Untitled Document

Negative Effects
Home Positive Effects Negative Effects Addiction Children & Adolescents References	There has been a lot of controversy over the negative effects of video games, but common effects have emerged from research. One negative effect that may be present for all types of video games is excessive play. This is discussed in the Addiction section of this site, and will not be elaborated on here. The main focus of this section is the negative effects of violent video games. While nonviolent video games have been found to have some negative effects, there seems to be a large number of negative effects from violent video games. Research on violent video games has been a common focus in many recent studies. A 2001 meta-analysis (Sherry, as cited by Farrar, Krcmar, & Nowak, 2006) found that games with human and fantasy violence were more strongly associated with aggression than sports games. Although the amount of research on violent video games is limited when compared to the amount of research on television and film violence, many studies demonstrate that exposure to these types of games increases aggressive feelings (ex: Anderson & Ford, 1986; Funk, Flores, Buchman, & Germann, 1999), aggressive thoughts (ex: Calvert & Tan, 1994; Kirsh, Olczak, & Mounts, 2005; Krahe & Moller, 2004), and aggressive behavior (ex: Anderson & Dill, 2000; Irwin & Gross, 1995). A 2004 meta-analysis (Anderson) confirmed these findings. General Aggression Model The General Aggression Model (GAM) has been used in many violent video game studies. The model states that there are person factors and situational factors that interact to influence a person's feelings and thoughts. Person factors have to do with traits of the person playing the game (such as attitudes towards violence and trait aggression), while situational factors pertain to the environment the player is in (such as exposure to real-life violence or media violence). These two factors interact to influence the player's internal state (Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro, 2007). In other words, the way a person feels (person factor) affects their actions. If they behave in an aggressive manner because of the way they feel (person factor), their behavior becomes a situational factor that further influences how they feel. Individual Differences The first part of the General Aggression Model states that there are individual traits that people possess (person factors) that influence their thoughts and behaviors. Some individuals may have a calm demeanor, while others may naturally be more hostile. A study by Peng, Liu, & Mou (2008) investigated a player's physical-aggressive personality with the aggressiveness of the way they played a violent video game. They found that players with more physically-aggressive personalities have a more aggressive style of playing, after controlling for gender differences and gaming experience. Aggression Related Priming The second part of the General Aggression Model pertains to the situational factors that influence a person's thoughts and feelings. Exposure to violent and aggressive content in video games may cause more aggressive thoughts to be activated in the player's memory (Geen, 1990, as cited by Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro, 2007). The aggressive thoughts that are activated spread to other thoughts that can be associated with aggression. Any ideas that are closely linked (such as "gun" and "shoot") form a stronger association in one's memory, and will therefore be more readily accessible. Anderson et al (1998, as cited by Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro, 2007) conducted a study on this topic and found that when participants were exposed to words like "gun" and "knife," they had more aggression related thoughts than those who were exposed to neutral words like "narrate" and "dessert." This illustrates that someone's thoughts and feelings can become more aggressive if they are exposed to violent games. The General Aggression Model includes this aggression related priming to explain violent video game effects. Weapons Effect If words like "gun" and "knife" lead to more aggressive thoughts, then the sight of a gun would probably have the same effect. Some video games offer an interactive light gun (like the one in Duck Hunt) to “shoot” with; and some are very realistic. The weapons effect states that the mere presence of a weapon will increase the aggressive thoughts, and then the behaviors of participants who see the weapon (Berkowitz & LePage, 1967 as cited by Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro, 2007). The 2007 study by Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro investigated the weapons effect and found that playing with an interactive light gun leads to higher aggression scores and produces more hostility in participants than when playing with a standard controller. Reward and Punishment Another thing that can influence aggression when playing violent video games is reward and punishment for violent actions made within the game. A 2005 study (Carnagey & Anderson) investigated rewards and punishments for aggressive actions within a game. They found that rewarding violent video game actions increased hostile emotion, aggressive thinking, and aggressive behavior. They also found that punishing violent actions increased hostile emotions but did not increase aggressive thinking or aggressive behavior. This suggests that games that reward violent actions can increase aggressive behavior by increasing aggressive thinking. Effects on Helping Behaviors Playing violent video games has been found to have a negative effect on pro-social helping behaviors. In an experiment by even though there was no difference in helping rates, participants who played a violent video game took 450% longer to help a person injured in a fight) than those who played a non-violent video game. The same participants who played a violent video game were also less likely to even notice the fight, and those who did notice it thought the fight was less serious than those who played a nonviolent video game (Bushman & Anderson, 2009). Desensitization and Sensitization Exposure to violence in video games has also been found to have an effect on physiological arousal. Measures of physiological arousal in video game studies have included blood pressure, heart rate (Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro, 2007), respiration rate, and skin conductance (Muller, Bliesener, & Luthman, 2008). The findings from the Bushman & Anderson (2009) study above may be explained by desensitization to violence. In a 2008 study (Staude-Muller, Bliesinger, & Luthman), participants who played a highly violent video game with “gore” turned on had weaker physiological responses to aversive pictures than participants who played a less-violent version of the game. This supports the desensitization hypothesis, which states that prolonged exposure to violence can weaken a response to violence in video games and in real life as well. In the same study by Staude-Muller, Bliesinger, & Luthman (2008), even though neither group differed in their subjective judgment of aggressive or aversive stimuli, the participants who played a highly violent video game had a stronger reaction to aggressive stimuli. This supports the sensitization hypothesis; the reaction becomes stronger due to repeated exposure to violence. In summary, violence in video games can lead to emotional desensitization to aversive stimuli, and can also sensitize the player to aggressive cues that result in stronger physiological reactions. Pathological Use There is a claim that video games are addictive. A study of a national sample of youth ages 8-18 revealed that 8.5% of the video game players showed pathological patterns of play. This study used the DSM-IV criteria for pathological gamblers because no criteria exist for gaming. Video game use habits were also analyzed and the results showed that pathological gamers spent twice as much time playing games. The study also found that pathological gamers were more likely to have a game system in their bedroom, had more trouble paying attention in school, received poorer grades in school, had more health problems, and were more likely to "feel addicted." Pathological gamers were also twice as likely to have been diagnosed with an attention problem (Gentile, 2009). Looking Forward A meta-analysis by Sherry (2001) found that effect sizes in violent video game studies have increased over time, with more current studies producing stronger effects. This could be due to the technological advancement of graphics in games, making them more realistic to the players. Ivory & Kalyanaraman (2007) found that technologically advanced video games increased one's sense of presence, involvement, and physiological and self-reported arousal after playing, but they did not find effects on accessibility of aggressive thoughts. Violent video games may also have long term effects. An exploratory analysis (Staude-Muller, Bliesinger, & Luthman, 2008) revealed that more experienced players reacted less sensitively to aversive stimuli, indicating emotional desensitization due to repeated exposure to violence in video games.

Negative Effects

Anger

There has been a lot of controversy over the negative effects of video games, but common effects have emerged from research. One negative effect that may be present for all types of video games is excessive play. This is discussed in the Addiction section of this site, and will not be elaborated on here. The main focus of this section is the negative effects of violent video games. While nonviolent video games have been found to have some negative effects, there seems to be a large number of negative effects from violent video games. Research on violent video games has been a common focus in many recent studies. A 2001 meta-analysis (Sherry, as cited by Farrar, Krcmar, & Nowak, 2006) found that games with human and fantasy violence were more strongly associated with aggression than sports games. Although the amount of research on violent video games is limited when compared to the amount of research on television and film violence, many studies demonstrate that exposure to these types of games increases aggressive feelings (ex: Anderson & Ford, 1986; Funk, Flores, Buchman, & Germann, 1999), aggressive thoughts (ex: Calvert & Tan, 1994; Kirsh, Olczak, & Mounts, 2005; Krahe & Moller, 2004), and aggressive behavior (ex: Anderson & Dill, 2000; Irwin & Gross, 1995). A 2004 meta-analysis (Anderson) confirmed these findings.

General Aggression Model

The General Aggression Model (GAM) has been used in many violent video game studies. The model states that there are person factors and situational factors that interact to influence a person's feelings and thoughts. Person factors have to do with traits of the person playing the game (such as attitudes towards violence and trait aggression), while situational factors pertain to the environment the player is in (such as exposure to real-life violence or media violence). These two factors interact to influence the player's internal state (Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro, 2007). In other words, the way a person feels (person factor) affects their actions. If they behave in an aggressive manner because of the way they feel (person factor), their behavior becomes a situational factor that further influences how they feel.

Individual Differences

The first part of the General Aggression Model states that there are individual traits that people possess (person factors) that influence their thoughts and behaviors. Some individuals may have a calm demeanor, while others may naturally be more hostile. A study by Peng, Liu, & Mou (2008) investigated a player's physical-aggressive personality with the aggressiveness of the way they played a violent video game. They found that players with more physically-aggressive personalities have a more aggressive style of playing, after controlling for gender differences and gaming experience.

Aggression Related Priming

The second part of the General Aggression Model pertains to the situational factors that influence a person's thoughts and feelings. Exposure to violent and aggressive content in video games may cause more aggressive thoughts to be activated in the player's memory (Geen, 1990, as cited by Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro, 2007). The aggressive thoughts that are activated spread to other thoughts that can be associated with aggression. Any ideas that are closely linked (such as "gun" and "shoot") form a stronger association in one's memory, and will therefore be more readily accessible. Anderson et al (1998, as cited by Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro, 2007) conducted a study on this topic and found that when participants were exposed to words like "gun" and "knife," they had more aggression related thoughts than those who were exposed to neutral words like "narrate" and "dessert." This illustrates that someone's thoughts and feelings can become more aggressive if they are exposed to violent games. The General Aggression Model includes this aggression related priming to explain violent video game effects.

Weapons Effect

If words like "gun" and "knife" lead to more aggressive thoughts, then the sight of a gun would probably have the same effect. Some video games offer an interactive light gun (like the one in Duck Hunt) to “shoot” with; and some are very realistic. The weapons effect states that the mere presence of a weapon will increase the aggressive thoughts, and then the behaviors of participants who see the weapon (Berkowitz & LePage, 1967 as cited by Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro, 2007). The 2007 study by Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro investigated the weapons effect and found that playing with an interactive light gun leads to higher aggression scores and produces more hostility in participants than when playing with a standard controller.

Reward and Punishment

Another thing that can influence aggression when playing violent video games is reward and punishment for violent actions made within the game. A 2005 study (Carnagey & Anderson) investigated rewards and punishments for aggressive actions within a game. They found that rewarding violent video game actions increased hostile emotion, aggressive thinking, and aggressive behavior. They also found that punishing violent actions increased hostile emotions but did not increase aggressive thinking or aggressive behavior. This suggests that games that reward violent actions can increase aggressive behavior by increasing aggressive thinking.

Effects on Helping Behaviors

Playing violent video games has been found to have a negative effect on pro-social helping behaviors. In an experiment by even though there was no difference in helping rates, participants who played a violent video game took 450% longer to help a person injured in a fight) than those who played a non-violent video game. The same participants who played a violent video game were also less likely to even notice the fight, and those who did notice it thought the fight was less serious than those who played a nonviolent video game (Bushman & Anderson, 2009).

Desensitization and Sensitization

Exposure to violence in video games has also been found to have an effect on physiological arousal. Measures of physiological arousal in video game studies have included blood pressure, heart rate (Bartlett, Harris, & Baldassaro, 2007), respiration rate, and skin conductance (Muller, Bliesener, & Luthman, 2008).
The findings from the Bushman & Anderson (2009) study above may be explained by desensitization to violence. In a 2008 study (Staude-Muller, Bliesinger, & Luthman), participants who played a highly violent video game with “gore” turned on had weaker physiological responses to aversive pictures than participants who played a less-violent version of the game. This supports the desensitization hypothesis, which states that prolonged exposure to violence can weaken a response to violence in video games and in real life as well.

In the same study by Staude-Muller, Bliesinger, & Luthman (2008), even though neither group differed in their subjective judgment of aggressive or aversive stimuli, the participants who played a highly violent video game had a stronger reaction to aggressive stimuli. This supports the sensitization hypothesis; the reaction becomes stronger due to repeated exposure to violence.
In summary, violence in video games can lead to emotional desensitization to aversive stimuli, and can also sensitize the player to aggressive cues that result in stronger physiological reactions.

Pathological Use

There is a claim that video games are addictive. A study of a national sample of youth ages 8-18 revealed that 8.5% of the video game players showed pathological patterns of play. This study used the DSM-IV criteria for pathological gamblers because no criteria exist for gaming. Video game use habits were also analyzed and the results showed that pathological gamers spent twice as much time playing games. The study also found that pathological gamers were more likely to have a game system in their bedroom, had more trouble paying attention in school, received poorer grades in school, had more health problems, and were more likely to "feel addicted." Pathological gamers were also twice as likely to have been diagnosed with an attention problem (Gentile, 2009).

Looking Forward

A meta-analysis by Sherry (2001) found that effect sizes in violent video game studies have increased over time, with more current studies producing stronger effects. This could be due to the technological advancement of graphics in games, making them more realistic to the players. Ivory & Kalyanaraman (2007) found that technologically advanced video games increased one's sense of presence, involvement, and physiological and self-reported arousal after playing, but they did not find effects on accessibility of aggressive thoughts.

Violent video games may also have long term effects. An exploratory analysis (Staude-Muller, Bliesinger, & Luthman, 2008) revealed that more experienced players reacted less sensitively to aversive stimuli, indicating emotional desensitization due to repeated exposure to violence in video games.