Regarding the Controversy Over Monday's APA Study & Game Violence Article

Regarding the Controversy Over Monday's APA Study & Game Violence Article

September 23, 2006
On Monday of this week, GP carried an item, No "Direct Causal Link" Between Games & Violence in APA Report.

It sparked a bit of controversy. It was suggested in certain quarters that GP ignored the views of Dr. Brad Bushman (left) of the University of Michigan, a member of the APA committee which issued the August, 2005 resolution.

That's not at all correct. In raising a particular question we turned to the two listed contacts for the APA study, Dr.Elizabeth Carll, committee co-chair and Dr. Dorothy Singer of Yale. There were a total of six committee members involved in the report. Dr. Bushman was among them. Not feeling the need to contact all six, we went to the two that the committee itself suggested.

The question Monday's GP article raised was, in retrospect, perhaps too narrow. But a very damning - and very narrow - interpretation of the APA study has been bandied about in recent times. GP wanted to pin the assertion down and see if it was accurate. We've heard it said or seen it written (and not by Dr. Bushman, by the way) that, "The American Psychological Association last year found a direct causal link between violent video games and teen violence." (emphasis GP's)

While the APA study was indeed very critical in regard to game violence (as we dutifully reported last August), that particular sentence seems to draw a straight line between violent games and real-life violence in the same way that a straight line is drawn between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer. However, as GP - admittedly, a layman - interpreted it, the APA report just didn't seem to say that there was a "direct causal link." In fact, searching the APA resolution, that term does not appear anywhere. Nor do the words "causal" or "causation."

But we're not afraid of industry-critical views here, and we like to think we present the news as factually as possible. To that end, we did indeed reach out for Dr. Bushman for a clarification. He in turn advised GP that he was working out a response between himself and Drs. Carll and Singer. Dr. Carll was kind enough to send that response along on Thursday night. GP promised to reprint it verbatim. Here it is:

"Brad Bushman forwarded to both myself and Dr. Singer the comments you sent to him regarding the content of the APA Resolution on Violence in Video Games and Interactive Media. I also forwarded to Dr. Bushman your original email to Dorothy Singer and myself, which is below."

"To clarify, the APA Resolution on Violence in Video Games and Interactive Media stated that there was an increase in aggressive behavior as a result of playing violent video games. The Resolution did not state that there was a direct causal link to an increase in teen violence as a result of playing video games, rather an increase in aggressive behavior, aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, and a decrease in helpful behavior as a result of playing violent video games." (emphasis GP's)

"The statement in your email of 9/19/06 to Dorothy Singer and myself refers to "teen violence" as opposed to aggressive behavior, which is why Dorothy Singer and I responded as we did. While violence is an extreme form of aggression, the body of research of which the resolution speaks is about aggression."

(GP: Yes, "teen violence" was the specific issue asked about, because that's the specific assertion which has been made in certain quarters. And Drs. Singer and Carll are in agreement on their answer, which was accurately reported in Monday's article.)

"In the interest of accuracy for future articles, it would be helpful to state that the APA Resolution on Violence in Video Games and Interactive Media reported an increase in aggressive behavior as a result of playing video games, rather than only reporting that there was no causal link to teen violence. Reporting that there was no causal link to teen violence without reporting that there was an increase in aggressive behavior, as a result of playing violent video games, may be misleading to the reader."

(GP: Point taken, Dr. Carll, although reading Monday's article clearly shows no intent to mislead. While not outlining the specifics of the aggression angle, GP did note, "The 2005 study was quite critical of interactive violence... Violence in video games appear to have similar negative effects as viewing violence on TV, but may be more harmful because of the interactive nature of video games." Monday's article also linked to the full APA resolution for those readers who wished to learn more about the APA's findings.)

Dr. Carll continues:

"The specific paragraph in the APA Resolution on Violence in Video Games and Interactive Media states: 'WHEREAS comprehensive analysis of violent interactive video game research suggests such exposure a.) increases aggressive behavior, b.) increases aggressive thoughts, c.) increases angry feelings, d.) decreases helpful behavior, and, e.) increases physiological arousal'"

"Hopefully this has helped clarify an important distinction. Thank you for your interest."

And GP thanks Drs. Carll, Singer and Bushman for investing their time in clarifying this issue.

Bottom line? GP stands by Monday's article.

Comments

hello,
i am a sophmore at mercy cross and i wam doing a resirch paper. it is abouyt video game violence and after reading your articale i was wondering if maby i could interview you. please email me back at tvelez1@yahoo.com

Post new comment

By posting comments on this Web site you agree to abide by the Comments Policy.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This image is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. The letters in the picture are all UPPER-CASE.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 08/30/08 at 01:04am
Brokenscope: No they can't legally drink. But the bars near most bases don't give a fuck.
Posted 08/29/08 at 11:11pm
Dark Sovereign: @zip: I believe that military can drink at 18 in the U.S. And these are trained soldiers. It was their personal decision to join
Posted 08/29/08 at 03:21pm
ZippyDSMlee: Dark Sovereign: because they are hurt/disabled and can't drink yet, I know lower the drinking age!! Make im real adults. :P
Posted 08/29/08 at 02:50pm
Dark Sovereign: I have one question: Why are soldiers constantly treated as victims and children?
Posted 08/29/08 at 02:45pm
Dark Sovereign: @thefremen: Glad to see you haven't left the past yet. I'll wait until you're in 2008.
Posted 08/29/08 at 02:18pm
Meggie: *doing
Posted 08/29/08 at 02:17pm
Meggie: Dr. Phil is going an Everquest addiction episode, this a repeat?
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:52am
ZippyDSMlee: feeman:DS is saying goverment would exspand more if the duims get in, he's probly right.
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:51am
thefremen: LOL, yes, the government has not expanded at all in the last 8 years, especially not for the benefit of corporate entities.
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:51am
thefremen: LOL, yes, the government has not expanded at all in the last 8 years, especially not for the benefit of corporate entities.
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:43am
ZippyDSMlee: DS- http://forums.theeca.com/showthread.php?p=84679#post84679 In OT BTW
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:32am
ZippyDSMlee: Dark Sovereign: Sure ^^
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:29am
Dark Sovereign: @zip: Make the thread. I'm just not active there.
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:28am
SimonBob: Heh, I was just playing with the semantics for my own amusement, not trying to shoehorn my way into the argument.
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:28am
ZippyDSMlee: Dark Sovereign: Iwish you would join the forums so we can have a full conversation these shouts are stifling!
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:27am
ZippyDSMlee: Dark Sovereign:force them into the wilderness to die off...this is the reality of not taking into account what to do with the lower classes.
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:26am
Dark Sovereign: @zip: What are you talking about? Less government means less taxes. Less taxes means more money in average Joe's pockets.
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:26am
ZippyDSMlee: Dark Sovereign: you DO realize there were roving shanty towns and poor hosues before social secuty was started? they were hives for poverty and disease,hell with todays "cleanliness" in housing code you can not have them anymore and states will just forc
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:22am
ZippyDSMlee: Dark Sovereign: noobies and their silly definition ^_~, but I ahve to ask how do you keep millions off the streets, taking twice as much money from states without social security and health care?
Posted 08/29/08 at 10:22am
Dark Sovereign: You ASSUME that not giving tons of handouts to people will make them poor. America itself shows you are wrong.
Login or register to post shouts