| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 61015 | 2005-08-21 22:13:00 | Violent video games making children aggressive: study | Strommer (42) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 382900 | 2005-08-21 22:13:00 | Children are becoming increasingly aggressive with their exposure to violent video games, according to a new study. Teachers of 600 children aged between 13 and 15, said children who spent more time playing such video games were more hostile than others. They are also more likely to argue with authorities and peers. The report was a result of 17 studies conducted over 20 years by Kevin Kieffer and Jessica Nicoll of Saint Leo University, Florida. According to the review, there’s a strong link between these games and how children and adolescents behave. Rest of article here. (www.financialexpress.com) See also this article (www.timesonline.co.uk) |
Strommer (42) | ||
| 382901 | 2005-08-21 22:29:00 | Good to see some kids will stick up for themselves..... | Metla (12) | ||
| 382902 | 2005-08-21 22:39:00 | Hey Mets, did Mrs. Metla make you pay for her Self Defence course? :lol: | Strommer (42) | ||
| 382903 | 2005-08-22 00:30:00 | Funny that is NOT what they said on that British child behavior TV programm a couple of weeks back . One child there was an expert Halo gamer at 4 years old, and rated higher than his peers in things like sociability, intelligence, and the ability to adapt to new situations . He was also able to differentuate killing in gmaes from violence in real life and didn't slide one into the other . However, like smoking, just because one person doesn't get affected doesn't mean that others are not either . You can't argue against 17 studies of 600 people . . . |
netchicken (4843) | ||
| 382904 | 2005-08-22 04:30:00 | Aha . A study carried out for 17 years, and reported in the Financial Express . :eek: However, the story has a New Delhi dateline and it reports a study carried out at St Leo University . Where? St Leo University in Florida? Who? This is not one of the great universities of the world, let alone one of the leading research oriented universities of the world . It seems it's a small private Roman Catholic "university" . It has a lot of campuses (campi?), mostly on military bases . One is in a "military high school" . (I think that's one where the kids dress up in fancy uniforms, not one where the children of military people get an education) . They are very proud of the fact that the president and chief operating officer of Sweetbay Supermarkets has joined their Board of Trustees . Doubless she can help to implement more efficient ways to package their product . There's a lot of flakey "research" done in the social "sciences" . Even when it's been reported to the American Psychological Association . Psychology has some of the flakiest research . It's even worse than sociology . Of course the results might be true . The arithmetic carried out might even produce "statistics" . At a guess this is one of the approximately 50% of such studies which find that violent games cause violent kids . But computer games have changed in the last 17 years . Oh, well . It must true . It's been printed in the Financial Express . And it's on the Internet . :D |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 382905 | 2005-08-22 04:51:00 | Yeah, there are too many confounders and pitfalls in these social researches, in addition to biases such as a Christian organisation carrying out a study into video games. As has been pointed out, this result has been contradicted elsewhere. In my own opinion, violent video games do not make children violent in themselves. It is neglect and abuse, which I suspect goes on in an environment where parents allow children to play these idiot games over a long period of time, that make children violent. And violence in children is not a new phenomenon at all - it is as old as neglect and abuse themselves. |
vinref (6194) | ||
| 382906 | 2005-08-22 05:17:00 | I get the feeling that we have touched this subject earlier this year... hmmm | bob_doe_nz (92) | ||
| 382907 | 2005-08-22 05:39:00 | << Psychology has some of the flakiest research. It's even worse than sociology.>> Ha! Well said, Graham ! But research in the 'pure' sciences is far from perfect. I am a regular reader of New Scientist magazine and the research reported is often so full of holes that it makes one wonder... But I am not knocking New Scientist, one of my favourite reads. Its just that nowadays society does not swallow the absolutes that it used to. |
Strommer (42) | ||
| 382908 | 2005-08-22 06:08:00 | I am a regular reader of New Scientist magazine and the research reported is often so full of holes that it makes one wonder... But I am not knocking New Scientist, one of my favourite reads. Its just that nowadays society does not swallow the absolutes that it used to.I know a person who loves the New Scientist, he is not stupid by any means. However one particular article he took a shine to and started to repeat these *facts* with great enthusiasm. Unfortunately it was on a topic which I had some experience, and I was able to easily disprove that article with some well known and proven facts. He was so cheesed off at the New Scientist for printing such inaccurate articles, last I heard he was writing a letter of complaint to them. :p You can sort the true from the fiction, or well researched articles/studies from the flaky ones if you have some knowledge in that area and know what to look for. I've seen some rather dodgy research performed and posted on the net from people with lots of nice letters after their names, which does not make it any more accurate or factual. Can't believe everything you read on the net. ;) |
Jen (38) | ||
| 382909 | 2005-08-22 08:11:00 | Can't believe everything you read on the net . Oh no . . . so that includes what you and I write here ! :lol: To be fair about New Scientist, if the articles are read very carefully, a person can see that 'guarded words' are often used that mean in effect: "The scientists doing this research are testing a hypothesis / evaluating a theory . . . so what is implied in the sensationalist heading really doesn't mean squat . " or if a person reads inbetween the lines: "This research was funded by pharmaceutical company XY and probably the scientists are being paid handsomely for making the results what the company wants to see . " There is some scientific magazine(s) that are going to require all research that appears in their publication to first be registered prior to starting the research . This is an attempt to stop only favourable research being reported, as it apparently will require even the dodgy / negative results to be published . |
Strommer (42) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||