( date: 1/5/09)
Who Is To Blame For Violent Children?
The way the media has covered the school shootings, one would think our children were being sent to the middle of war torn Beirut. The fact is school violence has gone down in spite of those shootings. There are many reasons why children go ballistic and act out their rage on the public. Violence is not just school shootings.
Children still deal with the same type of violence we did in school from a school bully to a misunderstanding on the playground. Some kids are just plain aggressive by nature. Others have been abused. Still others have low self esteem. To these children, violence is a quick way to get attention.
What complicates things is the glamorization of death in movies, books, television and video games. Note, I am not saying these are the only problem, but just a small part. A child is not really able to contemplate the reality of death. This is why children do things that are so risky, they feel invincible. The entertainment media just reinforces that belief when they see someone getting shot or stabbed and it is glossed over as just a body on the floor or grossly taken out of proportion to almost comedic death scenes. When death is painted as funny or no big deal to a child with these tendencies, life and death are meaningless.
Part of the complex situation with the media is the lack of instilling the values in the child. This should be a parent's job, but in American society the child is just as much raised by the media as they are their own parents. This is part of the problem - parents not being parents. One must learn from a very early age that all people have value and all people have feelings. This should be the job of the parent. Parents too often let the television raise their children. When children are not taught this or taught to degrade others who are different for whatever reason, they learn that people are disposable if they get in their way. To this type of child who has not learned empathy, if the object of their violence were hurt they cannot comprehend that they did wrong, but blame the victim.
Our society tends to have a "want it now" attitude and to hell with the consequences so as long as we get what we want. If someone is in your way, tear them down as expediently as possible. This also plays in with violent children who do not have the reasoning skills that tell them when they do whatever it takes to get what they want, it results in consequences for themselves and others.
Children need love and attention in order to build self esteem. They need to feel it from their parents. As a parent, if you notice your child starting to behave in antisocial ways from the age of 5, it is time to get some help before the problem becomes worse. Sometimes all that is needed is a change in parenting habits. Other times medication or counseling is required. When caught early enough, you should be able to avoid most problems in the future.
Lack of supervision is another key to violence among children. If you are not watching your child and they are not being watched by someone you trust, do you really know what your child is doing or to what he may be exposed? You may feel it is okay for a 12 year old to go to his friend's house even though the parents are not home. The question is do you know if their parents have a gun in their home. If they have a gun in the home, is it locked up? Does the kid know where the key and bullets are kept? Does this family have video tapes, games or other violent activities you would never let your child watch? If you don't know, then your child is not safe.
I will not debate the right of gun owners to have guns in general, but the fact is if you have children in your home having a gun is a very dangerous thing. Chances are greater the gun will be used to kill a member of the family or a friend than an intruder. This is just one of those things that a parent must consider for the sake and safety of your child. You may think your child does not know where your gun is or how to use it, but you may be surprised when they will find it.
Guns are not the only problem. If a kid wants to hurt someone they can use other methods that are more creative. When I was in second grade I was bullied by another boy who started to hit me. I clobbered him with my metal lunch box until some nuns broke it up. He needed stitches and I had a black eye and some cuts. With the Internet available to kids, they can make their own bombs. They can go the old fashioned route and use knives or razor blades. Outlawing guns will not solve the problem.
First and foremost, it starts with the parent from the day the child is born. A parent is responsible for their child until the age of 18. If a parent cannot control the child it is their duty to refer that child to someone who can help. It is the parent's job to instill values in the child, to know what their child is doing, to know how the child is feeling, what are their interests, who are their friends, how they do in school, if they do drugs, how their moods swing and so on.
Sometimes, a parent has done the best they could, but it seems the child just may be wired wrong. A parent who has done all they can for that type of child cannot be blamed for a bad seed. That is not to say they bare no responsibility altogether, but if they honestly tried everything to help and prevent problems and the system has failed them and the child, it becomes society's problem.
A child must also learn the world does not revolve around them. They must realize other people have the same rights as they do. They must learn how to get along with other people and learn how to cooperate. They must learn respect for themselves and others. They should also know that there will always be consequence for their actions.
A community must respect its children. Many places have a surprisingly hostile attitude to teenagers and pre-teens. These kids have nothing to do and no place to go. An idle child is a dangerous one. Not necessarily dangerous to the public, but more like to themselves. These kids need more community outreach programs. Caring adults without kids could spend time volunteering to supervise safe activities. Kids could use safe places to roller skate, dance, listen to music, or just hang out without being harassed by some cranky adult who can't trust those youngsters.
Local government should have more programs available for problem children. The fact is most parents with a problem child do not have the money or the resources available to help them with an out of control person. The system is mostly set up to do nothing until the child is in serious trouble and locked away in jail. If the legal system will not interfere unless a law is broken and cannot intervene, can we really be surprised when these children go off the deep end when it is too late?
Violence is all attitude. Erase the attitude leading to violence and the problem will decrease. Violence is human nature and will never completely go away, but we must learn to rise above the base tendencies.
Friday, 1 May 2009
poular criticism 2- tv programmes
Adolescents who watch more than one hour of television a day are more likely to commit aggressive and violent acts as adults, according to a 17-year study reported today in the journal Science.The study, which tracked more than 700 adolescents into adulthood, found that young people watching one to three hours of television daily were almost four times more likely to commit violent and aggressive acts later in life than those who watched less than an hour of TV a day.
Girls as well as boys exhibited increased aggression, according to the study, which was hailed by psychologists and social scientists as more evidence of TV's harmful effects."It's a very important study and has a great deal of credibility--it very niftily isolates television as a causal factor," said George Comstock, a researcher on media violence at Syracuse University in New York.It is also the first study, Comstock said, to clearly link TV viewing among adolescents to later, adult violence.
Families Were Selected RandomlyThe study authors, from Columbia University and Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York, used data from a wider-ranging survey of the behavior of children in 707 New York state families. The families had been selected randomly--not because their children had any behavior problems.Over the study's 17 years, the children and their parents were periodically interviewed about TV habits, violence and aggression. Interviews began in 1983, when the children's average age was 14; follow-up interviews were conducted at average ages of 16, 22 and 30.The scientists also examined state and FBI records in 2000 to find out if any of those in the study--who by then had reached an average age of 30--had been arrested or charged with a crime.The authors found that 5.7% of those who reported watching less than one hour of TV a day as adolescents committed aggressive acts against others in subsequent years--either by their own admission, a parent's report or legal records. Those acts included threats, assaults, fights, robbery and using a weapon to commit a crime.That figure rose to 22.5% of those who watched TV for one to three hours a day and to 28.8% of those who watched more than three hours daily.The size of the effect was surprising, said lead author Jeffrey Johnson, assistant clinical professor of psychology in Columbia University's psychiatry department.He and his coauthors, who conducted the study with federal funds, believe the findings help cement the link between TV and violence. The authors used statistics to rule out other possible causes, such as neglect, poverty and living in a violent neighborhood.The study did not describe the kinds of programs children were watching, drawing criticism from Jonathan Freedman, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. He also said such studies don't clearly demonstrate that viewing programs is the cause of subsequent violence."To suggest that because you get this effect that watching two hours a day causes aggressiveness is going so far beyond the data it's shocking," Freedman said.Critics Say Parents Can Monitor ViewingThe Motion Picture Assn. of America declined to comment on the report until staff members had a chance to read it. Association spokesman Rich Taylor said parents have the technology to easily control what their children watch."The V-chip puts a new level of control into a parent's hands, allowing them to determine and set the level of programming that they wish to allow in their home at any given time," he said.Six major medical groups--including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and the American Medical Assn.--have stated that they believe TV violence is a significant problem.Fears about the negative influence of TV have been voiced almost since 1946, when TV broadcasting began in the United States. The study published today is the latest in a string of investigations aimed at figuring out the link.One study in the early 1960s shocked the public by showing that children shown a TV program of adults beating a toy clown were more likely to repeat the behavior. Other studies similarly showed a rise in aggressive attitudes and behaviors after people watched violent programs. Subjects were more likely to fight in the playground or "punish" people with fake zaps of electricity.Other studies have explored the relationship between violent programming and real-life, serious violence--and have also found smaller, although statistically significant, links.The effects of such viewing pale, by comparison, with the effect of living in an abusive home or hanging out with delinquent peers.But TV watching is far more prevalent, said Joanne Cantor, professor emeritus of the University of Wisconsin in Madison and a longtime media violence researcher."The implications for parents is that unfettered access to television is not good for your child," Cantor said. "It has these negative effects--which affect them personally in terms of feeling more hostile. And it looks like it affects other people too--through expression of that hostility in aggressive behavior towards others."Responding to the study, National Assn. of Broadcasters spokesman Dennis Wharton said, "For every study of this sort that finds a correlation between TV violence and real life violence, there are studies that conclude just the opposite."Freedman, meanwhile, said that finding a correlation between TV viewing and violence does not prove TV programs are to blame. Children who are naturally more aggressive may be drawn to watch more violent TV, he said.While this may be true, Johnson countered, this study and others show that even-tempered children also became more aggressive after watching a lot of television.
Girls as well as boys exhibited increased aggression, according to the study, which was hailed by psychologists and social scientists as more evidence of TV's harmful effects."It's a very important study and has a great deal of credibility--it very niftily isolates television as a causal factor," said George Comstock, a researcher on media violence at Syracuse University in New York.It is also the first study, Comstock said, to clearly link TV viewing among adolescents to later, adult violence.
Families Were Selected RandomlyThe study authors, from Columbia University and Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York, used data from a wider-ranging survey of the behavior of children in 707 New York state families. The families had been selected randomly--not because their children had any behavior problems.Over the study's 17 years, the children and their parents were periodically interviewed about TV habits, violence and aggression. Interviews began in 1983, when the children's average age was 14; follow-up interviews were conducted at average ages of 16, 22 and 30.The scientists also examined state and FBI records in 2000 to find out if any of those in the study--who by then had reached an average age of 30--had been arrested or charged with a crime.The authors found that 5.7% of those who reported watching less than one hour of TV a day as adolescents committed aggressive acts against others in subsequent years--either by their own admission, a parent's report or legal records. Those acts included threats, assaults, fights, robbery and using a weapon to commit a crime.That figure rose to 22.5% of those who watched TV for one to three hours a day and to 28.8% of those who watched more than three hours daily.The size of the effect was surprising, said lead author Jeffrey Johnson, assistant clinical professor of psychology in Columbia University's psychiatry department.He and his coauthors, who conducted the study with federal funds, believe the findings help cement the link between TV and violence. The authors used statistics to rule out other possible causes, such as neglect, poverty and living in a violent neighborhood.The study did not describe the kinds of programs children were watching, drawing criticism from Jonathan Freedman, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. He also said such studies don't clearly demonstrate that viewing programs is the cause of subsequent violence."To suggest that because you get this effect that watching two hours a day causes aggressiveness is going so far beyond the data it's shocking," Freedman said.Critics Say Parents Can Monitor ViewingThe Motion Picture Assn. of America declined to comment on the report until staff members had a chance to read it. Association spokesman Rich Taylor said parents have the technology to easily control what their children watch."The V-chip puts a new level of control into a parent's hands, allowing them to determine and set the level of programming that they wish to allow in their home at any given time," he said.Six major medical groups--including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and the American Medical Assn.--have stated that they believe TV violence is a significant problem.Fears about the negative influence of TV have been voiced almost since 1946, when TV broadcasting began in the United States. The study published today is the latest in a string of investigations aimed at figuring out the link.One study in the early 1960s shocked the public by showing that children shown a TV program of adults beating a toy clown were more likely to repeat the behavior. Other studies similarly showed a rise in aggressive attitudes and behaviors after people watched violent programs. Subjects were more likely to fight in the playground or "punish" people with fake zaps of electricity.Other studies have explored the relationship between violent programming and real-life, serious violence--and have also found smaller, although statistically significant, links.The effects of such viewing pale, by comparison, with the effect of living in an abusive home or hanging out with delinquent peers.But TV watching is far more prevalent, said Joanne Cantor, professor emeritus of the University of Wisconsin in Madison and a longtime media violence researcher."The implications for parents is that unfettered access to television is not good for your child," Cantor said. "It has these negative effects--which affect them personally in terms of feeling more hostile. And it looks like it affects other people too--through expression of that hostility in aggressive behavior towards others."Responding to the study, National Assn. of Broadcasters spokesman Dennis Wharton said, "For every study of this sort that finds a correlation between TV violence and real life violence, there are studies that conclude just the opposite."Freedman, meanwhile, said that finding a correlation between TV viewing and violence does not prove TV programs are to blame. Children who are naturally more aggressive may be drawn to watch more violent TV, he said.While this may be true, Johnson countered, this study and others show that even-tempered children also became more aggressive after watching a lot of television.
popular crticism- tv programmes
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/mar/30/problem-behaviour-schools-television-programmes (date: 1/5/09)
Television to blame for decline in pupil behaviour
Aggressive behaviour, rudeness and inappropriate language due to shows is on the increase in primary and secondary schools, say teachers
Big Brother and Little Britain are the television programmes that cause the most problem behaviour among children in schools, according to teachers surveyed by the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL).
Two-thirds (66%) of the nearly 800 staff surveyed said the reality television programme Big Brother had caused most poor behaviour among pupils, compared with 61% for comedy sketch show Little Britain and 43% for the soap EastEnders.
Asked about their pupils' viewing habits, teachers, support staff and school leaders said the programmes led to general rudeness in the classroom, with pupils answering back, mimicking, using retorts and catchphrases (mentioned by 88%), and swearing or using inappropriate language (82%) after watching them.
Aggressive behaviour among pupils was highlighted by 74% of those surveyed and sexually inappropriate behaviour by 43%.
One classroom teacher at a state secondary school said: "Little Britain caused a lot of answering back when it was on, and the content in any case was not appropriate for the year 7 to 9 pupils who I know watched it."
A classroom teacher at a state primary school said pupils used the taglines and catchphrases from adult programmes. "Girls mimick the body language, conversations and attitudes towards other girls they see on Big Brother. When I asked them where they had ever seen anyone speaking to someone like that I was told they do it all the time on BB."
Another classroom teacher at a state secondary school said: "Programmes like Big Brother make it normal to eff and jeff."
Other shows on teachers' hit lists were The Catherine Tate Show, where pupils used the catchphrases "Whatev-ah" and "Am I bovvered?" as regular retorts.
Teachers also raised concerns about younger pupils playing kicking and fighting games they had picked up from TV programmes such as Power Rangers and Ben 10.
Staff believe that television has the most impact on pupils' behaviour (mentioned by 40% of those surveyed), and more influence than computer and video games (28%).
Most staff (86%) felt that TV programmes containing bad behaviour had a negative effect on the behaviour of their pupils – 85% said pupils in their school watched such programmes either before or after the nine o'clock watershed.
Debbie Cooper, a member of the school leadership team at a Northamptonshire primary school, said: "A year 2 child is being very rough at playtime. He claims he is Ben 10. When asked to stop, he changes it to Power Rangers ... and so it goes on.
She added that girls in year one and two talked inappropriately in the playground as part of a game of EastEnders where one pretended to be the character of Whitney, "the one with lots of makeup who snogs her dad".
Staff blame parents for not supervising what TV their children watch and recommend they take more responsibility.
Dr Mary Bousted, general secretary of ATL, said: "Staff report that more and more pupils believe the violence depicted on television and computer and video games is cool, heroic and something they want to emulate. It's not just aggressive behaviour; our members face swearing, inappropriate language and general rudeness on a daily basis, which is frequently picked up from the TV programmes pupils are watching.
"It is worrying that some of the youngest pupils do not know what behaviour is acceptable and when they should use it, and cannot differentiate between what they have seen on TV and real life.
"It's important that the companies that make these programmes think carefully about the role models being portrayed, and the potential effects on children and young people.
She said children increasingly have TVs in their bedrooms, making it difficult for parents to monitor, but they needed to discuss controversial issues with children and make sure they understand the context of what happens on screen.
Television to blame for decline in pupil behaviour
Aggressive behaviour, rudeness and inappropriate language due to shows is on the increase in primary and secondary schools, say teachers
Big Brother and Little Britain are the television programmes that cause the most problem behaviour among children in schools, according to teachers surveyed by the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL).
Two-thirds (66%) of the nearly 800 staff surveyed said the reality television programme Big Brother had caused most poor behaviour among pupils, compared with 61% for comedy sketch show Little Britain and 43% for the soap EastEnders.
Asked about their pupils' viewing habits, teachers, support staff and school leaders said the programmes led to general rudeness in the classroom, with pupils answering back, mimicking, using retorts and catchphrases (mentioned by 88%), and swearing or using inappropriate language (82%) after watching them.
Aggressive behaviour among pupils was highlighted by 74% of those surveyed and sexually inappropriate behaviour by 43%.
One classroom teacher at a state secondary school said: "Little Britain caused a lot of answering back when it was on, and the content in any case was not appropriate for the year 7 to 9 pupils who I know watched it."
A classroom teacher at a state primary school said pupils used the taglines and catchphrases from adult programmes. "Girls mimick the body language, conversations and attitudes towards other girls they see on Big Brother. When I asked them where they had ever seen anyone speaking to someone like that I was told they do it all the time on BB."
Another classroom teacher at a state secondary school said: "Programmes like Big Brother make it normal to eff and jeff."
Other shows on teachers' hit lists were The Catherine Tate Show, where pupils used the catchphrases "Whatev-ah" and "Am I bovvered?" as regular retorts.
Teachers also raised concerns about younger pupils playing kicking and fighting games they had picked up from TV programmes such as Power Rangers and Ben 10.
Staff believe that television has the most impact on pupils' behaviour (mentioned by 40% of those surveyed), and more influence than computer and video games (28%).
Most staff (86%) felt that TV programmes containing bad behaviour had a negative effect on the behaviour of their pupils – 85% said pupils in their school watched such programmes either before or after the nine o'clock watershed.
Debbie Cooper, a member of the school leadership team at a Northamptonshire primary school, said: "A year 2 child is being very rough at playtime. He claims he is Ben 10. When asked to stop, he changes it to Power Rangers ... and so it goes on.
She added that girls in year one and two talked inappropriately in the playground as part of a game of EastEnders where one pretended to be the character of Whitney, "the one with lots of makeup who snogs her dad".
Staff blame parents for not supervising what TV their children watch and recommend they take more responsibility.
Dr Mary Bousted, general secretary of ATL, said: "Staff report that more and more pupils believe the violence depicted on television and computer and video games is cool, heroic and something they want to emulate. It's not just aggressive behaviour; our members face swearing, inappropriate language and general rudeness on a daily basis, which is frequently picked up from the TV programmes pupils are watching.
"It is worrying that some of the youngest pupils do not know what behaviour is acceptable and when they should use it, and cannot differentiate between what they have seen on TV and real life.
"It's important that the companies that make these programmes think carefully about the role models being portrayed, and the potential effects on children and young people.
She said children increasingly have TVs in their bedrooms, making it difficult for parents to monitor, but they needed to discuss controversial issues with children and make sure they understand the context of what happens on screen.
popular criticism 2- video games (to be analyzed)
http://daniela.supersized.org/archives/42-The-negative-effects-of-violent-computer-games-on-children.html ( date: 1/5/09 )
The negative effects of violent computer games on children
Computer games have a negative impact on the development of children, especially contributing to aggressive and anti-social behaviour. Playing computer games has a greater negative effect because it involves interactivity which impacts on learning processes of the child.
• Numerous studies around the effects of violence in television, movies and video games on children have taken place over the last twenty years. The outcomes of various studies have shown that there is a negative effect of consuming violent media. • When it comes to computer games, however, research by Douglas Gentile and Craig Anderson, indicates that violent computer games have an even stronger effect on children’s behaviour because of its interactivity.• The General Aggression Model (GAM) has been developed to integrate recent findings in aggression theory and research with earlier models. In this model, the performance of aggression is based on learning, activation and application of aggression-related knowledge stored in memory.• It suggests that violent media causes short-term increases in aggression. Various studies were performed to prove this statement, involving exposing young adults to violent computer games, and testing their reaction to stimuli. The result was a quantifiable impact on the individual’s ‘internal’ state, the conclusion being that “violent media increases aggressive cognition (including previously learned aggressive scripts and aggressive perceptual schemata), by increasing arousal, or by creating an aggressive affective state.” • The long term effects involve learning processes. The model puts forward the idea that each encounter with violent media, is essentially one more learning trial, since knowledge structures are built on how humans perceive, interpret, judge and respond to events based on interactions in the real (in the family or at school) or perceived (the media) world. • As stated earlier, the impact of computer games are especially influential since:1. the games are highly engaging, 2. children are rewarded by violent behaviour, and 3. children repeat this behaviour over and over as they play. • Psychologists know that these three methods (active involvement, rewarding, and repeating) improve learning. Link this to a psychological term called ‘social learning’, where a child learns by watching or imitating others, as opposed to his/her own experience, and we have a process where a child’s behaviour is negatively influenced by the aggressive, violent nature of computer games. • Now take into account the fact that, according to a study by DeGaetano and Bander, computer games send the following false messages to players:1. Problems can be solved quickly and with little personal investment,2. The best way to solve a problem is to eliminate the source of the problem,3. Problems are clear-cut: right or wrong, black or white,4. Use instinctual rather than thoughtful problem solving,5. Personal imagination is not necessary for problem solving,and we see that the impact is far reaching, not only in terms of reaction to stimuli, but also through the absorption of morals and ethics, and approaches to problem-solving.• Furthermore, it is argued that playing computer games reduces ‘prosocial’ behaviour and sensitivity. Olivier discusses the process whereby players adjust their emotional reactions to acts of violence on the ‘real’ world, based on the internalisation of violence present in the computer games they play. • On a chemical/biological level - studies in brain science show that children’s experiences during their brain’s growth spurts have a greater impact on their brain’s wiring than at any other time of their lives. This has also been proven to continue during adolescence. The latest brain research shows that violent games activate the anger centre of the teenage brain while dampening the brain’s ‘conscience’.• And on a physical level – playing computer games are said to negatively affect the health of players. Research has documented the negative effects of computer games as including obesity and postural, muscular and skeletal disorders.• So, computer games have far-reaching negative effects, and these are heightened by its interactive nature.
The negative effects of violent computer games on children
Computer games have a negative impact on the development of children, especially contributing to aggressive and anti-social behaviour. Playing computer games has a greater negative effect because it involves interactivity which impacts on learning processes of the child.
• Numerous studies around the effects of violence in television, movies and video games on children have taken place over the last twenty years. The outcomes of various studies have shown that there is a negative effect of consuming violent media. • When it comes to computer games, however, research by Douglas Gentile and Craig Anderson, indicates that violent computer games have an even stronger effect on children’s behaviour because of its interactivity.• The General Aggression Model (GAM) has been developed to integrate recent findings in aggression theory and research with earlier models. In this model, the performance of aggression is based on learning, activation and application of aggression-related knowledge stored in memory.• It suggests that violent media causes short-term increases in aggression. Various studies were performed to prove this statement, involving exposing young adults to violent computer games, and testing their reaction to stimuli. The result was a quantifiable impact on the individual’s ‘internal’ state, the conclusion being that “violent media increases aggressive cognition (including previously learned aggressive scripts and aggressive perceptual schemata), by increasing arousal, or by creating an aggressive affective state.” • The long term effects involve learning processes. The model puts forward the idea that each encounter with violent media, is essentially one more learning trial, since knowledge structures are built on how humans perceive, interpret, judge and respond to events based on interactions in the real (in the family or at school) or perceived (the media) world. • As stated earlier, the impact of computer games are especially influential since:1. the games are highly engaging, 2. children are rewarded by violent behaviour, and 3. children repeat this behaviour over and over as they play. • Psychologists know that these three methods (active involvement, rewarding, and repeating) improve learning. Link this to a psychological term called ‘social learning’, where a child learns by watching or imitating others, as opposed to his/her own experience, and we have a process where a child’s behaviour is negatively influenced by the aggressive, violent nature of computer games. • Now take into account the fact that, according to a study by DeGaetano and Bander, computer games send the following false messages to players:1. Problems can be solved quickly and with little personal investment,2. The best way to solve a problem is to eliminate the source of the problem,3. Problems are clear-cut: right or wrong, black or white,4. Use instinctual rather than thoughtful problem solving,5. Personal imagination is not necessary for problem solving,and we see that the impact is far reaching, not only in terms of reaction to stimuli, but also through the absorption of morals and ethics, and approaches to problem-solving.• Furthermore, it is argued that playing computer games reduces ‘prosocial’ behaviour and sensitivity. Olivier discusses the process whereby players adjust their emotional reactions to acts of violence on the ‘real’ world, based on the internalisation of violence present in the computer games they play. • On a chemical/biological level - studies in brain science show that children’s experiences during their brain’s growth spurts have a greater impact on their brain’s wiring than at any other time of their lives. This has also been proven to continue during adolescence. The latest brain research shows that violent games activate the anger centre of the teenage brain while dampening the brain’s ‘conscience’.• And on a physical level – playing computer games are said to negatively affect the health of players. Research has documented the negative effects of computer games as including obesity and postural, muscular and skeletal disorders.• So, computer games have far-reaching negative effects, and these are heightened by its interactive nature.
academic criticism 2-video games (to be analyzed)
Do Video Games Lead to Violent Behavior in Children?
Violent video games have been linked to antisocial and aggressive behavior in children and adolescents, although other factors such as family disruption and parental abuse or neglect are more predictive of youth violence and delinquency. Other negative effects, such as reinforcement of racist or sexist stereotypes, have also been associated with use of video games. Conversely, some authors suggest that video games may provide a safe outlet for aggression and frustration. Positive effects on divided-attention performance, developmental issues, and spatial and coordination skills also have been suggested. Bensley and van Eenwyk performed a comprehensive review to see if violent video games are associated with aggression in real life.
The authors note that rates of adolescent violence, homicide, weapon-carrying, and other markers of antisocial behavior fell consistently during the period when violent video games became ubiquitous, more graphic, and more realistic. Furthermore, no consistent theories have emerged to explain a causative relationship between violent video games and antisocial behavior. Theories linking video games to violent behavior include learning and imitating aggressive behavior, arousal by the success or peer status of winning a violent game, and "priming" (changing the threshold at which violence seems acceptable or increasing the likelihood that ambiguous behavior is perceived to be threatening).
An extensive search of literature databases, personal contacts, and other sources identified 29 studies of this topic. The studies varied greatly in design and quality, leading the authors to conclude that a major deficiency in randomized, well-controlled studies prevents firm determinations from being reached. In children of middle-school age and younger, no association was found between video games and aggression in girls. In boys, studies report both increased and decreased aggression. Studies of middle- and high-school students predominately studied boys and often used self-report. Again, both calming and arousal effects were reported, and no consistent relationship was demonstrated between violent games and actual behavior. In college students and young adults, results were again mixed, but studies reporting calming effects were more common, particularly if the prior mood was hostile, angry, or aggressive.
The authors conclude that, contrary to popular impressions, little evidence supports concerns that violent video games are linked to aggressive or antisocial behavior. They caution that this topic is quite complex and not easily studied. The effect may depend on individual characteristics, including age and mood before playing the game, as well as the characteristics and complexity of the game itself. Modern, more realistic games may have very different effects than earlier versions. The authors do not regard violent video games as a significant public health concern.
ANNE D. WALLING M.D.
Bensley L, van Eenwyk J. Video games and real-life aggression: review of the literature. J Adolesc Health October 2001;29:244-57.
Violent video games have been linked to antisocial and aggressive behavior in children and adolescents, although other factors such as family disruption and parental abuse or neglect are more predictive of youth violence and delinquency. Other negative effects, such as reinforcement of racist or sexist stereotypes, have also been associated with use of video games. Conversely, some authors suggest that video games may provide a safe outlet for aggression and frustration. Positive effects on divided-attention performance, developmental issues, and spatial and coordination skills also have been suggested. Bensley and van Eenwyk performed a comprehensive review to see if violent video games are associated with aggression in real life.
The authors note that rates of adolescent violence, homicide, weapon-carrying, and other markers of antisocial behavior fell consistently during the period when violent video games became ubiquitous, more graphic, and more realistic. Furthermore, no consistent theories have emerged to explain a causative relationship between violent video games and antisocial behavior. Theories linking video games to violent behavior include learning and imitating aggressive behavior, arousal by the success or peer status of winning a violent game, and "priming" (changing the threshold at which violence seems acceptable or increasing the likelihood that ambiguous behavior is perceived to be threatening).
An extensive search of literature databases, personal contacts, and other sources identified 29 studies of this topic. The studies varied greatly in design and quality, leading the authors to conclude that a major deficiency in randomized, well-controlled studies prevents firm determinations from being reached. In children of middle-school age and younger, no association was found between video games and aggression in girls. In boys, studies report both increased and decreased aggression. Studies of middle- and high-school students predominately studied boys and often used self-report. Again, both calming and arousal effects were reported, and no consistent relationship was demonstrated between violent games and actual behavior. In college students and young adults, results were again mixed, but studies reporting calming effects were more common, particularly if the prior mood was hostile, angry, or aggressive.
The authors conclude that, contrary to popular impressions, little evidence supports concerns that violent video games are linked to aggressive or antisocial behavior. They caution that this topic is quite complex and not easily studied. The effect may depend on individual characteristics, including age and mood before playing the game, as well as the characteristics and complexity of the game itself. Modern, more realistic games may have very different effects than earlier versions. The authors do not regard violent video games as a significant public health concern.
ANNE D. WALLING M.D.
Bensley L, van Eenwyk J. Video games and real-life aggression: review of the literature. J Adolesc Health October 2001;29:244-57.
popular criticism 1-video games( to be analyzed)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4594376.stm( date accessed: 1/5/09 )
Violent games 'affect behaviour'
Previous research has suggested a link between violence and game playingViolent computer games may make people more likely to act aggressively, a study says.
Previous research has found people who play such games are more likely to be aggressive but some say this just shows violent people gravitate towards them.
But a team from the University of Missouri-Columbia said their study which monitored the brain activity of 39 game players suggests a causal link.
The truth is there are many factors that can lead to violence, such as being withdrawn and isolated, so it is hard to say it is because of one thing
Professor David Buckingham, of the Institute of Education
When shown images of real-life violence, people who played violent video games were found to have a diminished response.
However, when the same group were shown other disturbing images such as dead animals or ill children they had a much more natural response.
When the game players were given the opportunity to punish a pretend opponent those with the greatest reduction in P300 meted out the severest punishments.
Psychologist Bruce Bartholow, the lead researcher of the study which will be published in full in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology later this year, said: "As far as I'm aware, this is the first study to show that exposure to violent games has effects on the brain that predict aggressive behaviour.
"People who play a lot of violent video games didn't see them as much different from neutral.
"They become desensitised. However, their responses are still normal for the non-violent negative scenes."
The findings will back up what many have argued over recent years with the growth in games with scenes of graphic violence.
Killer
But some experts still remain unconvinced of a link.
Jonathan Freedman, a psychologist from the University of Toronto in Canada, said: "All we are really getting is desensitisation to images. There's no way to show that this relates to real-life aggression."
And Professor David Buckingham, an expert on the media and children at the Institute of Education, added there was still no consensus on whether violent games caused aggressive behaviour or were just played by violent people.
"The debate we are seeing is very similar to the one that has raged for years about TV. The truth is there are many factors that can lead to violence, such as being withdrawn and isolated, so it is hard to say it is because of one thing.
"In the absence of any proof, I think we have to be agnostic about it. However, I think there is an argument about the morality of some games.
"Some actually encourage amoral behaviour to win the game and I think parents should be talking to their children to make sure they realise this is a joke. Children are generally good at telling fantasy from reality, but parents should be discussing this."
Violent games 'affect behaviour'
Previous research has suggested a link between violence and game playingViolent computer games may make people more likely to act aggressively, a study says.
Previous research has found people who play such games are more likely to be aggressive but some say this just shows violent people gravitate towards them.
But a team from the University of Missouri-Columbia said their study which monitored the brain activity of 39 game players suggests a causal link.
The truth is there are many factors that can lead to violence, such as being withdrawn and isolated, so it is hard to say it is because of one thing
Professor David Buckingham, of the Institute of Education
When shown images of real-life violence, people who played violent video games were found to have a diminished response.
However, when the same group were shown other disturbing images such as dead animals or ill children they had a much more natural response.
When the game players were given the opportunity to punish a pretend opponent those with the greatest reduction in P300 meted out the severest punishments.
Psychologist Bruce Bartholow, the lead researcher of the study which will be published in full in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology later this year, said: "As far as I'm aware, this is the first study to show that exposure to violent games has effects on the brain that predict aggressive behaviour.
"People who play a lot of violent video games didn't see them as much different from neutral.
"They become desensitised. However, their responses are still normal for the non-violent negative scenes."
The findings will back up what many have argued over recent years with the growth in games with scenes of graphic violence.
Killer
But some experts still remain unconvinced of a link.
Jonathan Freedman, a psychologist from the University of Toronto in Canada, said: "All we are really getting is desensitisation to images. There's no way to show that this relates to real-life aggression."
And Professor David Buckingham, an expert on the media and children at the Institute of Education, added there was still no consensus on whether violent games caused aggressive behaviour or were just played by violent people.
"The debate we are seeing is very similar to the one that has raged for years about TV. The truth is there are many factors that can lead to violence, such as being withdrawn and isolated, so it is hard to say it is because of one thing.
"In the absence of any proof, I think we have to be agnostic about it. However, I think there is an argument about the morality of some games.
"Some actually encourage amoral behaviour to win the game and I think parents should be talking to their children to make sure they realise this is a joke. Children are generally good at telling fantasy from reality, but parents should be discussing this."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)