Football Games Cause More Aggression Than Shooters, Say UK Researchers

May 3, 2011 -

Forget about violent video games; according to a group of researchers in England, games with goals such as football are more likely to make participants aggressive than anything encountered in Grand Theft Auto or Call Of Duty. According to research conducted by Dr. Simon Goodson and Sarah Pearson of Huddersfield university, games with goals cause more of an aggressive reaction in participants than killing an animated character because sports is closer to real life. Of course, you have to take into account that Football in England is a culturally more important than video games in general.

Researchers measured the heart rates, respiration and brain activity of 40 male and female participants randomly selected to play violent Xbox 360 game or a football game. They found that when players killed someone in a game it caused little brain activity. But when participant's conceded a goal or foul in the sports game it caused a higher level of brain activity.

Dr. Goodson added that participants generally reacted with more agitation during the football game and that maybe violent games have been misrepresented as the worst thing a gamer can play. Dr. Goodson is presenting his research this week at the British Psychological Society’s annual conference in Glasgow, Scotland.

 

source: Metro.co.uk


Comments

Re: Football Games Cause More Aggression Than Shooters, Say ...

Next Up: Multiplayer games make people more aggressive than Single player ones, and I'd put money on that, competition warms the blood, and a human is a far more challenging and unpredictable opponent than an AI.

As an aside, I'd like to see a comparison of heart rate and blood pressure etc between someone having a go on a shooting range and someone playing in a Poker game, I think you'd find some interesting results :)

I suppose that's why those who would censor games have to bounce wildly between 'It causes random unpredictable violent behaviour!' and 'It turns them into a stone-cold killer who calmly walks around firing!' without them spotting the Oxymoron.

Re: Football Games Cause More Aggression Than Shooters, Say ...

Sports..... the most dangerous hobby!


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: Football Games Cause More Aggression Than Shooters, Say ...

Glad I never got into sports. With as much video games as I play, I could have been a mass murderer by now.

_____________________________________________________________________________

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Atlanta Video Games Examiner for examiner.com

Re: Football Games Cause More Aggression Than Shooters, Say ...

@Beomh

Agression != violence

This is a common misconception by those who hate games, all that is shown repeatedly is that competitive behaviour causes increased agression, which when engaged in competition is a good thing.

edit: post didn't appear where I intended

Re: Football Games Cause More Aggression Than Shooters, Say ...

>Agression != violence

Which is why I called the link 'slightly dubious' :)

/b 

Re: Football Games Cause More Aggression Than Shooters, Say ...

Giving how just the fans act I'm not surprised.

Re: Football Games Cause More Aggression Than Shooters, Say ...

It would be interesting to see this compared to watching actual football if we're going to make the slightly dubious "more brain activity = violent actions" leap, then it might go some way to explaining the whole 'football hooliganism' thing.

One inconsitency I would point out: "They found that when players killed someone in a game it caused little brain activity. But when participant's conceded a goal or foul in the sports game it caused a higher level of brain activity." One is a win conditional, one is a lose conditional. Might be relevant.

/b

Re: Football Games Cause More Aggression Than Shooters, Say ...

I don't think that requires a study. Drop by your local pub whenever a game is on, you'll see plenty of people shouting at the TV. Not that it matters, what's all the fuss about agression anyway?

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
SeanBJust goes to show what I have said for years. Your ability to have sex does not qualify you for parenthood.04/15/2014 - 9:21pm
NeenekoSo "worked" vs "failed" really comes down to who you think is more important and deserving04/15/2014 - 7:04pm
NeenekoThough I am also not sure we can say NYC failed. Rent control helped the people it was intended for and is considered a failure by the people it was designed to protect them from.04/15/2014 - 7:04pm
NeenekoIf they change the rules, demand will plummet. Though yeah, rent control probably would not help much in the SF case. I doubt anything will.04/15/2014 - 1:35pm
TheSmokeyOnline gamer accused of murdering son to keep playing - http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2014/04/15/21604921.html04/15/2014 - 11:50am
Matthew Wilsonyup, but curent city rules do not allow for that.04/15/2014 - 11:00am
ZippyDSMleeIf SF dose not start building upwards then they will price people out of the aera.04/15/2014 - 10:59am
Matthew Wilsonthe issue rent control has it reduces supply, and in SF case they already has a supply problem. rent control ofen puts rent below cost, or below profit of selling it. rent control would not fix this issue.04/15/2014 - 10:56am
NeenekoRent control is useful in moderation, NYC took it way to far and tends to be held up as an example of them not working, but in most cases they are more subtle and positive.04/15/2014 - 10:24am
PHX CorpBeating Cancer with Video Games http://mashable.com/2014/04/14/steven-gonzalez-survivor-games/04/15/2014 - 9:21am
Matthew Wilsonwhat are you saying SF should do rent control, that has never worked every time it has been tried. the issue here is a self inflicted supply problem imposed by stupid laws.04/15/2014 - 8:52am
E. Zachary KnightNeeneko, Government created price controls don't work though. They may keep prices down for the current inhabitants, but they are the primary cause of recently vacated residences having astronomical costs. Look at New York City as a prime example.04/15/2014 - 8:50am
NeenekoI think free markets are important, but believe in balance. Too much of any force and things get unstable.04/15/2014 - 7:25am
NeenekoWell, the traditional way of keeping prices down is what they are doing, controls on lease termination and tax code, but it will not be enough in this case.04/15/2014 - 7:24am
Matthew WilsonI said that already04/14/2014 - 4:22pm
E. Zachary KnightMatthew, The could also lower prices by increasing supply. Allow high rise apartment buildings to be built to fulfill demand and prices will drop.04/14/2014 - 3:48pm
Matthew Wilsonthe only way they could keep the price's down, would be to kick out google, apple, amazon, and other tech companies, but that would do a ton of economic damage to SF, but I am a major proponent of free markets04/14/2014 - 2:54pm
NeenekoThe community people are seeking gets destroyed in the process, and the new people are not able to build on themselves. Generally these situations result in local cultural death in a decade or so, and no one wins.04/14/2014 - 2:09pm
NeenekoWell yes, that is the 'free market', but the market is only a small piece of a much larger system. The market does not always do the constructive thing.04/14/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew WilsonWell that is the free market... they learned a valuable lesson restricting supply will drive up prices.04/14/2014 - 1:57pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician