Video game violence merits higher awareness

Video games are hardly the root of the world's evil - but neither are they blameless.

The July 1 Tribune included a review ("Links between violent games, behavior might surprise you," Page A13) of a new book by researchers Lawrence Kutner and Cheryl Olson. "Grand Theft Childhood" studies the link between playing video games and violent behavior. One compelling conclusion: Most gamers aren't adversely affected by what they play, though frequent players of "M" (mature audience) games are somewhat more violent than non-players.

"Grand Theft Childhood" is marketed as a groundbreaking study. However, it's not too surprising by media-effects research standards, since studies are often lucky to find even limited evidence for an immediate and observable effect in media. Instead, numerous effects studies have concluded, as the late scholar James Carrey noted in 1985, that "it depends" - which was why Carrey in frustration then called for scrapping effects research completely!

Part of the problem, however, is that effects researchers often generalize from a single freeze frame when they should be watching the whole movie. Media researchers are hard-pressed to detect immediate individual effects. Yet they know video games, as with other media, help shape the norms and values of our society. This is a long-term process rather than a short-term result, and effects may not emerge on the individual or social level for years, much less be detected by research. This would suggest long-term effects studies. Yet Kutner and Olson use a survey - a mere snapshot. A longitudinal panel study would be one method more appropriate for any and all conclusions about long-term effects.

But research aside, the sad truth is that we underplay potential video-game violence at our own peril. For better or worse, we learn from everything we see and hear, though we choose for ourselves what behavior to model. Since 1963, thanks to psychologist Albert Bandura, we've known that children are likely to imitate the violence they see rewarded. Unsurprisingly, Kutner and Olson (even in their snapshot) observe higher levels of aggression among only slightly older "M" players - where many games reward violent behavior as well.

True, most gamers won't fully imitate the violence they see. We all, as media consumers, can see for ourselves what's acceptable and what isn't, and choose accordingly. But if a significant number of "M" gamers have adopted any degree of violence, as far as the Kutner/Olson limited study can tell, this should make us think twice about what these games are teaching them and our society as a whole. Moreover, if even one "beyond-M" gamer escalates to real-life violence and mayhem, isn't that one too many?

Many "M" video games teach those who play them that violence is acceptable. Gamers will react in varying ways to this message, if at all.

Nonetheless, we all should be much more aware of the social implications of media-promoted violence.

Alden L. Weight is a lecturer in mass communication at Arizona State University Polytechnic in Mesa.