# New study compares prolonged exposure to violent games to cigarette habit



## Ares (Nov 23, 2009)

*New study compares prolonged exposure to violent games to cigarette habit*

Research conducted at the Université Pierre-Mendès-France, carried out by analysts at Ohio State University and the University of Hohenheim, has found that prolonged exposure to videogames increases aggression in players and coerces them to view the world in a more violent light. Get the research findings below.










On each of the three test days, the study saw 70 undergraduate participants exposed to either violent games – including Call of Duty 4 and Condemned 2 – or passive titles – including DiRT 2 and Pure – for 20 minutes at a time.

After playing, participants were asked to then read the start of a story, and then at the end come up with 20 possible follow-on actions the protagonist could take, with the players of violent games opting for more aggressive solutions when compared to the passive players.

Then, participants were told that there was another participant in another room, and that they had to compete with them by playing a 25-trial videogame, with the aim of being the first person to respond to visual cues on screen.

The winner would then have the power of sending the other person a ‘noise blast’ through their headphones – such as the sound of nails down a chalkboard or a dentist drill. Players of violent games leaned towards sending their opponent a louder, more prolonged sound, while passive players were kinder to their fellow participant. 

It should be noted however that there actually was no other participant, just in case someone got their ear drums blown out.

By the end of the study the research found, “people who played a violent video game for three consecutive days showed increases in aggressive behavior and hostile expectations each day they played. Meanwhile, those who played non-violent games showed no meaningful changes in aggression or hostile expectations over that period.

Brad Bushman, professor of communication and psychology at Ohio State University was co-author of the study, who said after the test, “It’s important to know the long-term causal effects of violent video games, because so many young people regularly play these games.

“Playing video games could be compared to smoking cigarettes. A single cigarette won’t cause lung cancer, but smoking over weeks or months or years greatly increases the risk. In the same way, repeated exposure to violent video games may have a cumulative effect on aggression.”

What do you make of the study? Is it enough to form opinion on the matter, or does more need to be done in this field?

Source: VG24/7


----------



## blitzer (Mar 5, 2010)

I hate studies. They are always misleading and the people that pay for them, always have a outcome in mind. Especially people that are out to prove something in the name of their own political motives.

If I spent three solid days doing anything - I would show more tendencies for what I was doing in the immediate future. If I spent three days saying the word banana 100,000 times, I would probably tend to be thinking more about bananas. Or possibly be thinking about violence towards bananas. duh....

This study only has valid conclusions if the effect is still there after an extended time. If after a month I was still constantly thinking about bananas and this cause problems in my life, then the banana study would be valid and I would advise against saying the word banana 100,000 times.

Another study comes to mind. Stats show people that floss everyday live longer and healthier lives. DUH. People that floss everyday are people that tend to take care of themselves and stay fit, eat better, etc, etc. So it may be that taking care of yourself well leads to a healthier life and not JUST flossing.

Stats also show that people with bigger feet are older. DUH. people have better feet when they are older, but bigger feet do not cause old age.

I could go on and on. A big pet peeve of mine. The worst lies are the half-truths.


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

What I make of the study is that the behavior in the video game transferred to another situation that was equally unrealistic. There was no real knowledge of another person, any more than the video game is real. With that much exposure in an unreal setting, why would one ever expect behavior on some hypothetical person to equate to behavior in the real world. The problem is not what these games do to healthy people in unrealistic settings, but what they do to sick people who cannot tell the difference between reality and fantasy. Identifying and providing help to those people before they do harm to others is no trivial problem. I doubt that studies like this do much to move us toward that end.


----------

