Synyster Graves

It’s Conclusive…we’re all violent…

by on Mar.03, 2011, under Games vs "Science"

While I personally prefer to think of Iowa as the home of Slipknot, one of the greatest modern metal bands of today, it also is the home of some bloody idiots disguised as scientists. I found this excerpt online:

An Iowa State psychology professor is claiming–not for the first time–that his latest published study offers irrefutable evidence that exposure to violent video games increases aggressive behavior.

Published in the March 2010 issue of APA journal Psychological Bulletin, the study by Iowa State professor Craig Anderson, director of Iowa State’s Center for the Study of Violence, concludes that exposure to violent video games leads to an increase in aggressive thoughts and behavior, as well as decreased empathy and favorable social behavior in children.

“We can now say with utmost confidence that regardless of research method–that is experimental, correlational, or longitudinal–and regardless of the cultures tested in this study [East and West], you get the same effects,” said Anderson. “And the effects are that exposure to violent video games increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior in both short-term and long-term contexts. Such exposure also increases aggressive thinking and aggressive affect, and decreases prosocial behavior.”

So all the revolutions/coup d'etats in history were inspired by Fable 3? Um no.

Now this clearly is one of those outlandish statements which seems to encapsulate a plethora of big words in a vague attempt to attach some kind of merit whatsoever. Seemingly blaming video games for the sole cause of violence is wide of the mark. Do you seriously think that the situation in Libya at the moment has escalated because of video games? I think not. This statement is more evidence of a tepid and transparent hypothesis aimed at scaring people into opposition of games. The main difference between this and all the other pieces of shite “evidence” into condemning games is that this is a drawn conclusion. Scientific research has a line drawn underneath it as fact if a conclusion, particularly of this conviction, that there is undeniable evidence that their hypothesis is correct, except that in this case there is not, as they have “irrefutable evidence”. Seeing that they cannot test every single person in the world, then again this is complete bullshit.

But lets take the scenario that this tripe is true, and every single owner of a video game console is in fact a passive aggressive psychopath as a result. In July 2010, Xbox announced that they had sold 42 million units and in November 2010 it was announced that the Playstation 3 had overtaken the Xbox 360. So for the sake of argument there were about 100 million next-gen consoles sold. If this study is correct, then assuming the world’s population is 6 billion, then one in sixty people are dangerous maniacs as a result of video games. Is this starting to sound ridiculous yet?

Somehow I doubt that Libya's social unrest is because of gaming...

But lets take current affairs into consideration now because Anderson states that “regardless of the cultures” that aggresive psycho-development is the sole by product of gaming. So lets look at what is happening in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia at present. The rioting and violence occuring in these countries is caused by gaming? I think not. But what about the times before video games existed? Well if you believe these fucking idiotic scientists then the answer is clearly rock band Judas Priest, but before then? The Romans slaughtering people in the centre of Circus Maximus I severly doubt got their taste for bloodshed from gaming. And I can go on and on like I have in previous articles but it really doesn’t need to be said again.

Anderson has a hypothesis, but using big words does not claim a point. As a gamer I feel more inclined to become aggressive after reading the crap he’s written rather than going home to play Red Faction Guerilla. More shite from scientists attempting to condemn games without substantial evidence and then claim that their research is “conclusive”. The only thing that is conclusive from this is that they are a bunch of morons with PhDs to hide behind. Irrefutable evidence? Well you just got shoryukened Anderson! And go get signal while you’re at it.

:, ,

1 Comment for this entry

Leave a Reply