RESEARCH PRESENTATION PROJECT

Videogames: distraction or destruction?

Antonia Sellars Malcolm Campbell 12 March 2014 Eng 1102

INTRODUCTION:
The controversial topic of violent videogames have been an issue since theyd first been created. Although there has been a lot of relativity between excessive aggression and violent videogames there still has not been any solid evidence proposed on the subject. An few examples of the relativity between first person shooter games and excessively violent behavior are evident in the Shooting at the movie theater in Colorado and many other school massacres. All of the shooters were violent gamers.

SOURCE: DO VIOLENT VIDEOGAMES MAKE PEOPLE

MORE VIOLENT IN REAL LIFE?
In this article by Michael Gonchar of New York Times, he discusses the correlation of violent video games and real live violence.

Gonchars article states that: Young people, especially boys, are playing bloodier and more realistic video games than ever before, but he then continues to say that, scientists are looking for links between real life violence and violent video games. However, the research so far is inconclusive.

SOURCE: SHOOTING IN THE DARK

In the article, written by Benedict Carey, he tries to make another direct correlation between first person shooter games and how the perceive real life. In Shooting in the Dark, Benedict Carey writes about research looking for connections between violent video games and violent behavior. Carey started his piece by saying that, The young men who opened fire at Columbine High School, at the movie theater in Aurora, Colo., and in other massacres had this in common: they were video gamers who seemed to be acting out some dark digital fantasy . According to Careys theory, It was as if all that exposure to computerized violence gave them the idea to go on a rampage or at least fueled their urges. One of the things Carey uses to bring his point home is that playing the games affects the short term and stirs hostile feelings and slightly aggressive behavior. Carey goes on to say that young people who are habitual gamers can eventually become slightly more aggressive with the people surrounding them. Although Carey has his own opinion on the matter he clarifies that even though there is no clear evidence whether over long periods of time the habit will cause a person to become an excessively violent person.

SOURCE: RESEARCH ON VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES

AND AGGRESSION: A TRANSLATION
John L. Sherry of the Michigan State University Department of Communications writes about videogames and aggression in this research paper.

John Sherry discusses how some videogame experiments are not conducted in realistic environments where the subjects would feel as at ease while playing the games therefore deeming them somewhat invalid. (4) Whereas those who do field study such as surveys tend to be more accurate. (5) In his article Sherry shares some statistics from experts that are meant to show that all of the date is non inclusive and all depends on the perspective of which the data was taken.

DISCUSSION:
Michael Gonchar proposes the question about whether or not society thinks violent video gaming was an issue. Gonchar lays the facts out and discusses his theory that young children playing these games are more susceptible to violence but also concedes that science has not solidified evidence that stably supports this claim.

DISCUSSION:
Benedict Carey focuses more on the short term responses to habitual gamers. He also discusses the people who go on mass shooting rampages and the fact that they were all participants of first person shooter game playing and also states that this may be the cause for their behavior. Carey also says that these games brings the ideas to their subconscious and also stirs hostile feelings within the player. Carey is very strong in his beliefs but admits that there is no clear scientific evidence.

DISCUSSION:
John Sherry backs up his point by displaying many different expirements relating to videogaming and aggression. Sherrys many different points all came around to the fact that all of the data collected so far was a matter of perception and who was in the study. Sherry also spoke about how some scientific studies about videogames and aggression are inaccurate because they have the subjects in a controlled environment they arent comfortable in whereas those scientists who do a field study are more accurate.

EFFECTIVENESS OF SOURCES
Do violent videogames make people more violent in real life?: I feel like this source raised questions but wasnt very thorough in discussing the topic. I feel like this article used more of others opinions to make the article. This source referred more to another one of my sources, shooting in the dark more than it actually proposed its own information. Although I did not really like this article it related to my topic because it proposed the same question I asked and pointed me in the direction of something that could better answer my question. But if Gonchars article was created simply to propose the question of game violence the article was a success.

EFFECTIVENESS OF SOURCES:
Shooting in the dark: I feel that this article was very affective in that it thoroughly covered the topic. The author supported his argument with statistics and scenarios that made the topic more relatable. This article was very interesting and it related to my topic by going more in depth with the questions it asked and answers it gave. Although the article was supportive of my topic it was still very opinionated. The only issue that I had were that there still wasnt any clarification from scientific evidence concerning first person shooter games effect on gamers real world experiences.

EFFECTIVENESS OF SOURCES
John Sherrys paper was probably the most effective in that it actually displayed real experiments and data that showed how aggression related to violent videogames. Sherry also shed light on the fact that everyone has different perspectives on issues as controversial as this and the person whos reviewing the information is the one who has to decide what they believe or not.

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS RAISED:

Is the relation between aggression and first person shooter games real or is it just a matter of perception? Do the short term effects of violent videogames become long term more often than not? Has the homicide rate increased since more realistic violent shooter games are being created? Should first person shooter games be relegated to military use only or does that fact that the military uses these games sometimes to train have any correlation to veterans sometimes shaky mental status?