Violent video games found not to affect empathy
In a previous post about whether or not child sex bots should be banned many posters said that they should be banned. The recurring justification for the ban is that it contributes to criminal sexual urges against children. As a counter argument I brought up the example of violent video games and mentioned that if these sex bots can be banned as a way to regulate the thinking patterns of pedophiles then it could set a precedent and that the argument being used is logically the same argument people use to ban violent video games or pornography.
In the discussion I asked if anyone could cite a single scientific study in support of the ban? In addition I cited the study on violent video games which proved:
The psychological questionnaire revealed no differences in measures of aggression and empathy between gamers and non-gamers. This finding was backed up by the fMRI data, which demonstrated that both gamers and non-gamers had similar neural responses to the emotionally provocative images. These results surprised the researchers, as they were contrary to their initial hypothesis, and suggest that any negative effects of violent video games on perception or behavior may be short-lived.
Violent video games found not to affect empathy
Playing violent video games is proven not to affect empathy. A person can kill innocent people all day in their fantasy world and there is no evidence which shows it will turn them into a psychopath in the real world. So it seems a person can behave as a psychopath in the game but this according to the study has no impact on their empathy in the real world.
I would say that there could be games which are more dangerous than others where the lines are perhaps blurred, but this study applies specifically to video games and so the result narrowly should be applied to that example.
Should violent video games be banned?
References
Frontiers. (2017, March 8). Violent video games found not to affect empathy: Study finds no link between long-term playing of violent video games and changes in empathetic neural responses. ScienceDaily. Retrieved July 6, 2017 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170308081057.htm
I think the opposite, actually. Violent videogames can serve as an exhaust valve for aggression, letting it out digitally rather than in real life.
I'm not sure, but I think that one has been disproven: http://news.wisc.edu/study-finds-violent-video-games-provide-quick-stress-relief-but-at-a-price/
The playing of games is a great mood elevator, but the violence part can make us perceive the world as more hostile.
Plus, using different violence as a way to mitigate anger actually serves to prime us for more anger. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/200909/you-cant-punch-your-way-out-anger
So play can relive stress and curb aggression, but violence only begets more violence it seems. Fascinating topic, but I do find I like my media violence cartoony and ridiculous rather than realistic and visceral as it feels a bit different to me.
In cases like these I have always been on the wall. I love gaming, even though I rarely play anymore. But my second job involves indie work with game companies, so yes I have a deep connection to gaming. But in cases like these it always comes down to the minds involved. Some minds are strong and have a good grasp on reality, while some are very easily manipulated by basic imagery and story telling. Sometimes real life involvement isn't the only element of environment that can affect a mind/growing mind. Again I'm more or less on the wall.
So people who have been diagnosed can be banned from playing video games but why ban video games for everyone? I don't think anyone is specifically advocating that we give violent video games to people in a mental hospital for self control related issues.
But what percentage of the population is that?
I'm not saying anything about banning. That's something I won't confront. Too unstable of ground. My point being here, is that saying video games or any kind of imagination based activity or source of entertainment not having any affect on the psyche is not true. Whether it is a positive or a negative affect. Especially long term, in which even those involved in the article admit needs further research. The psyche is constantly changing due to internal and external factors, like environment. Entertainment is very much a part of environment. Even in the article it admits that the affects can be "short-lived", meaning there is an affect. But again it can change due to exposure time and other environmental factors. Also those with self control issues aren't all in institute. Whether it is a personality disorder or a mental illness. They are a part of the general population like it or not, and can't be ruled out completely for something as broad as entertainment. My main point here again, to keep this short, is to say that there isn't any affect on the mind is too far fetched. But to say violent entertainment causes murders is also far fetched.
Not true based on what evidence? Are you saying you've done everything you've imagined yourself doing because it affected your psyche? Why wouldn't you be able to use your conscious mind?
Again even in the article they say there is an affect. It is short lived, but there still is a change. The mind is built to change, the entire human nature is built this way. Evolution, survival, reaction and adaptation is key to human existence.
When it comes to choice, no not every time I imagined something I did it. One thing to note though is your overall investment in that choice. When you make a choice you aren't always 100% in backing it. Of course you use your consciousness to act, but your sub-conscious still takes a roll. It is a part of the mind that can't be fully ignored as a human being. Both can be affected by the world and entertainment, and both are used frequently at the same time during full consciousness.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-media-psychology-effect/201203/brain-behavior-and-media
I like this article because it highlights the positives and negatives of entertainment on the human mind.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/evol-psy/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-how-and-why-sex-differences/201212/periodic-table-human-psychological-adaptations
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_adaptation
https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/the-mind-in-the-world-culture-and-the-brain#.WV-hDIVMGaM
So yes one is a wiki article, but it contains a good bulk of other articles out there that could be listed. These are just a few of the numerous articles/notes about the minds evolutionary traits and how it reacts to every external force including entertainment and culture in general. Again I do not agree or disagree with banning anything in media or entertainment, but I do recognize the effects it has on the mind.
My point is there are no actual studies showing the dangers. If there is no science behind a ban then there is no basis to justify a ban except subconscious feelings.
I would agree with this, media or entertainment does not make someone a homicidal maniac, sex crazed rapist, etc. That level of instability would come from more extreme tangible/physical/psychological environmental factors. Media and imagery couldn't have that drastic of an impact on the mind even subconsciously without other external actions at work. I couldn't justify the ban on any media either nor can I justify not banning it. Luckily I would never have to make such a decision in my life.
@o-soul you bring up some amazing points in your argument. Considering the reletive age of violent, specifically lifelike violent video games, it's premature to say there is no effect on empathy or the human psyche. We only could have been studying something like this for 20 years, and definitely haven't spent enough time on it to be sure of anything definitive especially considering the time frame and amount of exposure that varies on a variety of different minds.
Moreover, regardless what the science of this particular study says, I still find the claim that the violence we see has no effect on us to be pretty dubious considering that we know unequivocally that even advertising can affect what we buy and how we behave. We don't have the ability to "un-know" things after all.
While it may not add to the argument, I have had me some fun with violent video games , films, and lyrics, but I've noticed that as I've aged, learned more about the wider world, the oppressive and insidious nature of racism, toxic masculinity, and capitalism and the images used to reinforce unhealthy beliefs; I have found it more and more difficult to enjoy content that seems not to take these things into consideration.
I'm bothered that too many games create worlds where violence is the ONLY interaction with in. I'm unable to play games that don't say anything about the hyper violence we're committing beyond how cool it's supposed to be, and I question what I put in my brain more and more. For me, this proves that there is a difference in who I was as a person between Gears of War 1 and 3. Chainsawing aliens (or whatever) isn't as fun as it used to be and actively challenges who I'd like to be as a person.
So, I don't feel anyone should step in and dissolve or block violent video games, but I also think it's irresponsible to say there is no effect on the images and meanings we put into our mind, ESPECIALLY through a locus of control that gaming allows us to have. It's powerful even if we dont' fully understand it, and worth respecting what the death and murder means when we commit it. Our attraction to it alone makes that apparent in my book.
You can say the same about a McDonald's big mac. Some people are weak and can't control the urge to eat big macs. Does that mean we should go around banning big macs?
Again as posted already my argument is NOT about banning anything, but about the claim that video games and entertainment or any imaginative activity doesn't have any impact over the psyche. Even those involved in the article say more research is needed. Again I am not arguing for what can and cannot be banned, but simply the claim about external exposures and their affects on the human mind.
I'm pretty sure the way parents and other treat children has a huge effect on how they in turn treat others. If children encounter double standards and unfair treatment, they will learn it. They also understand very well that a game world is a game world, and you are supposed to play the game. But if in the game world they are teased or treated unfairly, it will have a negative effect on their personality - just like in the real world.
So I don't think violent games should be banned, but bad behavior towards children.
This is was always a no issue like the old targets that "corrupt the young people" like the rock and roll the movies the comics and the tv
This comment has received a sweet gift of Dank Amps in the flavor of 6.41 % upvote from @lovejuice thanks to: @ukato. Vote for Aggroed!
That's a relief. I've massacred thousands in video games!! It's nice to know society is safe from me.
It's crazy that people think violent video games promote violence. If anything it most likely is a deterrent from it as you can take out your frustrations in the digital world.
I don't really like to blame video games for people's actions. People need to learn to not copy everything they see in movies and games.
@dana-edwards, in a way violate video games promote violence I remember when everyone used to play Call of duty and then when they got outside in the real world they would use these skills such as even when we payed paintball. Young children should avoid these violating games because children's mind as developing minds , if they are exposed to this, it is bad for their future
Before video games little children played Cowboys and Indians. Does that mean Cowboys and Indians cause racism and interracial murder?
I don't think anyone can police the mind of anyone else with the current technology. With technology of the future it might be possible for a community to police your mind, but would you want your thoughts regulated by communal standards?
At what point does society move on from policing behavior and onto policing thoughts? If it's not morally wrong to police violent video games then when the technology becomes sophisticated enough where does it end and what can't be policed? If we are logically consistent about it then why would thoughts be sacred?
It does not produce racism , racism is created from thoughts and history that we have yet to forget . There is not end to violent video games because one part comes out then the next and so on, and indivuals even grown ups look forward to it as well . Just because we use a gun in call of duty does not mean we use a gun in real life
Nice post sir , love to Read it .
Keep going .
Please upload some more post like this .
To me i think violent video games kills empathy, my lil nephew wouldn't greet or say sorry if you fell or cough.....We had to ban his games for a while and the lad is just 8.
It really affects kids
How do you explain the scientific study I cited which proves the exact opposite of what you claim?
Because, some scientific studies are horsecrap. My son gets so hyped up when he plays first shooters, I banned them! He can only play sports games and minecraft! Maybe the scientists need to study actual children and not do a study paid for by Sony and Microsoft!
Yes but that particular study isn't.
I do not think it's any effect ,,,,?