when it does not. This simple little thing really is a complete injustice and is completely unfair for the videogame industry, as parents demand they stop making violent games and this is simply trying to silence an artistic medium. It is just insane how much flack a company will actually get for this stuff and it 's stupid. We as a people need to say that enough is enough and that we need to stop all of this protest against violent video games. First thing is first, violent video games do not make serial killers. This is simply just a false statement. In fact violent video …show more content… This is true yes but what most people who do not play video games do not realize is that the typically competitive nature of typically violent games is very clear. There 's even a whole subsection of the gaming community called esports that praise this competitiveness and play electronic sports, which is pretty much video games. These are not games played by a single person but multiple people all going head to head to win the game either for themselves or their team. These teams even amase large audiences typically in the millions to watch them. Does this sound familiar, because it should. This is very similar to the competitive sports teams of today. Both have a lot on the line when they play a game and as such they get stressed because of this as well as the competitive nature of the game itself. All those negative nancies out there must be asking “what about single player games.” Well they are competitive as well believe it or not. Weather the fight is against the struggle of committing a horrible act or the fight against a hard boss people get aggressive and emotion when in a tough situation. Video games being all that they are, stem most of their fun from this feeling of challenge and that is where most of the aggression comes from. One can be playing something as relaxing as farmville, a game in which you tend to your own farm, could start pulling teeth because they need just a little more money to build the next barn they need and overcome that challenge of not having enough space on the farm. Lastly one might say “Then wouldn’t all games lead to more aggressive people as all games have potential to make people aggressive.” The answer is a resounding no. In fact people play games to let out said anger most of the time, venting only helps, not to mention that violent video games help with this more as stated

Related Documents

Causes of violent video games and violence by elizabeth carl.

This is while video games have gone up in sales by just over 200% in the past decade (Essential). The correlation hardly shows that video games cause violence when there are more video games and less crime. However, this is not to say violent video games have no cause in crimes. Violent video games can be an inspiration to commit a crime for someone who is on the edge of committing a…

Violent Video Games And Aggression An Article By Brad Bushman

Video Games and Aggression Do video games amount to more than just entertainment in our everyday lives? With just how popular video games are in our society you have to wonder if they play a part in how we think and in our actions. In an article written by Brad Bushman he talks about the navy yard shooter and how his over consumption of violent video games lead to his more aggressive actions. This issue with violent games started back in 1976 with the release of the game Death Race.…

Do Violent Video Games Cause Violence

According to “Do video games cause violence?”, research has shown a consistent relationship between violent video game use and increased aggressive behavior and empathy and sensitivity to aggression ( Kelly). To seem a players, it may that they have been holding a real gun from the game in the virtual world. You can add points when you kill one person on a computer game. Then you want to get points in the real world and you really want to shoot it in real life.…

Violent Video Games Do Not Commit Mass Shootings

The mentally unstable on the other hand are more likely to use violent video games as an excuse to do violent acts or behave unethically. Studies have shown that people who play violent video games have less stress.…

Why We Need Violent Video Games Rhetorical Analysis

Seeing how Americas next generation is pondering about an outlet for aggression, could violent video games save them from the awful world of violence? Playing these games could just be an outlet of aggression that all people have within them. Everyone has a choice on how to live their life, they have a choice to make wrong or right decisions. Gilsdorf’s uses a personal experience by saying by providing his experience with violent games and says that American football is the real culprit. For men and some women, believe that violent video games are a perfect outlet for aggression and anger.…

Violent Video Games Do Not Cause Violence

A researcher Christopher Ferguson went to do a more detailed approach on the matter and even founded that video games helped decrease violence, as if an outlet for frustrated teens and even adults. He found significant evidence of public bias. Years of research have failed to find any true connection the violence and video games. If anything aggression can be linked to failure in-game mechanics (bugs, lags, system crashes) than…

Role Of Violence In Video Games

Second, people get mad at video game producers for adding too much violence. If you don’t want your children playing violent video games, don’t buy them. Not to mention the numerous setting in-game to prevent from too much violence. I also think it is ridiculous how people are blaming violent videogames for people being violent in…

Violence In Video Games

“An APA study claims to prove a definitive link between violent video games and aggressive behavior, but its limited implications mean the debate is far from settled. ”(Caspari). There are games such as GTA, Bully, Max Payne that promote violence. For example in the game Max Payne it shows scenes in slow motion in which shots go completely through target’s back in a very gruesome way. These genre of games have a very bad influencing picture on violence.…

Video Games And School Shootings

Since the technology advancements of these games have increased they have increased in popularity. Research from the General Aggression Model (GAM) has identified that these violent video games have increased the level of aggression in players. In one experiment conducted people were randomly assigned to one of four conditions. These were a neutral video game which as off-line, a neutral video game which as online, a violent video game off-line and a violent video game online.…

Why Do Violent Video Games Affect Children?

Nowadays, children are seen as more violent. They are usually jumping and running around, there are times where things do get out of hand and eventually next thing you know, the child has hurt someone. They either hit or scratched someone they do not know. These children are described as crazy, annoying, and mean.…

Video Games Do Not Cause Violent Behavior Essay

and they do not gain violent behaviors even with the long term effects of video games, there is insufficient research linking video games with violence only aggressive behaviors, and the fact that video games are only a contributing factor of violence. Video games cannot cause a person to commit acts of violence because the person would have no time to carry out such actions. People who tend to play violent video games…

What Is The Link Between Media And Violence?

It is not direct evidence that these games and usual violent behavior are linked with each other. The games may cast a positive impression as they are an endeavor to keep you safe from evil or something bad. It is the righteous guidance given by the games. The correlation founded by other researchers showing the linkage between video games and real violence ignores many important aspects of the study. Further, the video games taught us the understanding of pain.…

Argumentative Essay On Violent Video Games

and Bushman, Brad J. “Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggressive Behavior, Aggressive Cognition, Aggressive Affect, Physiological Arousal, and Prosocial Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Scientific Literature.” American Psychological Society. Vol. 12 No. 5 Sep. 2001.…

Video Games Should Be Banned Essay

Introduction: "They are melting your brain." "They are ruining your eyes." "They are turning you into a violent person." Violent video games are bad for kids, for they can give off bad effect to many children, and many parents are against that and want to ban violent games to help decrease violence. Over 90% of kids in the United States play video games, according to CNN, the studies of physiological groups took these reports.…

Argumentative Essay About Video Games Addiction

I) Introduction It is hard to believe that, over the last decade, video game has earned its place in many fields of our society, such as economy, media, entertain,.... Despite all the bad reputation, which say videogame is bad for young children, it quickly become a money –drenched industry, even surpasses the movie when put the sales scales annually. Nevertheless, video game’s development also causes many problems, which usually come from its addictive effects. What is more, according to recent survey, more and more children, mostly from 10-17 years old, sooner or later get involved in crime, or be accused of murder, just because of playing video games.…

Related Topics

• Video game controversy

Ready To Get Started?

• Create Flashcards
• Mobile apps
•   Facebook
•   Twitter
• Cookie Settings

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Bret Stephens

The Appalling Tactics of the ‘Free Palestine’ Movement

By Bret Stephens

Opinion Columnist

Last week, Susanne DeWitt, an 89-year-old Holocaust survivor who later became a molecular biologist, spoke before the Berkeley, Calif., City Council to request a Holocaust Remembrance Day proclamation. After taking note of a “horrendous surge in antisemitism,” she was then heckled and shouted down by protesters at the meeting when she mentioned the massacre and rapes in Israel of Oct. 7.

At the same meeting, a woman testified that her 7-year-old Jewish son heard “a group of kids at his school say, ‘Jews are stupid.’” She, too, was heckled : “Zionists are stupider,” a protester said. At the same meeting, others yelled , “cowards, go chase the money, you money suckers” and “you are traitors to this country, you are spies for Israel.”

Protest movements have an honorable place in American history. But not all of them. Not the neo-Nazis who marched in Chicago in 1978. Not the white supremacists who chanted “Jews will not replace us” at their Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017.

And not too much of what passes for a pro-Palestinian movement but is really pro-Hamas, with its calls to get rid of the Jewish state in its entirety (“from the river to the sea …”), its open celebration of the murder of its people (“ resistance is justified …”) and its efforts to mock, minimize or deny the suffering of Israelis, which so quickly descend into the antisemitism on naked display in Berkeley.

How did this happen?

It wasn’t a response to the human suffering in Gaza in recent months. A coalition of Harvard student groups issued a statement on Oct. 7 holding “the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.” Pro-Hamas demonstrations broke out worldwide on Oct. 8 . A Black Lives Matter chapter posted a graphic on Instagram of the Hamas paragliders who murdered hundreds of young Israelis at the Nova music festival. A Cornell professor said he found the massacre “exhilarating,” and demonstrators rallied in his support .

Nor is it a matter of seeking a Palestinian state — another fact the demonstrators openly avow. Among the popular chants at many protests is “ We don’t want no two states! We want all of ’48! ” — all of what had been Mandatory Palestine before the creation of Israel. Israeli soldiers and settlers vacated Gaza almost 20 years ago . The towns and kibbutzim that Hamas invaded on Oct. 7 are only “occupied” if one believes that all of Israel, in any kind of border, is a form of occupation.

In other words, the central, animating sentiment behind much of the protest movement is neither humanitarian nor liberationist. It’s eliminationist. And it expresses itself routinely in the tactics adopted by so many of its leading activists and followers.

Tactics like the grotesque and routine removal or defacement of posters of Israelis kidnapped to Gaza. Or holding a loud and aggressive demonstration outside of New York’s Memorial Sloan Kettering cancer hospital (“Make sure they hear you, they’re in the windows,” said one of the protest leaders), apparently because the hospital has collaborated with Israeli medical institutions. Or forcing a Jewish teacher at a public school in Queens to flee her classroom for safety as hundreds of teenagers rioted through the school, some waving Palestinian flags. Or shouting down Representative Jamie Raskin at the University of Maryland for being “complicit in genocide” when he came to the campus to give a talk on democracy and “the threat to reason in the 21st century.” Or surrounding a theater at the University of California at Berkeley that was supposed to host a talk by an Israeli lawyer, smashing windows, breaking through locked doors, spitting on and grabbing at least one student by the neck and forcing Jewish students to flee through an underground exit.

This is only a partial list. But it reveals the bullying mentality at the heart of the pro-Hamas movement. It isn’t enough for them to speak out; they must shut other voices down. It isn’t enough for them to make a strong or clear argument; they also aim to instill a palpable sense of fear in their opponents. American civil libertarians of the past once understood that inherent in the right to protest was the obligation to respect the right of people with differing views to protest as well. That understanding seems to be wholly absent from the people who think that, say, heckling Raskin into silence is also a form of democracy.

In this sense, critics of Israel who claim that American Jews must choose between Zionism and liberalism have it backward. The illiberals aren’t the people defending the right of an imperfect but embattled democracy to defend its territory and save its hostages. They are the people who, like the former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, want Israel wiped off the map and aren’t ashamed to say so. Not surprisingly, they also seem to share Ahmadinejad’s attitudes toward dealing with dissent.

It’s true that in nearly every political cause, including the most justified, there are ugly elements — the Meir Kahanes or the Louis Farrakhans of the world. But the mark of a morally serious movement lies in its determination to weed out its worst members and stamp out its worst ideas. What we’ve too often seen from the “Free Palestine” crowd is precisely the opposite.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

Bret Stephens is an Opinion columnist for The Times, writing about foreign policy, domestic politics and cultural issues. Facebook