Videogames: dangerous or not? (Part 2)
And now, play! What most surprised Roxanne Tonuitti about the results? "Though many studies claim the opposite, our study showed that the violent content had no effect on the children. In our case, there were no differences between the young people who played the violent video game and the ones who played the non-violent game. This observation is reassuring (for parents as well): it shows that a single variable is not enough to create this type of negative impact. It shows that the subject is not passive -he thinks about and interprets what he sees. The game doesn't imprint upon the child as if he were a blank page,” she says. Among the other interesting results: before playing the game, the hostile attribution bias test didn't show any differences between at-risk youth and the others. In fact, they all interpreted a peer's ambiguous behaviour in the same way, both in instrumental and relational terms. And after having played? A double whammy! In fact, all of the children had a more hostile perception of a peer's ambiguous intentions after playing a video game for only 15 minutes, no matter what the game was...
"It goes against common sense, but the violent video game content itself doesn't seem to have any significant impact on the hostile attribution bias; it's actually just playing any kind of video game that does," explains Roxanne Toniutti. “Furthermore, according to the study, this is also true for groups that are at risk for social maladjustment. However, for this target group, the violent video game content could have a negative impact if it is associated with other risk factors (such as a disadvantaged socio-economic-cultural context); however it's only a trend within the study. If the study had included a larger sample of young people, this interaction would likely have been more visible.” According to Cécile Mathys, some results are really on the borderline of a significant threshold: with more subjects per group - though for a graduate dissertation with this kind of research protocol, there was already a large sample size - other elements would probably have emerged and more conclusive results would probably have accentuated some trends that could already be detected, or could have confirmed some results that were just below the surface.
A critical look. In addition to the limited number of participants (and lack of diversity and identical playing conditions in each school), the author puts her study in perspective: "We noticed that a majority of our participants didn't usually respect the age ratings for these kinds of games. In fact, 67 % of the young people explained that they usually played games with much more violent content - with decapitated heads, blood spurts, and guns and knives. In that case, maybe the game we used was not violent enough to generate a significant increase in hostility?" Cécile Mathys mentions that none of them expected that so many children would be used to playing games with levels of violence that are much higher than those recommended for their age group. "Parents probably need to be made aware of this," she says. Roxanne Tonuitti also raises another issue: it's possible that there weren't enough noticeable differences between the two games used in the study. After all, football tackles are not very mild-mannered or civilised… "Games that we may perceive as 'neutral' may not actually be that neutral," says Cécile Mathys. "We should probably look more deeply into the issue and talk about what a violent game is, what is 'tolerated' violence, and think about the image of violence in the game, before we even try to determine whether violent games lead to violent behaviour." Lastly, Roxanne Toniutti explains that young people may view the test questions on hostile attribution bias as relatively transparent. "You're studying how mean we are," some students told her... the risk being that they will then give answers that make them seem like "nice boys"...
The dangers of frustration. Despite the author's reservations, what can we deduce from her results? The first significant conclusion: "It's not the content of the game itself that counts, but the game as a particular medium," she analyses. “The type of medium is more important than the content. In itself, the video game has an impact." This is most likely due to the fact that the game exacerbates feelings of frustration and competition, as other authors have shown. In this case, the frustration can stem from several causes: the children didn't choose the game they were assigned, they had to stop playing whether the game was finished or not, and in many cases, some of them were losing or had lost. And it has been demonstrated that frustration increases the likelihood of aggressive behaviour. Similarly, an increase in hostile attribution bias can occur in children who compete with a form of artificial intelligence, whether they are trying to win a game or beat a record.
However, other authors who have worked on these subjects claim that aggressive and hostile feelings borne out of frustration and competition can be counteracted when there is a human adversary: companionship and laughter among the players can suffice to lessen the tension aroused by the game. "Further studies on the influence of video game that examine hostile attribution bias could verify this affective component by testing a group playing a violent game, another group playing a non-violent game, and a third group playing a board game against a peer. Another option would be to have two players or a team play the game together," adds Roxanne Toniutti.
Here's to video games! In the end, Roxanne Toniutti's study has several strong points. "First of all, this research adds further information to a debate that is not always clear, and allows us to better understand the mechanisms that can contribute to aggressiveness. This study also adds some nuance to the discussion, by avoiding the too-hasty conclusions or linear connections that are sometimes made," observes Cécile Mathys. Furthermore, the results provide the opportunity to deliver an important message: there is no point in demonising video games, at least in a certain context. Indeed, the situation is clearly complex: an adolescent who plays video games is not necessarily different before and after, just because of the game. "In light of these results, it's now harder to say: that young person plays video games - or violent video games - therefore they will be aggressive! Other elements also have an impact: some of them are related to social background, others are related to still other factors, and there are probably cumulative effects as well," suggests Cécile Mathys. By shedding light upon this debate, this research also contributes to discussions about potential prevention methods, says Cécile Mathys. "Prevention will most likely occur through universal recommendations, with the objective being to help young people better understand the possible effects of hostile attribution bias or aggressiveness related to violent video games. But a secondary form of prevention should also be directed at populations that are more at risk and more vulnerable to these images, in order to raise their awareness, including on the subject of video games,” she explains. Of course this approach does not preclude addressing fundamental messages to parents - quite the opposite.
Who's baby-sitting tonight? Other reflections have emerged as a result of this study, thought they were not examined as such. For example, "Adults need to understand the importance of respecting the video game age ratings, in addition to showing interest in the games or even playing with their child, and thus creating a bond around the game," adds Roxanne Toniutti. “In fact, most studies show that parental supervision protects young people. The trap for parents is to view the game as a sort of ‘baby-sitter', which they don't need to think about. We need to tell adults over and over again that they must remain invested in their child and maintain their parental role, including in regards to this type of medium." Cécile Mathys adds, "when parents are interested in their child's life and development they have to focus even more on the time spent playing video games, and be attentive to their child's behaviour before and after they play. Video games don't have the same impact on everyone, and all individuals don't have the same level of sensitivity. Games can lead to more impulsive and even aggressive behaviour depending on the young person's background and environment. But they can also serve a protective function and as a means to release impulses and tension.” In any case, the advice for parents (and/or educators and teachers) is the same for all young people: talk and communicate with the child or adolescent, show interest in them, and encourage them to talk about their feelings and experiences. In short, maintain your connection with the child, don't shut yourself out of the video game universe. Even though we now know that violent video games in themselves don't necessarily inspire young people to pick up machine guns.
