Computer games and violence essay

Computer Games And Violence

Introduction

This essay will research into the effects of computer game violence. We will discover who actually plays computer games and what kinds of games they play. Also we will see if it is right to blame violence in computer games for the violent behaviour of children and what effects violent games can have their brains. Video games are regulated in much the same way movies are, we will see if more can be done to make sure that only the intended audience of these games are playing them.

Who plays video games?

Violence in computer games often gets blamed for violent behaviour by teenagers or even children of a younger age. We see a lot of newspaper articles where a teenager has committed a crime and we then find out they have been playing a mature or 18 certificated video game. But we do not see this when adults commit these crimes. Video games do not get blamed for violent crimes when people over the age of around 18 commit them. We assume that because people under the age of 18 commit these crimes they must have been influenced by something they have seen and it is the easiest option to assume playing a violent video game caused this. If we look at research done by Peter D. Hart research associates we find that a large majority of game players are between the ages of 18 and 49 (43%) (Figure 1) and the average age of game players is 30. When children buy games 92% of the time their parents are there at the time they purchased or rented the game. So parents often allow their children to buy games that could not be intended for them. But 32% of parents say they play video games with their children. So the parents could have a strong control on what the child see’s and how long they are exposed to the game and also 63% of parents believe that video games have positive impact on their children.

Video games to blame?

There have been several high profile incidents where computer games have been given the blame. On April 20^th 1999 two students at a school in America killed 12 of their classmates and a teacher in the columbine high school massacre. It was stated at the time that the two boys created their own version of a game called “Doom” by recreating some of the games levels using WAD’s. It was discovered that they did not make a level recreating their school so it would only be speculation to blame the game for their act of violence. They uploaded these versions of the levels to the columbine school computers and AOL. As they got into more trouble the two had their internet access restricted and as a result became more and more angered. A psychiatrist called Jerald Block (MD) argues the fact that they would not have committed these crimes if they had not had their access to this game restricted. He states that they felt most gratifying while they were playing these games and they became immersed in them. It was a way to escape the real world and be free of their problems. After the shootings tests were done and it was found that one student was a clinical psychopath and the other was a depressive. Although it would be wrong to blame the violence in the game for the violent act of the two students some analysts believe that the violent scenes in the game caused desensitilization in the two students, meaning that the constant exposure to the graphic scenes of violence made the emotions provoked by the images irrelevant. This does point blame at the violence seen in computer games but also other media’s could be included such as violent films and music, so it would be hard to say that one computer game influenced these acts. It would not be unfair though to say that incidents surrounding the game caused them to do what they did. An example of this would be a recent incident involving a 17 year old boy who killed an elderly woman after losing to his brother 3 times on a football game called fifa (daily mail). There are no violent scenes in this game so the boy would not have been influenced by anything he has seen but the fact he lost and became frustrated caused him to go out and kill. So sometimes the game itself cannot be fully to blame but the incidents surrounding the people who play the games can be and also the mental health of the people playing them. Another game called ‘Counter strike’ was at the heart of strong debates on video game violence after the Virginia Tech shootings in America. One man in particular called Jack Thompson was adamant that this game was to blame for the shootings. Jack Thompson is a Florida Attorney who has always been a strong opponent against violent video games. After the shootings he said “These are real lives. These are real people in the ground now because of this game. I have no doubt about it”. When tragedies like these happen it can be seen that violent video games are at the front of all that can be accused and some people believe that they get blamed so quickly so that these people who strongly oppose video games can give the campaign against them a boost. Jason Della Rocca, executive director of the international game developers association said “It's so sad. These massacre chasers — they're worse than ambulance chasers — they're waiting for these things to happen so they can jump on their soapbox". So this could be why we are always hearing about violent video games being the cause of these types of events, because the people who are against them can use these tragic events to force the opinion of video games being a bad influence. Although they are not wrong, at the same time they are not right when suggesting a video game is the only reason for young people committing these crimes.

Effects of violent video games on the brain

Research by the Indiana university school of medicine in America suggests that consistent exposure to violent images can affect the brain even in non-aggressive people. They did a study on a group of teenagers and found out that the part of the brain that controls decision-making and self control could be impaired by exposure to violent scenes. The research consisted of two groups of 14 teenagers, 5 of which were female. One group consisted of normal teenagers with no history of disruptive behaviour and the other group had teenagers who have had a history of violence and been diagnosed with disruptive behaviour disorder. Members of both groups had all been exposed to different amounts of violent media. The two groups then took part in a test called a counting stroop task. Stroop tasks are concentration tests that require the use of the part of the brain that controls decision making and self-control (the frontal cortex). So for example you would be shown ‘444’ and the answer would be three. After the tests had been completed, brain scans were taken and showed that all the teenagers in the disruptive behaviour disorder group had a low amount of activity in the frontal cortex, even the ones who were exposed to a high amount of violent material. In the group of teenagers without any behaviour disorders it was discovered that the members who were exposed to a controlled level of violent media had normal activity in their frontal cortex, whereas the others members who were exposed to high amounts of violent material had the same amount of activity as those in the disruptive behaviour group. The media both groups were exposed to was not just video games however, it also included violent scenes that could be seen on TV, and so it took two aspects of a teenager’s life that could play a strong part in their daily lives. Study leader professor Vincent Matthews explained “We found that individuals in the control group with high media violence exposure showed a brain activation pattern similar to the pattern of the aggressive group”. So although this research is not conclusive it does suggest that violent images in television and video games could have an impact on the part of the brain.

Regulations

Violence in video games is regulated and giving certificates which are, 12+, 15+ and 18+ or in American (E) everyone, (T) teen or (M) mature. But people argue that these regulations just do not work. It can be seen that games with violence warnings and receive negative publicity actually have seen their sales increase, so it is clear people are not put off by the warnings the regulators put on the games. It is also strong opinion that anything you try to put restrictions on people often try harder to get hold of. In America some states have taken ever more drastic action to cut down on children buying games they are not supposed to. In Arkansas it is under consideration that displays in shops displaying games over the age restriction of 17 would have to be more than 5 feet high and also a bill putting partial blame for acts of violence committed by children on the companies that sell games that supposedly inspire their actions. Rather than bringing in regulations and rules constantly parents should play a more active role in the media their children are exposed to. If parents were to buy or supervise their children when they are buying games or even join in playing the game with their children, they can decide for themselves whether the game is too violent. A lot of parents already do this, 56% say they play games with their children because it is a good opportunity to view the content of the game.

Conclusion

In conclusion we can see that violent video games do have an effect on the brain. But it would inappropriate to say that they influence people to commit violent crimes. They can cause children to be desensitized but that would not necessarily mean they will go out and commit crimes, it just means that they would find certain scenes of violence less disturbing than people who have not played violent video games. You would not get so desensitized that you would just walk someone who had been shot or struck by a car, you would still be effected or feel the need to help the person. Regulations on violent games already seem to be pretty strict so it is down to the shops selling the games to enforce these restrictions in the right way and also parents should be aware of what their child is being exposed to. Regulations being to lenient cannot be to blame when parents buy the games for the age of person they are not meant for so if it is found that a young person has committed violent crimes because of what they have seen in a video game then greater focus should be placed on parents. Children who commit these crimes often already have some form of mental illness or have been mistreated at home, which can all be reasons for someone to commit a violent crime. So overall it can be said that violent computer games can have some negative effects on the brain but with good restrictions placed on the time children spend playing the games, they can often also be stimulating and have positive impact of a person.