MediaWise® Video Game Report Card
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
Here for a printable PDF version of the report
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
Risk to Children Continues to
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
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
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.
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, the National PTA, and the American Academy
of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. We plan to
issue and endorse a set of ratings recommendations.
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
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
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
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
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
MediaWise® Video Game Report
Ratings Education --------- C+
Retailers' Policies --------- B
Retailers' Enforcement --- D-
Ratings Accuracy --------- F
Arcade Survey ----------- B-
2005 Survey Results
Surveys covered in the 2005 Report
Retailers' Ratings Education
Retailers' Policies and Enforcement
Game Content and Ratings Accuracy
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
- There are vast differences between boys
and girls, with 86% of boys admitting that
they play M-rated games compared to 49% of
- 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
- 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.
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
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
- 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%
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
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.
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
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
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.
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
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
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.
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
- 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
- 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
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
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.
Report Card Parent Buying Guide
|Parent Alert! Games to
avoid for your children and teens
|1. Far Cry
|3. The Warriors
|4. Stubbs the Zombie in Rebel
Without a Pulse
|5. True Crime: New York City
|6. Blitz: The League
|7. Grand Theft Auto: Liberty
|8. God of War
|9. Doom 3: Resurrection of Evil
|10. Urban Reign
|11. Conker: Live and Reloaded
|12. Resident Evil 4
games for children and teens
|1. Harry Potter and the Goblet
|2. The Incredibles: Rise of
|3. Peter Jackson's King Kong
|4. Legend of Zelda: The Minish
|5. The Chronicles of
Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe
|6. Sly 3: Honor Amongst Thieves
|7. We Love Katamari
|8. Sid Meier's Pirates!
|9. Dance Dance Revolution ULTRAMIX3
|10. Backyard Baseball 2005
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
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."
- 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. Available online: www.mediafamily.org/research/Gentile_NIMF_Review_2005.pdf
- 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:
- Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2003). Video
games modify visual attention. Nature, 423,
- 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,
- O'Keefe, B.J., & Zehnder, S. (2004). Understanding
media development: A framework and case study.
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,
- 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,