Psychiatrist Examines Studies Supporting CA's Violent Video Game Law

May 21, 2011 -

We’re all on pins and needles waiting for the Supreme Court to finally release its decision on Brown v. EMA, so why not relieve some tension listening to an academic offer his less-than-impressed analysis of the evidence supporting the violent video game law authored by California State Senator Leland Yee.

Dr. Paul Ballas is a Philadelphia psychiatrist who deals with examining psychiatric illnesses in children and one of dozens who signed an amicus brief in support of the EMA.  At the recent Games Beyond Entertainment conference in Boston, Ballas examined whether Yee's evidence supported his argument that playing violent video games is a harmful thing for the kiddies to do.

Believing that any law based on research-backed harm has the responsibility to prove that it will actually alleviate said harm, Ballas looked at three studies Yee used to support his law.

The first was Douglas Gentile’s 2004 study that surveyed 607 eighth and ninth graders, asking them what types of video games they played, how violent the games were, what the students’ hostility levels were, etc.  Ballas pointed out that none of this self-reported data was corroborated.

"I've worked with 14-year-olds long enough to know that if you give them a long list of questions, and they're bored, and there's no downside to making up stuff, they'll just make up stuff," Ballas said. “What's fascinating is that there's stuff that [the study authors] could have absolutely double-checked, like grades. But they didn't do that. They didn't send requests for report cards in this study.”

The second study was covered in Craig Anderson’s 2004 book “Violent Video Game Effect.”  It measured the blood pressure of 130 college students after they had played a violent video game.  The obvious problem is that this study didn’t look at kids so it’s not applicable as evidence in the first place.  Also, Ballas wasn’t impressed by the increases in blood pressure the students experienced.

“Blood pressure goes up when you do lots of different things,” Ballas said, citing that musicians often report a rise in blood pressure whenever they perform. “It doesn't mean that they should stop performing, it just means that they were excited to do that activity.”

The third study (Jeanne Funk, 2004) measured the empathy levels of 150 fourth and fifth graders after they had played a violent video game.  While Ballas found the measures used in the study reasonable, the study’s conclusion doesn’t do much to support the need for Yee’s law anyway.

“The authors stated at the end of the study, however, that the relationships identified between the source of violence exposure and indicators of desensitization did not necessarily translate into causality. The authors further noted that children with lower empathy scores, and pro-violence attitudes, may simply have just been drawn to violent video games. The study also had a small sample size with no control group for pertinent variables like deviant peer influence and family violence.”

While it’s always fun to watch someone in the know eviscerate a law most of us actively dislike, the big question remains: what does the Supreme Court think?  We’ll find out sometime in the next month or so.  At least, as long as the world doesn’t end today.

Stay tuned...

Via: Gamasutra

-Reporting from San Diego, GamePolitics Contributing Editor Andrew Eisen


Comments

Re: Psychiatrist Examines Studies Supporting CA's Violent ...

Dr. Ballas should have been the one giving our amicus brief.

This is it. If the SCOTUS rules in our favor, it's not just CA that wins, but every state that still has some law banning or restricting games has to revoke those laws, because they will be, finally, declared 1rst Amendment protected!

But if Yee wins, everybody looses. Cause every state can pass whatever they want. But we don't back down. We keep fighting, never give up, and never back down.

"This is America. We go in, making bribes and threats until we get what we want!" Jimmy Hopkins

 

Re: Psychiatrist Examines Studies Supporting CA's Violent ...

Not to mention that they likely won't stop there and might begin going after other forms of media.

Re: Psychiatrist Examines Studies Supporting CA's Violent ...

I recently read through a report on the Comic book hearings back in the 50s. The evidence and research they gathered actually felt more compelling and reasonable than the crap CA has been pushing out.

Re: Psychiatrist Examines Studies Supporting CA's Violent ...

Any examples?  Wertham WAS actually a good psychologist (he gave expert testimony in Brown v Board) but to the best of my knowledge his evidence against comics basically came down to the fact that juvenile delinquents all read them -- which wasn't exactly useful information in an era where ALL children read comics.

Re: Psychiatrist Examines Studies Supporting CA's Violent ...

A lot of testimonials from criminals. It was mostly about the sexual stimulation they got from reading comic books. That's all I can remember off the top of my head.

Re: Psychiatrist Examines Studies Supporting CA's Violent ...

SO in a nut shell his evidence was pretty much the same as the evidence agaisnt games now.

Re: Psychiatrist Examines Studies Supporting CA's Violent ...

The world hasn't ended in Autralia, where they lack R-18 ratings for games. So we'll find out soon enough.

On that note- Harold Camping can suck it.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
Matthew WilsonSF have to build upwards they have natural growth limits. they can not grow outwards. ps growing outwards is terable just look at Orlando or Austin for that.04/16/2014 - 4:15pm
ZippyDSMleeIf they built upward then it would becoem like every other place making it worthless, if they don't build upward they will price people out making it worthless, what they need to do is a mix of things not just one exstreme or another.04/16/2014 - 4:00pm
Matthew Wilsonyou know the problem in SF was not the free market going wrong right? it was government distortion. by not allowing tall buildings to be build they limited supply. that is not free market.04/16/2014 - 3:48pm
ZippyDSMleeOh gaaa the free market is a lie as its currently leading them to no one living there becuse they can not afford it makign it worthless.04/16/2014 - 3:24pm
Matthew WilsonIf you have not read http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/introducing-steam-gauge-ars-reveals-steams-most-popular-games/ you should. It is a bit stats heavy, but worth the read.04/16/2014 - 2:04pm
Matthew Wilsonthe issue is when is doesn't work it can screw over millions in new york city's case. more often than not it is better to let the free market run its course without market distortion.04/16/2014 - 9:36am
NeenekoTrue, and overdone stagnation is a problem. It is a tricky balance. It does not help that when it does work, no one notices. Most people here have benifited from rent controls and not even realized it.04/16/2014 - 9:23am
ZippyDSMleehttp://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2014/04/15/riaa_files_civil_suit_against_megaupload04/16/2014 - 8:48am
ZippyDSMleeEither way you get stagnation as people can not afford the prices they set.04/16/2014 - 8:47am
Neenekowell, specifically it helps people already living there and hurts people who want to live there instead. As for 'way more hurt', majorities generally need less legal protection. yes it hurt more people then it helped, it was written for a minority04/16/2014 - 8:30am
MaskedPixelantehttp://torrentfreak.com/square-enix-drm-boosts-profits-and-its-here-to-stay-140415/ Square proves how incredibly out of touch they are by saying that DRM is the way of the future, and is here to stay.04/16/2014 - 8:29am
james_fudgeUnwinnable Weekly Telethon playing Metal Gear http://www.twitch.tv/rainydayletsplay04/16/2014 - 8:06am
ConsterTo be fair, there's so little left of the middle class that those numbers are skewing.04/16/2014 - 7:42am
Matthew Wilsonyes it help a sub section of the poor, but hurt both the middle and upper class. in the end way more people were hurt than helped. also, it hurt most poor people as well.04/16/2014 - 12:13am
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
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician