|
Tenth Annual MediaWise®
Video Game Report Card
Print
this page
David Walsh, Ph.D.; Douglas Gentile,
Ph.D.; Erin Walsh; Nat Bennett; Brad Robideau; Monica Walsh,
MA; Sarah Strickland, David McFadden
National Institute on Media and the Family
November 29, 2005
This MediaWise Video and Computer Game Report Card is the
tenth issued by the National Institute on Media and the
Family, an independent, non-partisan, non-sectarian, non-profit
organization. The MediaWise Video and Computer Game Report
Card provides a snapshot of the interactive gaming industry
with a focus on issues related to the welfare of children
and teens.
Risk to Children Continues to Grow
Every child who plays video games is undergoing
a powerful developmental experiment, the results of which
we do not yet fully comprehend. This year, we find the
video game industry exactly as we have found it every year
we've compiled this report: even more powerful than it was
the year before. In fact, the video game industry's growing
sales numbers and ever-widening influence have become so
apparent and so well-known that describing the industry
as powerful has become clichéd.
The industry's efforts to be good corporate
citizens have not kept pace with its explosive growth. The
industry that generated 25 billion dollars in worldwide
sales last year (nearly 10 billion in the U.S. alone) seems
increasingly focused on the bottom line, at the expense
of its customers, especially children and teenagers. Killographic
and sexually explicit games are still finding their way
into the hands of millions of underage players.
2005 Report Card Highlights
Ratings Accuracy
After years of criticizing the ESRB ratings
and calling for improvement and overhaul of the system,
we have come to the conclusion that the system itself is
beyond repair. The system supposedly put in place to keep
killographic games out of the hands of kids seems to often
produce the opposite results.
In early July, we discovered that explicit
pornography was included in the top selling video game,
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. We issued a MediaWise
Parent Alert, and a firestorm in the news media followed.
It took two weeks for the game's manufacturer, Rockstar
Games, to cut short its string of denials and finally come
clean. The results include lawsuits, a federal investigation,
and major retailers cleaning the games off their shelves
and sending them back to Rockstar. The so-called "hot
coffee" scandal does not simply reveal the bad faith
of one of the industry's most prominent companies; it has
shown once and for all that the present rating system is
broken and can't be fixed.
The ESRB video game rating system, like its
cousins in the movie and television industries, is owned
and operated by the industry it is supposed to monitor.
This obvious conflict of interest is why only eighteen games
out of ten thousand have ever been rated Adults Only (AO).
It seems that every year M-rated games are on average more
violent, contain more sexual content and have more profane
language than games released with the same rating the year
before. Study after study shows that ratings would be stricter
if parents were doing the job. It took explicit porn to
get Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas an AO rating, even
though the original version, still rated M, rewards players
whose onscreen persona had sex with prostitutes and then
killed them. We have been calling for AO ratings for the
Grand Theft Auto series for years - now it is clear
why the ESRB has ignored our request.
Our Response
In response to the ESRB's recent failure, the National Institute
on Media and the Family will convene a summit next year
on video game ratings with the leading national organizations
dedicated to children's health and welfare, including Children
Now and the National PTA. We plan to issue and endorse a
set of ratings recommendations.
Retailer Performance
This year the Institute continues another
tradition: evaluating video game retailers' efforts to keep
M-rated games out of the hands of children. This was the
second year the public received promises from the major
retailers that they had established and would enforce policies
to protect underage customers. Our survey of retailers found
that 80 percent of store personnel were able to describe
their stores' policies. And yet, in spite of these policies,
enforcement falls short. Half of the time, young children
are able to walk out of their stores with M-rated games
in hand.
This is a significant step back from the previous
year's sting operation, which found children able to purchase
these games in one out of three attempts. This comparison
yields a disturbing conclusion: retailers would much rather
appear as if they care about children than actually
take basic steps to protect them.
In one case, for example, a clerk at a major
retailer asked our Secret Shopper his age when he attempted
to buy an M-rated game. He replied with his true birth date.
When the cash register would not let her complete the sale
because he was under 17 she told him that she would change
the birth date so that he could get the game. They both
smiled and he walked out with the game.
One retailer, Best Buy, is the exception to
this rule. Their performance this year is worth mentioning
because it should serve as an example to all other retailers.
This year, we found their policy and enforcement flawless
in our sting investigation. We know this is not a fluke
- Best Buy conducts its own stings to ensure that its policy
is enforced, and disciplines employees who fail to follow
the rules. Best Buy has set the standard for which all other
retailers should strive.
A Widening Gap Between What Kids Do and What Parents
Know
The motto at the center of our efforts to
create MediaWise communities and organizations is simple:
"Watch what your kids watch." Unfortunately, when
it comes to video games, parents do not seem to be paying
attention. Some of the blame must be laid at the feet of
an industry which rubber stamps ultra-violent games and
refuses to make the proper effort to enforce responsible
retail policies. But parents must bear some of the responsibility
too. Especially in the context of a growing body of research
showing the link between violent games and real-world aggression,
parents need to open their eyes to the reality that their
kids' favorite games are not appropriate for children. They
are rated M for Mature.
This year, our student survey found that seven
out of 10 children report playing M-rated games, and three
out of five kids named an M-rated game as one of their favorites.
Nearly half of the more than 300 boys who participated in
the study named an M-rated title as their most favorite
game.
Half of the parents who participated in our
survey said they do not allow their children to play M-rated
games, but nearly two-thirds of surveyed students said they
owned their own M-rated game. What explains this gap? Maybe
this statistic: only half of the parents say they were with
their children the last time they purchased a game.
In the light of the video game industry's
growing power, and its recent lack of concern for its customers,
parents have a greater responsibility than ever to be aware
of their kids' video game habits.
MediaWise® Video Game Report Card Summary
Ratings Education --------- C+
Retailers' Policies --------- B
Retailers' Enforcement --- D-
Ratings Accuracy --------- F
Arcade Survey ----------- B-
2005 Survey Results
Surveys covered in the 2005 Report Card
-
Student Survey
-
Parent Survey
-
Retailers' Ratings Education
-
Retailers' Policies and Enforcement
-
Game Content and Ratings Accuracy
-
Arcade Survey
Student Survey
This year, we surveyed six hundred and
fifty-seven 4th-grade through 12th-grade students in
their classrooms. These students represented schools
both public and private in rural, suburban and urban
schools. Students averaging 13.7 years of age completed
the surveys anonymously during the fall of 2005. Key
findings include:
- 87% of 8- to 17-year old children play video
games at home. More than nine out of ten (92%) boys
play video games at home, while 80% of girls say
they play at home.
- Less than half (47%) of children say their parents
understand all of the ESRB ratings.
- Only 26% say that a parent has ever stopped them
from getting a video game because of its rating
(28% boys, 23% girls).
- Seven out of 10 children report playing M-rated
games.
- There are vast differences between boys and girls,
with 86% of boys admitting that they play M-rated
games compared to 49% of girls.
- Almost two-thirds (61%) of children report owning
their own M-rated games, up from 56% in 2003. 78%
of boys say they own M-rated games.
- Almost half of children (45%) say they have bought
M-rated games themselves (up from 37% in 2003).
- Only 55% of children said a parent was present
the last time they bought an M-rated game (down
from 65% in 2003).
- Almost two-thirds (60%) of children list at least
one M-rated game as their favorite (75% of boys
and 35% of girls).
This survey clearly shows that M-rated
games are more popular than ever, more easily accessible
and that most children's parents continue to be unaware
of the games they play. As technology advances, and
the lines between different media begin to blur, it
becomes more and more difficult for parents to determine
what is and isn't good for their kids. It is more important
now, than ever before, that parents not only understand
the ratings but understand why it is so important
to pay attention.
Parent Survey
Obviously, parents play a very important
role in supervising the game play of children. From
the Student Survey it appears that not enough parents
are paying attention. To hear directly from parents,
we surveyed by telephone 145 households nationally that
were randomly-selected from a list of parents. 71% of
these households currently have children living
at home. We conducted our surveys in September and October
2005.
Knowledge and Use of Ratings
Only 40% of respondents say they understand all of the
video game rating symbols. Households with children
currently living at home are only slightly more likely
to say they understand all of the ratings (47%). In
addition, only 53% of parents with kids at home say
they have ever stopped their children from getting a
video game because of its rating.
Purchase Behaviors
Among only households with kids at home, one quarter
(27%) of respondents say they allow their children to
buy M-rated games, with only half (50%) saying they
do not. Just under half (42%) of respondents say their
children have bought video games without them present.
When asked "the last time your child bought a video
game, were you present?" only 50% say yes.
Retailers' Ratings Education
There has been a great deal of attention
paid to retailers this year as legislation restricting
kids' access to Mature-rated games sweeps the country.
We contacted the retailers themselves to see what is
happening on the ground. We surveyed by telephone 65
video game rental or retail stores in 12 states. We
surveyed stores in both large cities and small towns
within these states. Of the 65 stores, 34 primarily
sell computer and video games, 24 primarily rent, and
seven sell and rent about equally. Forty-eight of the
stores surveyed are part of a chain of stores. We conducted
our surveys in September and October 2005. Key findings
include:
- Seventy-one percent of the stores say they educate
the public about the ESRB rating system (72% in
2004).
- When asked, only 52% could describe how they
educate their customers.
- Only half (52%) of the retail personnel say they
have a policy training their employees on the ESRB
rating system (same as 2004 and down from 62% in
2003).
- A majority (97%) of the retail personnel say
they personally understand the ESRB rating system
(up from 76% in 2004).
- Only 26% of employees were familiar with ESRB's
"OK to Play" Campaign (22% in 2004).
The video game retailers have a lot of
work to do in educating the public about the ESRB ratings.
While it is encouraging that more and more retail employees
personally understand the ratings, still only half of
the stores formally train their employees in the rating
system or make a coordinated effort to educate the public.
Grade for Ratings Education…………………………………..………C+
Retailers' Policies and Enforcement
Policies about Ratings
Over the last three years, we have seen a steady increase
in the number of stores that claim to have a policy
preventing children younger than 17 from renting or
buying M-rated games. This year, the vast majority (94%)
of stores say they have a policy. This is an increase
from the results of previous years (89% in 2004, 83%
in 2003, and 70% in 2002). When the actual policies
are examined however, the percentage drops to 80%. When
employees were unable to describe the policy we did
not count it as such. Last year, we attributed the increase
in the number of stores who claimed to have policies
in place to the announcement the Interactive Entertainment
Merchants Association gave after the report card two
years ago stating that they would restrict youth access
to M-rated games without parental permission.
Retailers' Policies……………………………………………………………………………….B
Policy enforcement
Last year, it seemed as if the retailers were making
a good faith effort to enforce their policies. Between
2003 and 2004, the percentage of successful purchases
made by our young Secret Shoppers dropped from 55% to
34%- reflecting progress the retailers made on their
promise to restrict youth access to M-rated games.
However, this year it appears that retailers
are actually more negligent in enforcing their
policies than last year. As stated earlier in the report,
it seems that retailers would rather appear as
if they care about children than actually take simple
steps to protect them. This fall, children between the
ages of 9 and 16 entered retail stores and attempted
to purchase M-rated games without adult supervision.
Sting Operations took place between August and October
2005 at 46 retail locations throughout the country.
Of the 46 attempts, 20 resulted in successful
purchases. This 44% success rate is significantly higher
than 2004 (34%). Even more disturbingly, we saw the
success rates for girls skyrocket this year. For the
first time in the history of this report card, rates
were roughly equivalent for boys and girls (42% boys,
46% girls). This is a large increase for girls from
last year when they were able to purchase M-rated games
only 8% of the time (last year boys were able to purchase
M-rated games 50% of the time).
We have frequently decried the disparity
between genders - last year calling for retailers to
enforce their restriction policies with both boys and
girls. Needless to say, this is not the kind of equality
that we had in mind.
Policy enforcement ……………………………….……………………………………...……D-
Game Content and Ratings Accuracy
The best way to ensure that kids are playing
appropriate video games is, of course, to literally
watch what they watch, or play what they play. But most
parents do not have the time, the interest, or skill
to play every video game their kids use. This is why
there is a ratings system in place. If the ratings work,
all parents should have to do is look at the label on
a video game to see if it's okay for their kids. Ratings
should be reliable, consistent and informative. Unfortunately,
today's ratings don't make it that simple.
Every year we claim that video games continue
to push the envelope on sex, violence and inappropriate
language. This year, the 10th Anniversary of the Report
Card, we are quantifying these changes. To illustrate
the degree to which video games have become more violent,
more sexual, and more crude we compared six M-rated
games representative of those featured in report cards
during the late 1990s to six M-rated games from 2004.
The results couldn't paint a more clear picture of what
we have said all along; the ratings aren't reflecting
the changes in game content.
Using data generated by PSVratings, a
content-based ratings system measuring actual levels
of profanity, sex, and violence, we found that games
in 2004 were on average more violent, contained more
sexual content and had more profane language when compared
to games from the late '90s. In the '90s only 16% of
the M-rated games contained any profanity at all and
only 33% contained sexual content. By 2004 all
(100%) of the M-rated games contained some level of
profanity and sexual content. The actual figures shot
through the roof. The games we analyzed from last year
were 30 times more likely to contain profanity than
those from the '90s, and the average prevalence of sexual
content increased a whopping 800%. Kids are six times
more likely to see nude or partially nude figures in
M-rated video games today than they were in the late
1990s. Yet the ratings haven't changed.
It is clear from the data that the games
we examined from the late '90s were labeled Mature largely
due to their violent content. The games must have been
pretty violent to earn an M-rating based on violence
alone. However, we see that violence in the video games
from 2004 increased 46% from the late '90s. This means
that on top of being more sexually explicit and full
of obscene language, the games from 2004 were on average
even more violent than those games that were given an
M-rating based on little more than violent content alone
less than ten years ago. The continual increase in adult
content, the failure to use the AO rating, and the "hot
coffee" scandal of 2005 all point toward the deep
flaws in the ESRB rating system.
Ratings Accuracy………………………………………………………………………………F
Arcade Survey
Over five years ago, we called upon the
arcade industry to develop, implement, and enforce a
rating system. They responded in 2000, with a system
of green, yellow, and red stickers. After seeing little
improvement by the arcade industry in 2001 in terms
of ratings education and enforcement we wanted to see
where we stand four years later.
After visiting 17 arcades in five states,
we are encouraged to see that this year all of the arcades
have ratings displayed on at least some of the games.
However, in arcades where there are ratings, only 78%
of the games have ratings displayed (down from 81% in
2001). Only four of the arcades claimed to have a policy
regarding the ratings. Two of the respondents said that
the ratings were posted, but the monitoring is left
up to the parents. This year, 27% of arcades had an
attendant watching over the arcade (20% in 2003 and
24% in 2001). Of these, only two attendees were given
any training on the ratings and were placed in charge
of enforcing the ratings. However, even in arcades without
attendants, 20% of arcades had educational materials
(posters) describing the ratings system (up from 13%
in 2003, 12% in 2001 and 0% in 2000).
It looks like arcades have taken a few
steps forward in the last four years, but we still see
a lot of room for improvement.
Grade for Arcade Industry…………………………………………………………………….B-
Recommendations:
- The National Institute on Media and the Family
will convene a National Summit on Video Game Ratings
with leading parent, health, and child welfare groups.
The purpose will be to review the current ESRB rating
system and issue a set of recommendations for improvement.
- Retailers need to enforce policies restricting
youth access to M-rated games. We challenge the
industry to enforce their policies 100% of the time
by next year.
- Parents need to become MediaWise, "Watch
what their kids watch," and only purchase and
allow their children to play age-appropriate games.
- We call upon the video game industry to join
us in educating parents about the need to supervise
their children's game play. The industry's efforts
so far have educated parents about how to use the
ratings but not why the ratings and the new electronic
tools built into game consoles are important for
children's health.
Legislative Update
In state houses across the country, legislation
is being introduced to prohibit the sale or rental of
Mature-rated video games to children. Such laws were
recently enacted in Illinois and California.
There is a growing nationwide recognition
of the harmful effects of violent, or killographic,
video games on children, based in large part on the
National Institute on Media and the Family's well-known
research that shows playing violent video games is linked
to aggressive behavior in children. Yet M-rated video
games that push the envelope with the depiction of cop
killing, the denigration women, and, now, the glorification
drug use, unfortunately, get into the hands of children.
Through its Annual MediaWise® Video Game Report
Card, the National Institute on Media and the Family
repeatedly has recommended to the video game industry
steps they can take to restrict the sale of M-rated
games to those 17 and older.
The National Institute on Media and the
Family appreciates public officials taking steps to
ensure children can enjoy good video games, while avoiding
those harmful games that are easily accessible to children.
The National Institute on Media and the
Family will actively support legislation that funds
and/or promotes the education, communication, and research
on issues regarding children and media. The impact of
video games on adolescent brain development and the
childhood obesity epidemic is a significant public health
issue and requires additional analysis. That is why
the National Institute on Media and the Family supports
the Children and Media Research Advancement Act, which
has been introduced in the U.S. Congress. This bipartisan
legislation would provide funds to establish a program
on children and the media, within the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, to study the role and impact
of electronic media in the development of children.
The National Institute on Media and the
Family will also provide expert testimony on the impact
of media on children and youth. The National Institute
on Media and the Family will be careful to engage in
these activities in order to maintain its position that
it does not support legislation involving censorship.
|
MediaWise®
Report Card Parent Buying Guide
|
| Game Lists |
|
Rating: |
| Parent Alert! Games to avoid
for your children and teens |
| 1. Far Cry |
M |
| 2. F.E.A.R. |
M |
| 3. The Warriors |
M |
| 4. Stubbs the Zombie in Rebel Without
a Pulse |
M |
| 5. True Crime: New York City |
M |
| 6. Blitz: The League |
M |
| 7. Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City
Stories |
M |
| 8. God of War |
M |
| 9. Doom 3: Resurrection of Evil |
M |
| 10. Urban Reign |
T |
| 11. Conker: Live and Reloaded |
M |
| 12. Resident Evil 4 |
M |
| |
|
|
| MediaWise recommended games
for children and teens |
| 1. Harry Potter and the Goblet of
Fire |
E 10+ |
| 2. The Incredibles: Rise of the Underminer
|
E 10+ |
| 3. Peter Jackson's King Kong |
T |
| 4. Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap
|
E |
| 5. Chronicles of Narnia:
The Lion, The Witch, & The Wardrobe |
T |
| 6. Sly 3: Honor Amongst Thieves |
E 10+ |
| 7. We Love Katamari |
E |
| 8. Sid Meier's Pirates! |
E |
| 9. Dance Dance Revolution ULTRAMIX3
|
E 10+ |
| 10. Backyard Baseball 2005 |
E |
2005 Video Game Research Update
This year, every new study and all the
latest research pointed to the same fact: video games
are excellent teachers. Just as activity simulators
can help train players for real-world tasks, violent
video games coax players into actual aggression and
antagonistic attitudes. If there was ever any doubt
about the impact of video games on children it has finally
been laid to rest. Everyone in the scientific community
agrees, whether an ally of the industry or a critic
of its practices - whether or not they realize they
agree - because every bit of research we have seen has
shown, in one way or another, that video games are powerful
in potential and effect, for good and for ill. It is
this fact that should compel parents, educators, and
policy-makers to pay attention to video games.
In recent years, many more studies have
been conducted than in the past, and most of them have
been of higher scientific quality than the earlier studies.
Bit by bit, the broad picture is becoming clear. This
is thanks in part to two new trends in the field: longitudinal
studies and meta-analyses. Although some of the studies
in these categories were conducted earlier than the
last year, their inclusion in the consideration of these
trends is essential, hence their mention below.
In a longitudinal study, researchers study
the same people over a period of time. Longitudinal
studies allow us to see whether people change over time.
To our knowledge, only five longitudinal studies have
yet been conducted. Because these are newer, we are
reporting on them in some depth.
In one, 41 adolescents played either a
hand-to-hand fighting game (Mortal Kombat), a violent
horror game (Resident Evil), or a sports game (NBA Live)
once a week for three weeks (Ballard, Panee, Engold,
& Hamby, 2001). Physiological arousal (heart rate
and blood pressure) and emotions (facial smiling and
disgust displays) were measured during play, and self-reported
anger, frustration, arousal, and relaxation were measured
post-play. Heart rate, blood pressure, and facial displays
of disgust decreased significantly over the three play
periods, showing desensitization with repeated exposure.
Self-reported variables did not change significantly,
and there were no reported differences in desensitization
by game type. However, this study included a very small
sample (only 13-14 playing each game), and only one
hour of play each week for three weeks.
In the second longitudinal study, 807 Japanese 5th and
6th grade students were surveyed twice during a school
year (Ihori, Sakamoto, Kobayashi, & Kimura, 2003).
The experimenters found that the amount of video game
play at Time 1 was significantly related to later physical
aggression, but aggression at Time 1 was not related
to later video game play. However, the authors only
measured the amount of video game play, and did
not report whether the children were playing violent
games. This distinction between the amount and content
of the games is important, and will be discussed in
greater detail later in this report.
In the third study, 2,550 6th and 7th
grade students were surveyed four times over two years
about their violent media consumption (action movies,
video/computer games involving weapons, and Internet
sites describing/recommending violence), and their attitudes
about and engagement in aggressive behaviors (Slater,
Henry, Swaim, & Anderson, 2003). The strength of
this approach is that it allows for a strong test of
the mutual reinforcement hypothesis (i.e., that aggressive
kids seek out violent media, which in turn makes them
more aggressive, which makes them seek out more violent
media, which further increases their aggressive tendencies,
etc.). Indeed, this downward spiral is exactly the pattern
that was found. However, this study also has several
problems - the most relevant here is that no data were
reported for violent video games independently, so it
is impossible to determine the effect of violent games
by themselves. However, the results are likely to be
underestimates of the effects, because the measures
used were not sensitive measures of media violence exposure.
In the fourth longitudinal study, 213
gamers were recruited to play a massively multiplayer
online role playing game (MMORPG), 75 of whom were given
the game which included violent content (Williams &
Skoric, 2005). Most of the gamers were adults (mean
age = 28, range 14-68). The experimental group was requested
to play the game for at least five hours per week for
four weeks, although one third (32%) did not. At the
beginning and end of the month, all participants were
asked whether they had been involved in a "serious
argument" with a friend or a partner during the
previous month. There was a correlation between game
play and arguments, but not with changes in the number
of arguments. Unfortunately, this study suffers from
several critical flaws - most importantly the studies
did not include a measure of aggression. Arguments with
friends and partners are sometimes antisocial behavior,
but are rarely aggression. Furthermore, by only asking
yes/no, there was no way for this study to measure increases
in antisocial behaviors. If you had been involved in
an argument at the beginning of the study and also at
the end, this study would have only been able to show
no change.
In the fifth longitudinal study, 430 3rd,
4th, and 5th grade students, their teachers, and their
peers were surveyed at two points during the school
year (Anderson, Gentile, & Buckley, under contract;
Study 3). Children who had high exposure to violent
video games changed over the school year to become more
verbally aggressive, more physically aggressive, and
less prosocial (as rated by themselves, their peers,
and their teachers). It appears that not only does repeated
exposure to violent video games increase aggressive
behavior, but it also decreases empathic helpful behavior.
This study has several strengths over the preceding
longitudinal studies, including more sensitive violence
exposure measures and the use of multiple informants.
However, the lag time between the two surveys was relatively
short, ranging between two and six months.
All but one of these studies document
increases in aggressive cognitions and behaviors in
connection with violence exposure. Because these are
longitudinal studies, we can make some claims about
a likely causal direction, as later behaviors cannot
cause prior behaviors. However, unless the studies are
experimental in design, strong causal claims cannot
be made.
Several meta-analyses have been conducted
on violent video games (e.g., Anderson, 2004; Anderson
& Bushman, 2001; Anderson, Carnagey, Flanagan, Benjamin,
Eubanks, & Valentine, 2004; Gentile & Anderson,
2003; Sherry, 2001). All of them have concluded that
there is a significant relation between violent video
game play and aggression. Anderson and his colleagues
have conducted detailed analyses on five specific effects
(e.g., Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Anderson et al.,
2004). Across studies, violent video games have significant
effects on aggressive affect, physiological arousal,
aggressive cognitions, and aggressive behaviors. They
are also significantly negatively related to prosocial
behaviors. These conclusions hold for both experimental
and cross-sectional studies, so both causality and applicability
to real-world aggression can be inferred (Anderson et
al., 2004). These conclusions also hold for studies
with children and adults (Gentile & Anderson, 2003).
It would be expected that we might find larger effects
with newer studies since violent video games have become
more violent over time. Indeed, this is the pattern
found, with earlier studies showing smaller effect sizes
than more recent studies (Gentile & Anderson, 2003).
Finally, it could be argued that the pattern of effects
is driven by methodologically flawed studies - that
is, poorer quality studies show a large effect, but
high-quality studies show small or no effects. Anderson
et al. (2004) coded each of the studies included in
the meta-analysis on nine different quality dimensions,
and the opposite pattern was found. Methodologically
weaker studies actually show significantly smaller effects
of violent video games than do studies using "best
practices."
References
- Anderson, C.A. (2004). An update on the effects
of playing violent video games. Journal of Adolescence,
27, 113-122.
- Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects
of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive
cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal,
and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of
the scientific literature. Psychological Science,
12, 353-359.
- Anderson, C.A., Carnagey, N.L., Flanagan, M., Benjamin,
A.J., Eubanks, J., & Valentine, J.C. (2004). Violent
video games: specific effects of violent content on
aggressive thoughts and behavior. Advances in Experimental
Social Psychology, 36, 199-249.
- Anderson, C. A., Gentile, D. A., & Buckley,
K. E. (under contract). Violent video game effects
on children and adolescents. New York: Oxford
University Press.
- Ballard, M. E., Panee, C. D., & Engold, E. D.,
& Hamby, R. H. (2001). Society for Research in
Child Development Conference.
- Gentile, D. A. (2005). Examining the effects of
video games from a psychological perspective: Focus
on violent games and a new synthesis. Minneapolis,
MN: National Institute on Media and the Family.
- Gentile, D. A., Lynch, P. J., Linder, J. R., &
Walsh, D. A. (2004). The effects of violent video
game habits on adolescent hostility, aggressive behaviors,
and school performance. Journal of Adolescence,
27, 5-22.
- Gentile, D. A., & Stone, W. (in press). Violent
video game effects on children and adolescents: A
review of the literature. Minerva Pediatrica.
- Gentile, D. A. & Anderson, C. A. (2003). Violent
video games: The newest media violence hazard. In
D. A. Gentile (Ed.), Media violence and children.
(pp. 131-152). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishing.
- Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2003). Video games
modify visual attention. Nature, 423, 534-537.
- Greenfield, P. M., DeWinstanley, P., Kilpatrick,
H., & Kaye, D. (1994). Action video games and
informal education: Effects on strategies for dividing
visual attention. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 15, 105-123.
- Ihori, N., Sakamoto, A., Kobayashi, K., & Kimura,
F. (2003). Does video game use grow children's aggressiveness?:
Results from a panel study. Proceedings of the
International Simulation and Gaming Association, Tokyo,
Japan, 34, 221-230.
- O'Keefe, B.J., & Zehnder, S. (2004). Understanding
media development: A framework and case study. Journal
of Applied Developmental Psychology, 25, 729-740.
- Rosser, J.C. Jr., Lynch, P.J., Haskamp, L.A., Yalif,
A., Gentile, D.A., & Giammaria, L. (2004, January).
Are Video Game Players Better at Laparoscopic Surgery?
Paper presented at the Medicine Meets Virtual Reality
Conference, Newport Beach, CA.
- Sherry, J. L. (2001). The effects of violent video
games on aggression: A meta-analysis. Human Communication
Research, 27, 409-431.
- Slater, M.D., Henry, K.L., Swaim, R.C., & Anderson,
L.L. (2003). Violent media content and aggressiveness
in adolescents. Communication Research, 30(6),
713-736.
- Williams, D., & Skoric, M. (2005). Internet
fantasy violence: A test of aggression in an online
game. Communication Monographs, 72, 217-233.
|
