Forum for Science, Industry and Business

Sponsored by:     3M 
Search our Site:

 

Does video game violence harm teens? New study weighs the evidence

21.04.2011
How much scientific evidence is there for and against the assertion that exposure to video game violence can harm teens?

Three researchers have developed a novel method to consider that question: they analyzed the research output of experts who filed a brief in a U.S. Supreme Court case involving violent video games and teens.

Their conclusion? Experts who say violent video games are harmful to teens have published much more evidence supporting their claims than have experts on the other side of the debate.

"We took what I think is a very objective approach: we looked at the individuals on both sides of the debate and determined if they actually have expertise in the subjects in which they call themselves experts," said Brad Bushman, co-author of the study and professor of communication and psychology at Ohio State University.

"The evidence suggests that those who argue violent video games are harmful have a lot more experience and stronger credentials than those who argue otherwise."

Bushman conducted the study with Craig Anderson, professor of psychology at Iowa State University, and Deana Pollard Sacks, professor of law at Texas Southern University. Their research will be published in May in the Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy.

Their study involved Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association, a case before the U.S. Supreme Court that will decide whether the state of California can ban the sale or rental of violent video games to children under 18. The court is expected to rule on the case this summer.

In this case, groups supporting and opposing the law have filed what are called briefs of amicus curiae. These are briefs by people or groups who are not involved directly in the case, but want to offer the court their expert opinion on the issues involved.

The researchers analyzed the credentials of the 115 people who signed the Gruel brief, who believe video violence is harmful, and the 82 signers of the Millett brief, who believe video violence is not harmful. (The briefs are named after the lead attorneys for each side.)

The data for the study came from the PsycINFO database, which provides more than 3 million references to the psychological literature from the 1800s to the present, including peer-reviewed journal articles, book chapters or essays, and books.

For each of the signers of the two briefs, the researchers calculated how many articles and books they published on issues relating to violence and aggression in general and on media violence specifically.

The results showed that 60 percent of the Gruel brief signers (who believe video game violence is harmful) have published at least one scientific study on aggression or violence in general, compared to only 17 percent of the Millett brief signers.

Moreover, when the researchers looked specifically at the subject of media violence, 37 percent of Gruel brief signers have published at least one study in that area, compared to just 13 percent of the Millett brief signers.

In a further analysis, Bushman and Anderson examined where the signers of both briefs have published their research. The best academic journals have the highest standards and the most rigorous peer review, so only the best research should be published there, Bushman said.

The researchers used a well-established formula, called the impact factor, to determine the top-tier journals, and then calculated how many signers had published in these journals.

Results showed that signers of the Gruel brief had published over 48 times more studies in top-tier journals than did those who signed the Millett brief.

"That's a staggering difference," Bushman said. "It provides strong support for the argument that video game violence is indeed harmful."

Bushman said he and his colleagues did this study because they wanted to show that there is a way for the Supreme Court to evaluate the contradictory evidence it has been presented.

"The justices were presented with two briefs, arguing opposite sides, and they may think the contradictory briefs simply cancel each other out," Bushman said.

"We just wanted to point out to the justices that not all briefs are the same. In this case, the credentials and experience of those who signed the Gruel brief far exceeds that of the ones who signed the Millett brief."

Brad Bushman | EurekAlert!
Further information:
http://www.osu.edu

Further reports about: Supreme scientific evidence video game violence video games

More articles from Studies and Analyses:

nachricht The Great Unknown: Risk-Taking Behavior in Adolescents
19.01.2017 | Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung

nachricht A sudden drop in outdoor temperature increases the risk of respiratory infections
11.01.2017 | University of Gothenburg

All articles from Studies and Analyses >>>

The most recent press releases about innovation >>>

Die letzten 5 Focus-News des innovations-reports im Überblick:

Im Focus: Quantum optical sensor for the first time tested in space – with a laser system from Berlin

For the first time ever, a cloud of ultra-cold atoms has been successfully created in space on board of a sounding rocket. The MAIUS mission demonstrates that quantum optical sensors can be operated even in harsh environments like space – a prerequi-site for finding answers to the most challenging questions of fundamental physics and an important innovation driver for everyday applications.

According to Albert Einstein's Equivalence Principle, all bodies are accelerated at the same rate by the Earth's gravity, regardless of their properties. This...

Im Focus: Traffic jam in empty space

New success for Konstanz physicists in studying the quantum vacuum

An important step towards a completely new experimental access to quantum physics has been made at University of Konstanz. The team of scientists headed by...

Im Focus: How gut bacteria can make us ill

HZI researchers decipher infection mechanisms of Yersinia and immune responses of the host

Yersiniae cause severe intestinal infections. Studies using Yersinia pseudotuberculosis as a model organism aim to elucidate the infection mechanisms of these...

Im Focus: Interfacial Superconductivity: Magnetic and superconducting order revealed simultaneously

Researchers from the University of Hamburg in Germany, in collaboration with colleagues from the University of Aarhus in Denmark, have synthesized a new superconducting material by growing a few layers of an antiferromagnetic transition-metal chalcogenide on a bismuth-based topological insulator, both being non-superconducting materials.

While superconductivity and magnetism are generally believed to be mutually exclusive, surprisingly, in this new material, superconducting correlations...

Im Focus: Studying fundamental particles in materials

Laser-driving of semimetals allows creating novel quasiparticle states within condensed matter systems and switching between different states on ultrafast time scales

Studying properties of fundamental particles in condensed matter systems is a promising approach to quantum field theory. Quasiparticles offer the opportunity...

All Focus news of the innovation-report >>>

Anzeige

Anzeige

Event News

Sustainable Water use in Agriculture in Eastern Europe and Central Asia

19.01.2017 | Event News

12V, 48V, high-voltage – trends in E/E automotive architecture

10.01.2017 | Event News

2nd Conference on Non-Textual Information on 10 and 11 May 2017 in Hannover

09.01.2017 | Event News

 
Latest News

Tracking movement of immune cells identifies key first steps in inflammatory arthritis

23.01.2017 | Health and Medicine

Electrocatalysis can advance green transition

23.01.2017 | Physics and Astronomy

New technology for mass-production of complex molded composite components

23.01.2017 | Process Engineering

VideoLinks
B2B-VideoLinks
More VideoLinks >>>