October 2, 2018

Do Violent Video Games Trigger Aggression?

A study tries to find whether slaughtering zombies with a virtual assault weapon translates into misbehavior when a teenager returns to reality

By Melinda Wenner Moyer

video games encourage violence essay

Getty Images

Intuitively, it makes sense Splatterhouse and Postal 2 would serve as virtual training sessions for teens, encouraging them to act out in ways that mimic game-related violence. But many studies have failed to find a clear connection between violent game play and belligerent behavior, and the controversy over whether the shoot-‘em-up world transfers to real life has persisted for years. A new study published on October 1 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences tries to resolve the controversy by weighing the findings of two dozen studies on the topic.

The meta-analysis does tie violent video games to a small increase in physical aggression among adolescents and preteens. Yet debate is by no means over. Whereas the analysis was undertaken to help settle the science on the issue, researchers still disagree on the real-world significance of the findings.

This new analysis attempted to navigate through the minefield of conflicting research. Many studies find gaming associated with increases in aggression, but others identify no such link. A small but vocal cadre of researchers have argued much of the work implicating video games has serious flaws in that, among other things, it measures the frequency of aggressive thoughts or language rather than physically aggressive behaviors like hitting or pushing, which have more real-world relevance.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Jay Hull, a social psychologist at Dartmouth College and a co-author on the new paper, has never been convinced by the critiques that have disparaged purported ties between gaming and aggression. “I just kept reading, over and over again, [these] criticisms of the literature and going, ‘that’s just not true,’” he says. So he and his colleagues designed the new meta-analysis to address these criticisms head-on and determine if they had merit.

Hull and colleagues pooled data from 24 studies that had been selected to avoid some of the criticisms leveled at earlier work. They only included research that measured the relationship between violent video game use and overt physical aggression. They also limited their analysis to studies that statistically controlled for several factors that could influence the relationship between gaming and subsequent behavior, such as age and baseline aggressive behavior.

Even with these constraints, their analysis found kids who played violent video games did become more aggressive over time. But the changes in behavior were not big. “According to traditional ways of looking at these numbers, it’s not a large effect—I would say it’s relatively small,” he says. But it’s “statistically reliable—it’s not by chance and not inconsequential.”

Their findings mesh with a 2015 literature review conducted by the American Psychological Association, which concluded violent video games worsen aggressive behavior in older children, adolescents and young adults. Together, Hull’s meta-analysis and the APA report help give clarity to the existing body of research, says Douglas Gentile, a developmental psychologist at Iowa State University who was not involved in conducting the meta-analysis. “Media violence is one risk factor for aggression,” he says. “It's not the biggest, it’s also not the smallest, but it’s worth paying attention to.”

Yet researchers who have been critical of links between games and violence contend Hull’s meta-analysis does not settle the issue. “They don’t find much. They just try to make it sound like they do,” says Christopher Ferguson, a psychologist at Stetson University in Florida, who has published papers questioning the link between violent video games and aggression.

Ferguson argues the degree to which video game use increases aggression in Hull’s analysis—what is known in psychology as the estimated “effect size”—is so small as to be essentially meaningless. After statistically controlling for several other factors, the meta-analysis reported an effect size of 0.08, which suggests that violent video games account for less than one percent of the variation in aggressive behavior among U.S. teens and pre-teens—if, in fact, there is a cause-and effect relationship between game play and hostile actions. It may instead be that the relationship between gaming and aggression is a statistical artifact caused by lingering flaws in study design, Ferguson says.  

Johannes Breuer, a psychologist at GESIS–Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences in Germany, agrees, noting that according to “a common rule of thumb in psychological research,” effect sizes below 0.1 are “considered trivial.” He adds meta-analyses are only as valid as the studies included in them, and that work on the issue has been plagued by methodological problems. For one thing, studies vary in terms of the criteria they use to determine if a video game is violent or not. By some measures, the Super Mario Bros. games would be considered violent, but by others not. Studies, too, often rely on subjects self-reporting their own aggressive acts, and they may not do so accurately. “All of this is not to say that the results of this meta-analysis are not valid,” he says. “But things like this need to be kept in mind when interpreting the findings and discussing their meaning.”

Hull says, however, that the effect size his team found still has real-world significance. An analysis of one of his earlier studies, which reported a similar estimated effect size of 0.083, found playing violent video games was linked with almost double the risk that kids would be sent to the school principal’s office for fighting. The study began by taking a group of children who hadn’t been dispatched to the principal in the previous month and then tracked them for a subsequent eight months. It found 4.8 percent of kids who reported only rarely playing violent video games were sent to the principal’s office at least once during that period compared with 9 percent who reported playing violent video games frequently. Hull theorizes violent games help kids become more comfortable with taking risks and engaging in abnormal behavior. “Their sense of right and wrong is being warped,” he notes.

Hull and his colleagues also found evidence ethnicity shapes the relationship between violent video games and aggression. White players seem more susceptible to the games' putative effects on behavior than do Hispanic and Asian players. Hull isn’t sure why, but he suspects the games' varying impact relates to how much kids are influenced by the norms of American culture, which, he says, are rooted in rugged individualism and a warriorlike mentality that may incite video game players to identify with aggressors rather than victims. It might “dampen sympathy toward their virtual victims,” he and his co-authors wrote, “with consequences for their values and behavior outside the game.”

Social scientists will, no doubt, continue to debate the psychological impacts of killing within the confines of interactive games. In a follow-up paper Hull says he plans to tackle the issue of the real-world significance of violent game play, and hopes it adds additional clarity. “It’s a knotty issue,” he notes—and it’s an open question whether research will ever quell the controversy.

  • Where We Work
  • Publications
  • Toolkits & Guides
  • Data Collection Tools
  • Fact Sheets
  • All Resources

Do Video Games Influence Violent Behavior?

Featured image for “Do Video Games Influence Violent Behavior?”

By:  Roanna Cooper, MA and Marc Zimmerman, PhD, MI-YVPC Director

An op-ed article appeared recently in the The New York Times  discussing the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down California’s law barring the sale or rental of violent video games to people under 18.  The author, Dr. Cheryl Olson,   describes how the proposed law was based on the erroneous assumption that such games influence violent behavior in real life.

Dr. Olson suggests that the deliberately outrageous nature of violent games, though disturbing, makes them easily discernible from real life and suggests that the interactivity could potentially make such games less harmful.

She raises the question of how these two behaviors can be linked if youth violence has declined over the last several years while violent video game playing has increased significantly during the same period.

This analysis ignores the fact that such variation may be explained by factors other than the link between the two. A spurious variable–a third variable that explains the relationship between two other variables—may explain the negative correlation of video game playing and violent behavior. As one example, socioeconomic status may explain both a decline in violent behavior and an increase in video game playing. More affluent youth have the means and time to buy and play video games, which keeps them safely inside while avoiding potentially violent interactions on the street.  Dr. Olsen also cites several studies that have failed to show a connection between violent video game playing and violent behavior among youth.

This conclusion, however, may not be as clear cut as it appears.

Youth violence remains a significant public health issue

The decline of youth violence notwithstanding, it remains a significant public health issue that requires attention.Youth homicide remains the number one cause of death for African-American youth between 14 and 24 years old, and the number two cause for all children in this age group. Furthermore, the proportion of youth admitting to having committed various violent acts within the previous 12 months has remained steady or even increased somewhat in recent years ( http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/108/5/1222.full.pdf+html ).  Although the Columbine tragedy and others like it make the headlines, youth are killed everyday by the hands of another.  A more critical analysis of the link between video game playing and violence is necessary for fully understanding a complex problem like youth violent behavior that has many causes and correlates.

video games encourage violence essay

Studies support a link between violent video games and aggressive behavior

Researchers have reported experimental evidence linking violent video games to more aggressive behavior, particularly as it relates to children who are at more sensitive stages in their socialization.  These effects have been found to be particularly profound in the case of child-initiated virtual violence.

  • In one study, 161 9- to 12-year olds and 354 college students were randomly assigned to play either a violent or nonviolent video game.  The participants subsequently played another computer game in which they set punishment levels to be delivered to another person participating in the study (they were not actually administered).  Information was also gathered on each participant’s recent history of violent behavior; habitual video game, television, and move habits, and several other control variables.  The authors reported three main findings: 1) participants who played one of violent video games would choose to punish their opponents with significantly more high-noise blasts than those who played the nonviolent games; 2) habitual exposure to violent media was associated with higher levels of recent violent behavior; and 3) interactive forms of media violence were more strongly related to violent behavior than exposure to non-interactive media violence.
  • The second study was a cross-sectional correlational study of media habits, aggression-related individual difference variables, and aggressive behaviors of an adolescent population.  High school students (N=189) completed surveys about their violent TV, movie, and video game exposure, attitudes towards violence, and perceived norms about violent behavior and personality traits.  After statistically controlling for sex, total screen time and aggressive beliefs and attitudes, the authors found that playing violent video games predicted heightened physically aggressive behavior and violent behavior in the real world in a long-term context.
  • In a third study, Anderson et al. conducted a longitudinal study of elementary school students to examine if violent video game exposure resulted in increases in aggressive behavior over time.  Surveys were given to 430 third, fourth, and fifth graders, their peers, and their teachers at two times during a school year.  The survey assessed both media habits and their attitudes about violence.  Results indicated that children who played more violent video games early in a school year changed to see the world in a more aggressive way and also changed to become more verbally and physically aggressive later in the school year.  Changes in attitude were noticed by both peers and teachers.
  • Bushman and Huesmann, in a 2006 Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine article , examined effect size estimates using meta-analysis to look at the short- and long-term effects of violent media on aggression in children and adults.  They reported a positive relationship between exposure to media violence and subsequent aggressive behavior, aggressive ideas, arousal, and anger across the studies they examined.  Consistent with the theory that long-term effects require the learning of beliefs and that young minds can easier encode new scripts via observational learning, they found that the long-term effects were greater for children.
  • In a more recent review, Anderson et al. (2010) also analyzed 136 studies representing 130,296 participants from several countries.  These included experimental laboratory work, cross-sectional surveys and longitudinal studies.  Overall, they found consistent associations between playing violent video games and many measures of aggression, including self, teacher and parent reports of aggressive behavior.  Although the correlations were not high (r=0.17-0.20), they are typical for psychological studies in general and comparable with other risk factors for youth violence suggested in the 2001 Surgeon General’s Report on youth violence .

Violent video games may increase precursors to violent behavior, such as bullying

Although playing violent video games may not necessarily determine violent or aggressive behavior, it may increase precursors to violent behavior.  In fact, Dr. Olson points out that violent video games may be related to bullying, which researchers have found to be a risk factor for more serious violent behavior. Therefore, video game playing may have an indirect effect on violent behavior by increasing risk factors for it.  Doug Gentile notes that the only way for violent video games to affect serious criminal violence statistics is if they were the primary predictor of crime, which they may not be.  Rather, they represent one risk factor among many for aggression ( http://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/12/virtual-violence.aspx ).

Should video games be regulated?

L. Rowell Huesmann (2010) points out that violent video game playing may be similar to other public health threats such as exposure to cigarette smoke and led based paint .  Despite not being guaranteed, the probability of lung cancer from smoking or intelligence deficits from lead exposure is increased.  Nevertheless, we have laws controlling cigarette sales to minors and the use of lead-based paint (and other lead-based products such as gasoline) because it is a risk factor for negative health outcomes.  Huesmann argues the same analysis could be applied to video game exposure.  Although exposure to violent video games is not the sole factor contributing to aggression and violence among children and adolescents, it is a contributing risk factor that is modifiable.

video games encourage violence essay

Violent behavior is determined by many factors

Finally, most researchers would agree that violent behavior is determined by many factors which may combine in different ways for different youth. These factors involve neighborhoods, families, peers, and individual traits and behaviors. Researchers, for example, have found that living in a violent neighborhood and experiencing violence as a victim or witness is associated with an increased risk for violent behavior among youth. Yet, this factor alone may not cause one to be violent and most people living in such a neighborhood do not become violent perpetrators. Similarly, researchers have found consistently that exposure to family violence (e.g., spousal and child abuse, fighting and conflict) increases the risk for youth violent behavior, but does not necessarily result in violent children. Likewise, researchers have found that first person killing video game playing is associated with increased risk for violent behavior, but not all the time. Yet, constant exposure to violence from multiple sources, including first person violent video games, in the absence of positive factors that help to buffer these negative exposures is likely to increase the probability that youth will engage in violent behavior.

Despite disagreements on the exact nature of the relationship between violent video game playing and violent or aggressive behavior, significant evidence exists linking video game playing with violent behavior and its correlates.  Although we are somewhat agnostic about the role of social controls like laws banning the sale of violent video games to minors, an argument against such social controls based on the conclusion  that the video games have no effect seems to oversimplify the issue. A more in-depth and critical analysis of the issue from multiple perspectives may both help more completely understand the causes and correlates of youth violence, and provide us with some direction for creative solutions to this persistent social problem.

Share this:

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • View all journals
  • My Account Login
  • Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • Open access
  • Published: 13 March 2018

Does playing violent video games cause aggression? A longitudinal intervention study

  • Simone Kühn 1 , 2 ,
  • Dimitrij Tycho Kugler 2 ,
  • Katharina Schmalen 1 ,
  • Markus Weichenberger 1 ,
  • Charlotte Witt 1 &
  • Jürgen Gallinat 2  

Molecular Psychiatry volume  24 ,  pages 1220–1234 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

542k Accesses

102 Citations

2353 Altmetric

Metrics details

  • Neuroscience

It is a widespread concern that violent video games promote aggression, reduce pro-social behaviour, increase impulsivity and interfere with cognition as well as mood in its players. Previous experimental studies have focussed on short-term effects of violent video gameplay on aggression, yet there are reasons to believe that these effects are mostly the result of priming. In contrast, the present study is the first to investigate the effects of long-term violent video gameplay using a large battery of tests spanning questionnaires, behavioural measures of aggression, sexist attitudes, empathy and interpersonal competencies, impulsivity-related constructs (such as sensation seeking, boredom proneness, risk taking, delay discounting), mental health (depressivity, anxiety) as well as executive control functions, before and after 2 months of gameplay. Our participants played the violent video game Grand Theft Auto V, the non-violent video game The Sims 3 or no game at all for 2 months on a daily basis. No significant changes were observed, neither when comparing the group playing a violent video game to a group playing a non-violent game, nor to a passive control group. Also, no effects were observed between baseline and posttest directly after the intervention, nor between baseline and a follow-up assessment 2 months after the intervention period had ended. The present results thus provide strong evidence against the frequently debated negative effects of playing violent video games in adults and will therefore help to communicate a more realistic scientific perspective on the effects of violent video gaming.

Similar content being viewed by others

video games encourage violence essay

No effect of short term exposure to gambling like reward systems on post game risk taking

Nicholas J. D’Amico, Aaron Drummond, … James D. Sauer

video games encourage violence essay

Increasing prosocial behavior and decreasing selfishness in the lab and everyday life

Andrew T. Gloster, Marcia T. B. Rinner & Andrea H. Meyer

video games encourage violence essay

Dynamics of the immediate behavioral response to partial social exclusion

J. F. Dewald-Kaufmann, T. Wüstenberg, … F. Padberg

The concern that violent video games may promote aggression or reduce empathy in its players is pervasive and given the popularity of these games their psychological impact is an urgent issue for society at large. Contrary to the custom, this topic has also been passionately debated in the scientific literature. One research camp has strongly argued that violent video games increase aggression in its players [ 1 , 2 ], whereas the other camp [ 3 , 4 ] repeatedly concluded that the effects are minimal at best, if not absent. Importantly, it appears that these fundamental inconsistencies cannot be attributed to differences in research methodology since even meta-analyses, with the goal to integrate the results of all prior studies on the topic of aggression caused by video games led to disparate conclusions [ 2 , 3 ]. These meta-analyses had a strong focus on children, and one of them [ 2 ] reported a marginal age effect suggesting that children might be even more susceptible to violent video game effects.

To unravel this topic of research, we designed a randomised controlled trial on adults to draw causal conclusions on the influence of video games on aggression. At present, almost all experimental studies targeting the effects of violent video games on aggression and/or empathy focussed on the effects of short-term video gameplay. In these studies the duration for which participants were instructed to play the games ranged from 4 min to maximally 2 h (mean = 22 min, median = 15 min, when considering all experimental studies reviewed in two of the recent major meta-analyses in the field [ 3 , 5 ]) and most frequently the effects of video gaming have been tested directly after gameplay.

It has been suggested that the effects of studies focussing on consequences of short-term video gameplay (mostly conducted on college student populations) are mainly the result of priming effects, meaning that exposure to violent content increases the accessibility of aggressive thoughts and affect when participants are in the immediate situation [ 6 ]. However, above and beyond this the General Aggression Model (GAM, [ 7 ]) assumes that repeatedly primed thoughts and feelings influence the perception of ongoing events and therewith elicits aggressive behaviour as a long-term effect. We think that priming effects are interesting and worthwhile exploring, but in contrast to the notion of the GAM our reading of the literature is that priming effects are short-lived (suggested to only last for <5 min and may potentially reverse after that time [ 8 ]). Priming effects should therefore only play a role in very close temporal proximity to gameplay. Moreover, there are a multitude of studies on college students that have failed to replicate priming effects [ 9 , 10 , 11 ] and associated predictions of the so-called GAM such as a desensitisation against violent content [ 12 , 13 , 14 ] in adolescents and college students or a decrease of empathy [ 15 ] and pro-social behaviour [ 16 , 17 ] as a result of playing violent video games.

However, in our view the question that society is actually interested in is not: “Are people more aggressive after having played violent video games for a few minutes? And are these people more aggressive minutes after gameplay ended?”, but rather “What are the effects of frequent, habitual violent video game playing? And for how long do these effects persist (not in the range of minutes but rather weeks and months)?” For this reason studies are needed in which participants are trained over longer periods of time, tested after a longer delay after acute playing and tested with broader batteries assessing aggression but also other relevant domains such as empathy as well as mood and cognition. Moreover, long-term follow-up assessments are needed to demonstrate long-term effects of frequent violent video gameplay. To fill this gap, we set out to expose adult participants to two different types of video games for a period of 2 months and investigate changes in measures of various constructs of interest at least one day after the last gaming session and test them once more 2 months after the end of the gameplay intervention. In contrast to the GAM, we hypothesised no increases of aggression or decreases in pro-social behaviour even after long-term exposure to a violent video game due to our reasoning that priming effects of violent video games are short-lived and should therefore not influence measures of aggression if they are not measured directly after acute gaming. In the present study, we assessed potential changes in the following domains: behavioural as well as questionnaire measures of aggression, empathy and interpersonal competencies, impulsivity-related constructs (such as sensation seeking, boredom proneness, risk taking, delay discounting), and depressivity and anxiety as well as executive control functions. As the effects on aggression and pro-social behaviour were the core targets of the present study, we implemented multiple tests for these domains. This broad range of domains with its wide coverage and the longitudinal nature of the study design enabled us to draw more general conclusions regarding the causal effects of violent video games.

Materials and methods

Participants.

Ninety healthy participants (mean age = 28 years, SD = 7.3, range: 18–45, 48 females) were recruited by means of flyers and internet advertisements. The sample consisted of college students as well as of participants from the general community. The advertisement mentioned that we were recruiting for a longitudinal study on video gaming, but did not mention that we would offer an intervention or that we were expecting training effects. Participants were randomly assigned to the three groups ruling out self-selection effects. The sample size was based on estimates from a previous study with a similar design [ 18 ]. After complete description of the study, the participants’ informed written consent was obtained. The local ethics committee of the Charité University Clinic, Germany, approved of the study. We included participants that reported little, preferably no video game usage in the past 6 months (none of the participants ever played the game Grand Theft Auto V (GTA) or Sims 3 in any of its versions before). We excluded participants with psychological or neurological problems. The participants received financial compensation for the testing sessions (200 Euros) and performance-dependent additional payment for two behavioural tasks detailed below, but received no money for the training itself.

Training procedure

The violent video game group (5 participants dropped out between pre- and posttest, resulting in a group of n  = 25, mean age = 26.6 years, SD = 6.0, 14 females) played the game Grand Theft Auto V on a Playstation 3 console over a period of 8 weeks. The active control group played the non-violent video game Sims 3 on the same console (6 participants dropped out, resulting in a group of n  = 24, mean age = 25.8 years, SD = 6.8, 12 females). The passive control group (2 participants dropped out, resulting in a group of n  = 28, mean age = 30.9 years, SD = 8.4, 12 females) was not given a gaming console and had no task but underwent the same testing procedure as the two other groups. The passive control group was not aware of the fact that they were part of a control group to prevent self-training attempts. The experimenters testing the participants were blind to group membership, but we were unable to prevent participants from talking about the game during testing, which in some cases lead to an unblinding of experimental condition. Both training groups were instructed to play the game for at least 30 min a day. Participants were only reimbursed for the sessions in which they came to the lab. Our previous research suggests that the perceived fun in gaming was positively associated with training outcome [ 18 ] and we speculated that enforcing training sessions through payment would impair motivation and thus diminish the potential effect of the intervention. Participants underwent a testing session before (baseline) and after the training period of 2 months (posttest 1) as well as a follow-up testing sessions 2 months after the training period (posttest 2).

Grand Theft Auto V (GTA)

GTA is an action-adventure video game situated in a fictional highly violent game world in which players are rewarded for their use of violence as a means to advance in the game. The single-player story follows three criminals and their efforts to commit heists while under pressure from a government agency. The gameplay focuses on an open world (sandbox game) where the player can choose between different behaviours. The game also allows the player to engage in various side activities, such as action-adventure, driving, third-person shooting, occasional role-playing, stealth and racing elements. The open world design lets players freely roam around the fictional world so that gamers could in principle decide not to commit violent acts.

The Sims 3 (Sims)

Sims is a life simulation game and also classified as a sandbox game because it lacks clearly defined goals. The player creates virtual individuals called “Sims”, and customises their appearance, their personalities and places them in a home, directs their moods, satisfies their desires and accompanies them in their daily activities and by becoming part of a social network. It offers opportunities, which the player may choose to pursue or to refuse, similar as GTA but is generally considered as a pro-social and clearly non-violent game.

Assessment battery

To assess aggression and associated constructs we used the following questionnaires: Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire [ 19 ], State Hostility Scale [ 20 ], Updated Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale [ 21 , 22 ], Moral Disengagement Scale [ 23 , 24 ], the Rosenzweig Picture Frustration Test [ 25 , 26 ] and a so-called World View Measure [ 27 ]. All of these measures have previously been used in research investigating the effects of violent video gameplay, however, the first two most prominently. Additionally, behavioural measures of aggression were used: a Word Completion Task, a Lexical Decision Task [ 28 ] and the Delay frustration task [ 29 ] (an inter-correlation matrix is depicted in Supplementary Figure 1 1). From these behavioural measures, the first two were previously used in research on the effects of violent video gameplay. To assess variables that have been related to the construct of impulsivity, we used the Brief Sensation Seeking Scale [ 30 ] and the Boredom Propensity Scale [ 31 ] as well as tasks assessing risk taking and delay discounting behaviourally, namely the Balloon Analogue Risk Task [ 32 ] and a Delay-Discounting Task [ 33 ]. To quantify pro-social behaviour, we employed: Interpersonal Reactivity Index [ 34 ] (frequently used in research on the effects of violent video gameplay), Balanced Emotional Empathy Scale [ 35 ], Reading the Mind in the Eyes test [ 36 ], Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire [ 37 ] and Richardson Conflict Response Questionnaire [ 38 ]. To assess depressivity and anxiety, which has previously been associated with intense video game playing [ 39 ], we used Beck Depression Inventory [ 40 ] and State Trait Anxiety Inventory [ 41 ]. To characterise executive control function, we used a Stop Signal Task [ 42 ], a Multi-Source Interference Task [ 43 ] and a Task Switching Task [ 44 ] which have all been previously used to assess effects of video gameplay. More details on all instruments used can be found in the Supplementary Material.

Data analysis

On the basis of the research question whether violent video game playing enhances aggression and reduces empathy, the focus of the present analysis was on time by group interactions. We conducted these interaction analyses separately, comparing the violent video game group against the active control group (GTA vs. Sims) and separately against the passive control group (GTA vs. Controls) that did not receive any intervention and separately for the potential changes during the intervention period (baseline vs. posttest 1) and to test for potential long-term changes (baseline vs. posttest 2). We employed classical frequentist statistics running a repeated-measures ANOVA controlling for the covariates sex and age.

Since we collected 52 separate outcome variables and conduced four different tests with each (GTA vs. Sims, GTA vs. Controls, crossed with baseline vs. posttest 1, baseline vs. posttest 2), we had to conduct 52 × 4 = 208 frequentist statistical tests. Setting the alpha value to 0.05 means that by pure chance about 10.4 analyses should become significant. To account for this multiple testing problem and the associated alpha inflation, we conducted a Bonferroni correction. According to Bonferroni, the critical value for the entire set of n tests is set to an alpha value of 0.05 by taking alpha/ n  = 0.00024.

Since the Bonferroni correction has sometimes been criticised as overly conservative, we conducted false discovery rate (FDR) correction [ 45 ]. FDR correction also determines adjusted p -values for each test, however, it controls only for the number of false discoveries in those tests that result in a discovery (namely a significant result).

Moreover, we tested for group differences at the baseline assessment using independent t -tests, since those may hamper the interpretation of significant interactions between group and time that we were primarily interested in.

Since the frequentist framework does not enable to evaluate whether the observed null effect of the hypothesised interaction is indicative of the absence of a relation between violent video gaming and our dependent variables, the amount of evidence in favour of the null hypothesis has been tested using a Bayesian framework. Within the Bayesian framework both the evidence in favour of the null and the alternative hypothesis are directly computed based on the observed data, giving rise to the possibility of comparing the two. We conducted Bayesian repeated-measures ANOVAs comparing the model in favour of the null and the model in favour of the alternative hypothesis resulting in a Bayes factor (BF) using Bayesian Information criteria [ 46 ]. The BF 01 suggests how much more likely the data is to occur under the null hypothesis. All analyses were performed using the JASP software package ( https://jasp-stats.org ).

Sex distribution in the present study did not differ across the groups ( χ 2 p -value > 0.414). However, due to the fact that differences between males and females have been observed in terms of aggression and empathy [ 47 ], we present analyses controlling for sex. Since our random assignment to the three groups did result in significant age differences between groups, with the passive control group being significantly older than the GTA ( t (51) = −2.10, p  = 0.041) and the Sims group ( t (50) = −2.38, p  = 0.021), we also controlled for age.

The participants in the violent video game group played on average 35 h and the non-violent video game group 32 h spread out across the 8 weeks interval (with no significant group difference p  = 0.48).

To test whether participants assigned to the violent GTA game show emotional, cognitive and behavioural changes, we present the results of repeated-measure ANOVA time x group interaction analyses separately for GTA vs. Sims and GTA vs. Controls (Tables  1 – 3 ). Moreover, we split the analyses according to the time domain into effects from baseline assessment to posttest 1 (Table  2 ) and effects from baseline assessment to posttest 2 (Table  3 ) to capture more long-lasting or evolving effects. In addition to the statistical test values, we report partial omega squared ( ω 2 ) as an effect size measure. Next to the classical frequentist statistics, we report the results of a Bayesian statistical approach, namely BF 01 , the likelihood with which the data is to occur under the null hypothesis that there is no significant time × group interaction. In Table  2 , we report the presence of significant group differences at baseline in the right most column.

Since we conducted 208 separate frequentist tests we expected 10.4 significant effects simply by chance when setting the alpha value to 0.05. In fact we found only eight significant time × group interactions (these are marked with an asterisk in Tables  2 and 3 ).

When applying a conservative Bonferroni correction, none of those tests survive the corrected threshold of p  < 0.00024. Neither does any test survive the more lenient FDR correction. The arithmetic mean of the frequentist test statistics likewise shows that on average no significant effect was found (bottom rows in Tables  2 and 3 ).

In line with the findings from a frequentist approach, the harmonic mean of the Bayesian factor BF 01 is consistently above one but not very far from one. This likewise suggests that there is very likely no interaction between group × time and therewith no detrimental effects of the violent video game GTA in the domains tested. The evidence in favour of the null hypothesis based on the Bayes factor is not massive, but clearly above 1. Some of the harmonic means are above 1.6 and constitute substantial evidence [ 48 ]. However, the harmonic mean has been criticised as unstable. Owing to the fact that the sum is dominated by occasional small terms in the likelihood, one may underestimate the actual evidence in favour of the null hypothesis [ 49 ].

To test the sensitivity of the present study to detect relevant effects we computed the effect size that we would have been able to detect. The information we used consisted of alpha error probability = 0.05, power = 0.95, our sample size, number of groups and of measurement occasions and correlation between the repeated measures at posttest 1 and posttest 2 (average r  = 0.68). According to G*Power [ 50 ], we could detect small effect sizes of f  = 0.16 (equals η 2  = 0.025 and r  = 0.16) in each separate test. When accounting for the conservative Bonferroni-corrected p -value of 0.00024, still a medium effect size of f  = 0.23 (equals η 2  = 0.05 and r  = 0.22) would have been detectable. A meta-analysis by Anderson [ 2 ] reported an average effects size of r  = 0.18 for experimental studies testing for aggressive behaviour and another by Greitmeyer [ 5 ] reported average effect sizes of r  = 0.19, 0.25 and 0.17 for effects of violent games on aggressive behaviour, cognition and affect, all of which should have been detectable at least before multiple test correction.

Within the scope of the present study we tested the potential effects of playing the violent video game GTA V for 2 months against an active control group that played the non-violent, rather pro-social life simulation game The Sims 3 and a passive control group. Participants were tested before and after the long-term intervention and at a follow-up appointment 2 months later. Although we used a comprehensive test battery consisting of questionnaires and computerised behavioural tests assessing aggression, impulsivity-related constructs, mood, anxiety, empathy, interpersonal competencies and executive control functions, we did not find relevant negative effects in response to violent video game playing. In fact, only three tests of the 208 statistical tests performed showed a significant interaction pattern that would be in line with this hypothesis. Since at least ten significant effects would be expected purely by chance, we conclude that there were no detrimental effects of violent video gameplay.

This finding stands in contrast to some experimental studies, in which short-term effects of violent video game exposure have been investigated and where increases in aggressive thoughts and affect as well as decreases in helping behaviour have been observed [ 1 ]. However, these effects of violent video gaming on aggressiveness—if present at all (see above)—seem to be rather short-lived, potentially lasting <15 min [ 8 , 51 ]. In addition, these short-term effects of video gaming are far from consistent as multiple studies fail to demonstrate or replicate them [ 16 , 17 ]. This may in part be due to problems, that are very prominent in this field of research, namely that the outcome measures of aggression and pro-social behaviour, are poorly standardised, do not easily generalise to real-life behaviour and may have lead to selective reporting of the results [ 3 ]. We tried to address these concerns by including a large set of outcome measures that were mostly inspired by previous studies demonstrating effects of short-term violent video gameplay on aggressive behaviour and thoughts, that we report exhaustively.

Since effects observed only for a few minutes after short sessions of video gaming are not representative of what society at large is actually interested in, namely how habitual violent video gameplay affects behaviour on a more long-term basis, studies employing longer training intervals are highly relevant. Two previous studies have employed longer training intervals. In an online study, participants with a broad age range (14–68 years) have been trained in a violent video game for 4 weeks [ 52 ]. In comparison to a passive control group no changes were observed, neither in aggression-related beliefs, nor in aggressive social interactions assessed by means of two questions. In a more recent study, participants played a previous version of GTA for 12 h spread across 3 weeks [ 53 ]. Participants were compared to a passive control group using the Buss–Perry aggression questionnaire, a questionnaire assessing impulsive or reactive aggression, attitude towards violence, and empathy. The authors only report a limited increase in pro-violent attitude. Unfortunately, this study only assessed posttest measures, which precludes the assessment of actual changes caused by the game intervention.

The present study goes beyond these studies by showing that 2 months of violent video gameplay does neither lead to any significant negative effects in a broad assessment battery administered directly after the intervention nor at a follow-up assessment 2 months after the intervention. The fact that we assessed multiple domains, not finding an effect in any of them, makes the present study the most comprehensive in the field. Our battery included self-report instruments on aggression (Buss–Perry aggression questionnaire, State Hostility scale, Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance scale, Moral Disengagement scale, World View Measure and Rosenzweig Picture Frustration test) as well as computer-based tests measuring aggressive behaviour such as the delay frustration task and measuring the availability of aggressive words using the word completion test and a lexical decision task. Moreover, we assessed impulse-related concepts such as sensation seeking, boredom proneness and associated behavioural measures such as the computerised Balloon analogue risk task, and delay discounting. Four scales assessing empathy and interpersonal competence scales, including the reading the mind in the eyes test revealed no effects of violent video gameplay. Neither did we find any effects on depressivity (Becks depression inventory) nor anxiety measured as a state as well as a trait. This is an important point, since several studies reported higher rates of depressivity and anxiety in populations of habitual video gamers [ 54 , 55 ]. Last but not least, our results revealed also no substantial changes in executive control tasks performance, neither in the Stop signal task, the Multi-source interference task or a Task switching task. Previous studies have shown higher performance of habitual action video gamers in executive tasks such as task switching [ 56 , 57 , 58 ] and another study suggests that training with action video games improves task performance that relates to executive functions [ 59 ], however, these associations were not confirmed by a meta-analysis in the field [ 60 ]. The absence of changes in the stop signal task fits well with previous studies that likewise revealed no difference between in habitual action video gamers and controls in terms of action inhibition [ 61 , 62 ]. Although GTA does not qualify as a classical first-person shooter as most of the previously tested action video games, it is classified as an action-adventure game and shares multiple features with those action video games previously related to increases in executive function, including the need for hand–eye coordination and fast reaction times.

Taken together, the findings of the present study show that an extensive game intervention over the course of 2 months did not reveal any specific changes in aggression, empathy, interpersonal competencies, impulsivity-related constructs, depressivity, anxiety or executive control functions; neither in comparison to an active control group that played a non-violent video game nor to a passive control group. We observed no effects when comparing a baseline and a post-training assessment, nor when focussing on more long-term effects between baseline and a follow-up interval 2 months after the participants stopped training. To our knowledge, the present study employed the most comprehensive test battery spanning a multitude of domains in which changes due to violent video games may have been expected. Therefore the present results provide strong evidence against the frequently debated negative effects of playing violent video games. This debate has mostly been informed by studies showing short-term effects of violent video games when tests were administered immediately after a short playtime of a few minutes; effects that may in large be caused by short-lived priming effects that vanish after minutes. The presented results will therefore help to communicate a more realistic scientific perspective of the real-life effects of violent video gaming. However, future research is needed to demonstrate the absence of effects of violent video gameplay in children.

Anderson CA, Bushman BJ. Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: a meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychol Sci. 2001;12:353–9.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Anderson CA, Shibuya A, Ihori N, Swing EL, Bushman BJ, Sakamoto A, et al. Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: a meta-analytic review. Psychol Bull. 2010;136:151–73.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ferguson CJ. Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children’s and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015;10:646–66.

Ferguson CJ, Kilburn J. Much ado about nothing: the misestimation and overinterpretation of violent video game effects in eastern and western nations: comment on Anderson et al. (2010). Psychol Bull. 2010;136:174–8.

Greitemeyer T, Mugge DO. Video games do affect social outcomes: a meta-analytic review of the effects of violent and prosocial video game play. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2014;40:578–89.

Anderson CA, Carnagey NL, Eubanks J. Exposure to violent media: The effects of songs with violent lyrics on aggressive thoughts and feelings. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;84:960–71.

DeWall CN, Anderson CA, Bushman BJ. The general aggression model: theoretical extensions to violence. Psychol Violence. 2011;1:245–58.

Sestire MA, Bartholow BD. Violent and non-violent video games produce opposing effects on aggressive and prosocial outcomes. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2010;46:934–42.

Kneer J, Elson M, Knapp F. Fight fire with rainbows: The effects of displayed violence, difficulty, and performance in digital games on affect, aggression, and physiological arousal. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;54:142–8.

Kneer J, Glock S, Beskes S, Bente G. Are digital games perceived as fun or danger? Supporting and suppressing different game-related concepts. Cyber Beh Soc N. 2012;15:604–9.

Sauer JD, Drummond A, Nova N. Violent video games: the effects of narrative context and reward structure on in-game and postgame aggression. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2015;21:205–14.

Ballard M, Visser K, Jocoy K. Social context and video game play: impact on cardiovascular and affective responses. Mass Commun Soc. 2012;15:875–98.

Read GL, Ballard M, Emery LJ, Bazzini DG. Examining desensitization using facial electromyography: violent video games, gender, and affective responding. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;62:201–11.

Szycik GR, Mohammadi B, Hake M, Kneer J, Samii A, Munte TF, et al. Excessive users of violent video games do not show emotional desensitization: an fMRI study. Brain Imaging Behav. 2017;11:736–43.

Szycik GR, Mohammadi B, Munte TF, Te Wildt BT. Lack of evidence that neural empathic responses are blunted in excessive users of violent video games: an fMRI study. Front Psychol. 2017;8:174.

Tear MJ, Nielsen M. Failure to demonstrate that playing violent video games diminishes prosocial behavior. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e68382.

Tear MJ, Nielsen M. Video games and prosocial behavior: a study of the effects of non-violent, violent and ultra-violent gameplay. Comput Hum Behav. 2014;41:8–13.

Kühn S, Gleich T, Lorenz RC, Lindenberger U, Gallinat J. Playing super Mario induces structural brain plasticity: gray matter changes resulting from training with a commercial video game. Mol Psychiatry. 2014;19:265–71.

Buss AH, Perry M. The aggression questionnaire. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1992;63:452.

Anderson CA, Deuser WE, DeNeve KM. Hot temperatures, hostile affect, hostile cognition, and arousal: Tests of a general model of affective aggression. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1995;21:434–48.

Payne DL, Lonsway KA, Fitzgerald LF. Rape myth acceptance: exploration of its structure and its measurement using the illinois rape myth acceptance scale. J Res Pers. 1999;33:27–68.

McMahon S, Farmer GL. An updated measure for assessing subtle rape myths. Social Work Res. 2011; 35:71–81.

Detert JR, Trevino LK, Sweitzer VL. Moral disengagement in ethical decision making: a study of antecedents and outcomes. J Appl Psychol. 2008;93:374–91.

Bandura A, Barbaranelli C, Caprara G, Pastorelli C. Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996;71:364–74.

Rosenzweig S. The picture-association method and its application in a study of reactions to frustration. J Pers. 1945;14:23.

Hörmann H, Moog W, Der Rosenzweig P-F. Test für Erwachsene deutsche Bearbeitung. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 1957.

Anderson CA, Dill KE. Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;78:772–90.

Przybylski AK, Deci EL, Rigby CS, Ryan RM. Competence-impeding electronic games and players’ aggressive feelings, thoughts, and behaviors. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2014;106:441.

Bitsakou P, Antrop I, Wiersema JR, Sonuga-Barke EJ. Probing the limits of delay intolerance: preliminary young adult data from the Delay Frustration Task (DeFT). J Neurosci Methods. 2006;151:38–44.

Hoyle RH, Stephenson MT, Palmgreen P, Lorch EP, Donohew RL. Reliability and validity of a brief measure of sensation seeking. Pers Individ Dif. 2002;32:401–14.

Farmer R, Sundberg ND. Boredom proneness: the development and correlates of a new scale. J Pers Assess. 1986;50:4–17.

Lejuez CW, Read JP, Kahler CW, Richards JB, Ramsey SE, Stuart GL, et al. Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk taking: the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). J Exp Psychol Appl. 2002;8:75–84.

Richards JB, Zhang L, Mitchell SH, de Wit H. Delay or probability discounting in a model of impulsive behavior: effect of alcohol. J Exp Anal Behav. 1999;71:121–43.

Davis MH. A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Cat Sel Doc Psychol. 1980;10:85.

Google Scholar  

Mehrabian A. Manual for the Balanced Emotional Empathy Scale (BEES). (Available from Albert Mehrabian, 1130 Alta Mesa Road, Monterey, CA, USA 93940); 1996.

Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Hill J, Raste Y, Plumb I. The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test revised version: A study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2001;42:241–51.

Buhrmester D, Furman W, Reis H, Wittenberg MT. Five domains of interpersonal competence in peer relations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988;55:991–1008.

Richardson DR, Green LR, Lago T. The relationship between perspective-taking and non-aggressive responding in the face of an attack. J Pers. 1998;66:235–56.

Maras D, Flament MF, Murray M, Buchholz A, Henderson KA, Obeid N, et al. Screen time is associated with depression and anxiety in Canadian youth. Prev Med. 2015;73:133–8.

Hautzinger M, Bailer M, Worall H, Keller F. Beck-Depressions-Inventar (BDI). Beck-Depressions-Inventar (BDI): Testhandbuch der deutschen Ausgabe. Bern: Huber; 1995.

Spielberger CD, Spielberger CD, Sydeman SJ, Sydeman SJ, Owen AE, Owen AE, et al. Measuring anxiety and anger with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 1999.

Lorenz RC, Gleich T, Buchert R, Schlagenhauf F, Kuhn S, Gallinat J. Interactions between glutamate, dopamine, and the neuronal signature of response inhibition in the human striatum. Hum Brain Mapp. 2015;36:4031–40.

Bush G, Shin LM. The multi-source interference task: an fMRI task that reliably activates the cingulo-frontal-parietal cognitive/attention network. Nat Protoc. 2006;1:308–13.

King JA, Colla M, Brass M, Heuser I, von Cramon D. Inefficient cognitive control in adult ADHD: evidence from trial-by-trial Stroop test and cued task switching performance. Behav Brain Funct. 2007;3:42.

Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc. 1995;57:289–300.

Wagenmakers E-J. A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychon Bull Rev. 2007;14:779–804.

Hay DF. The gradual emergence of sex differences in aggression: alternative hypotheses. Psychol Med. 2007;37:1527–37.

Jeffreys H. The Theory of Probability. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1961.

Raftery AE, Newton MA, Satagopan YM, Krivitsky PN. Estimating the integrated likelihood via posterior simulation using the harmonic mean identity. In: Bernardo JM, Bayarri MJ, Berger JO, Dawid AP, Heckerman D, Smith AFM, et al., editors. Bayesian statistics. Oxford: University Press; 2007.

Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A-G, Buchner A. G*Power3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39:175–91.

Barlett C, Branch O, Rodeheffer C, Harris R. How long do the short-term violent video game effects last? Aggress Behav. 2009;35:225–36.

Williams D, Skoric M. Internet fantasy violence: a test of aggression in an online game. Commun Monogr. 2005;72:217–33.

Teng SK, Chong GY, Siew AS, Skoric MM. Grand theft auto IV comes to Singapore: effects of repeated exposure to violent video games on aggression. Cyber Behav Soc Netw. 2011;14:597–602.

van Rooij AJ, Kuss DJ, Griffiths MD, Shorter GW, Schoenmakers TM, Van, de Mheen D. The (co-)occurrence of problematic video gaming, substance use, and psychosocial problems in adolescents. J Behav Addict. 2014;3:157–65.

Brunborg GS, Mentzoni RA, Froyland LR. Is video gaming, or video game addiction, associated with depression, academic achievement, heavy episodic drinking, or conduct problems? J Behav Addict. 2014;3:27–32.

Green CS, Sugarman MA, Medford K, Klobusicky E, Bavelier D. The effect of action video game experience on task switching. Comput Hum Behav. 2012;28:984–94.

Strobach T, Frensch PA, Schubert T. Video game practice optimizes executive control skills in dual-task and task switching situations. Acta Psychol. 2012;140:13–24.

Colzato LS, van Leeuwen PJ, van den Wildenberg WP, Hommel B. DOOM’d to switch: superior cognitive flexibility in players of first person shooter games. Front Psychol. 2010;1:8.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hutchinson CV, Barrett DJK, Nitka A, Raynes K. Action video game training reduces the Simon effect. Psychon B Rev. 2016;23:587–92.

Powers KL, Brooks PJ, Aldrich NJ, Palladino MA, Alfieri L. Effects of video-game play on information processing: a meta-analytic investigation. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013;20:1055–79.

Colzato LS, van den Wildenberg WP, Zmigrod S, Hommel B. Action video gaming and cognitive control: playing first person shooter games is associated with improvement in working memory but not action inhibition. Psychol Res. 2013;77:234–9.

Steenbergen L, Sellaro R, Stock AK, Beste C, Colzato LS. Action video gaming and cognitive control: playing first person shooter games is associated with improved action cascading but not inhibition. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0144364.

Download references

Acknowledgements

SK has been funded by a Heisenberg grant from the German Science Foundation (DFG KU 3322/1-1, SFB 936/C7), the European Union (ERC-2016-StG-Self-Control-677804) and a Fellowship from the Jacobs Foundation (JRF 2016–2018).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Center for Lifespan Psychology, Lentzeallee 94, 14195, Berlin, Germany

Simone Kühn, Katharina Schmalen, Markus Weichenberger & Charlotte Witt

Clinic and Policlinic for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Clinic Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany

Simone Kühn, Dimitrij Tycho Kugler & Jürgen Gallinat

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simone Kühn .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Supplementary material, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Kühn, S., Kugler, D., Schmalen, K. et al. Does playing violent video games cause aggression? A longitudinal intervention study. Mol Psychiatry 24 , 1220–1234 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-018-0031-7

Download citation

Received : 19 August 2017

Revised : 03 January 2018

Accepted : 15 January 2018

Published : 13 March 2018

Issue Date : August 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-018-0031-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Exposure to hate speech deteriorates neurocognitive mechanisms of the ability to understand others’ pain.

  • Agnieszka Pluta
  • Joanna Mazurek
  • Michał Bilewicz

Scientific Reports (2023)

The effects of violent video games on reactive-proactive aggression and cyberbullying

  • Yunus Emre Dönmez

Current Psychology (2023)

Machen Computerspiele aggressiv?

  • Jan Dieris-Hirche

Die Psychotherapie (2023)

The effect of competitive context in nonviolent video games on aggression: The mediating role of frustration and the moderating role of gender

  • Jinqian Liao
  • Yanling Liu

Systematic Review of Gaming and Neuropsychological Assessment of Social Cognition

  • Elodie Hurel
  • Marie Grall-Bronnec
  • Gaëlle Challet-Bouju

Neuropsychology Review (2023)

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

video games encourage violence essay

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • Front Psychol

The Relation of Violent Video Games to Adolescent Aggression: An Examination of Moderated Mediation Effect

1 Research Institute of Moral Education, College of Psychology, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China

2 The Lab of Mental Health and Social Adaptation, Faculty of Psychology, Research Center for Mental Health Education, Southwest University, Chongqing, China

Yunqiang Wang

To assess the moderated mediation effect of normative beliefs about aggression and family environment on exposure to violent video games and adolescent aggression, the subjects self-reported their exposure to violent video games, family environment, normative beliefs about aggression, and aggressive behavior. The results showed that there was a significant positive correlation between exposure to violent video games and adolescent aggression; normative beliefs about aggression had a mediation effect on exposure to violent video games and adolescent aggression, while family environment moderated the first part of the mediation process. For individuals with a good family environment, exposure to violent video games had only a direct effect on aggression; however, for those with poor family environment, it had both direct and indirect effects mediated by normative beliefs about aggression. This moderated mediation model includes some notions of General Aggression Model (GAM) and Catalyst Model (CM), which helps shed light on the complex mechanism of violent video games influencing adolescent aggression.

Introduction

Violent video games and aggression.

The relationship between violent video games and adolescent aggression has become a hot issue in psychological research ( Wiegman and Schie, 1998 ; Anderson and Bushman, 2001 ; Anderson et al., 2010 ; Ferguson et al., 2012 ; Greitemeyer, 2014 ; Yang et al., 2014 ; Boxer et al., 2015 ). Based on the General Aggression Model (GAM), Anderson et al. suggested that violent video games constitute an antecedent variable of aggressive behavior, i.e., the degree of exposure to violent video games directly leads to an increase of aggression ( Anderson and Bushman, 2001 ; Bushman and Anderson, 2002 ; Anderson, 2004 ; Anderson et al., 2004 ). Related longitudinal studies ( Anderson et al., 2008 ), meta-analyses ( Anderson et al., 2010 ; Greitemeyer and Mugge, 2014 ), event-related potential studies ( Bailey et al., 2011 ; Liu et al., 2015 ), and trials about juvenile delinquents ( DeLisi et al., 2013 ) showed that exposure to violent video games significantly predicts adolescent aggression.

Although Anderson et al. insisted on using the GAM to explain the effect of violent video games on aggression, other researchers have proposed alternative points of view. For example, a meta-analysis by Sherry (2001) suggested that violent video games have minor influence on adolescent aggression. Meanwhile, Ferguson (2007) proposed that publication bias (or file drawer effect) may have implications in the effect of violent video games on adolescent aggression. Publication bias means that compared with articles with negative results, those presenting positive results (such as statistical significance) are more likely to be published ( Rosenthal and Rosnow, 1991 ). A meta-analysis by Ferguson (2007) found that after publication bias adjustment, the related studies cannot support the hypothesis that violent video games are highly correlated with aggression. Then, Ferguson et al. proposed a Catalyst Model (CM), which is opposite to the GAM. According to this model, genetic predisposition can lead to an aggressive child temperament and aggressive adult personality. Individuals who have an aggressive temperament or an aggressive personality are more likely to produce violent behavior during times of environmental strain. Environmental factors act as catalysts for violent acts for an individual who have a violence-prone personality. This means that although the environment does not cause violent behavior, but it can moderate the causal influence of biology on violence. The CM model suggested that exposure to violent video games is not an antecedent variable of aggressive behavior, but only acts as a catalyst influencing its form ( Ferguson et al., 2008 ). Much of studies ( Ferguson et al., 2009 , 2012 ; Ferguson, 2013 , 2015 ; Furuya-Kanamori and Doi, 2016 ; Huesmann et al., 2017 ) found that adolescent aggression cannot be predicted by the exposure to violent video games, but it is closely related to antisocial personality traits, peer influence, and family violence.

Anderson and his collaborators ( Groves et al., 2014 ; Kepes et al., 2017 ) suggested there were major methodological shortcomings in the studies of Ferguson et al. and redeclared the validity of their own researches. Some researchers supported Anderson et al. and criticized Ferguson’s view ( Gentile, 2015 ; Rothstein and Bushman, 2015 ). However, Markey (2015) held a neutral position that extreme views should not be taken in the relationship between violent video games and aggression.

In fact, the relation of violent video games to aggression is complicated. Besides the controversy between the above two models about whether there is an influence, other studies explored the role of internal factors such as normative belief about aggression and external factors such as family environment in the relationship between violent video games and aggression.

Normative Beliefs About Aggression, Violence Video Games, and Aggression

Normative beliefs about aggression are one of the most important cognitive factors influencing adolescent aggression; they refer to an assessment of aggression acceptability by an individual ( Huesmann and Guerra, 1997 ). They can be divided into two types: general beliefs and retaliatory beliefs. The former means a general view about aggression, while the latter reflects aggressive beliefs in provocative situations. Normative beliefs about aggression reflect the degree acceptance of aggression, which affects the choice of aggressive behavior.

Studies found that normative beliefs about aggression are directly related to aggression. First, self-reported aggression is significantly correlated to normative beliefs about aggression ( Bailey and Ostrov, 2008 ; Li et al., 2015 ). General normative beliefs about aggression can predict young people’s physical, verbal, and indirect aggression ( Lim and Ang, 2009 ); retaliatory normative beliefs about aggression can anticipate adolescent retaliation behavior after 1 year ( Werner and Hill, 2010 ; Krahe and Busching, 2014 ). There is a longitudinal temporal association of normative beliefs about aggression with aggression ( Krahe and Busching, 2014 ). Normative beliefs about aggression are significantly positively related to online aggressive behavior ( Wright and Li, 2013 ), which is the most important determining factor of adolescent cyberbullying ( Kowalski et al., 2014 ). Teenagers with high normative beliefs about aggression are more likely to become bullies and victims of traditional bullying and cyberbullying ( Burton et al., 2013 ). Finally, normative beliefs about aggression can significantly predict the support and reinforcement of bystanders in offline bullying and cyberbullying ( Machackova and Pfetsch, 2016 ).

According to Bandura’s social cognitive theory ( Bandura, 1989 ), violent video games can initiate adolescents’ observational learning. In this situation, not only can they imitate the aggressive behavior of the model but also their understanding and acceptability about aggression may change. Therefore, normative beliefs about aggression can also be a mediator between violent video games and adolescent aggression ( Duan et al., 2014 ; Anderson et al., 2017 ; Huesmann et al., 2017 ). Studies have shown that the mediating role of normative beliefs about aggression is not influenced by factors such as gender, prior aggression, and parental monitoring ( Gentile et al., 2014 ).

Family Environment, Violence Video Games, and Aggression

Family violence, parenting style, and other family factors have major effects on adolescent aggression. On the one hand, family environment can influence directly on aggression by shaping adolescents’ cognition and setting up behavioral models. Many studies have found that family violence and other negative factors are positively related to adolescent aggression ( Ferguson et al., 2009 , 2012 ; Ferguson, 2013 ), while active family environment can reduce the aggressive behavior ( Batanova and Loukas, 2014 ).

On the other hand, family environment can act on adolescent aggression together with other factors, such as exposure to violent video games. Analysis of the interaction between family conflict and media violence (including violence on TV and in video games) to adolescent aggression showed that teenagers living in higher conflict families with more media violence exposure show more aggressive behavior ( Fikkers et al., 2013 ). Parental monitoring is significantly correlated with reduced media violence exposure and a reduction in aggressive behavior 6 months later ( Gentile et al., 2014 ). Parental mediation can moderate the relationship between media violence exposure and normative beliefs about aggression, i.e., for children with less parental mediation, predictability of violent media exposure on normative beliefs about aggression is stronger ( Linder and Werner, 2012 ). Parental mediation is closely linked to decreased aggression caused by violent media ( Nathanson, 1999 ; Rasmussen, 2014 ; Padilla-Walker et al., 2016 ). Further studies have shown that the autonomy-supportive restrictive mediation of parents is related to a reduction in current aggressive behavior by decreasing media violence exposure; conversely, inconsistent restrictive mediation is associated with an increase of current aggressive behavior by enhancing media violence exposure ( Fikkers et al., 2017 ).

The Current Study

Despite GAM and CM hold opposite views on the relationship between violent video games and aggression, both of the two models imply the same idea that aggression cannot be separated from internal and external factors. While emphasizing on negative effects of violent video games on adolescents’ behavior, the GAM uses internal factors to explain the influencing mechanism, including aggressive beliefs, aggressive behavior scripts, and aggressive personality ( Bushman and Anderson, 2002 ; Anderson and Carnagey, 2014 ). Although the CM considers that there is no significant relation between violent video games and aggression, it also acknowledges the role of external factors such as violent video games and family violence. Thus, these two models seem to be contradictory, but in fact, they reveal the mechanism of aggression from different points of view. It will be more helpful to explore the effect of violent video games on aggression from the perspective of combination of internal and external factors.

Although previous studies have investigated the roles of normative beliefs about aggression and family factors in the relationship between violent video games and adolescent aggression separately, the combined effect of these two factors remains unstudied. The purpose of this study was to analyze the combined effect of normative beliefs about aggression and family environment. This can not only confirm the effects of violent video games on adolescent aggression further but also can clarify the influencing mechanism from the integration of GAM and CM to a certain extent. Based on the above, the following three hypotheses were proposed:

  • Hypothesis 1: There is a significant positive correlation between exposure to violent video games and adolescent aggression.
  • Hypothesis 2: Normative beliefs about aggression are the mediator of exposure to violent video games and adolescent aggression.
  • Hypothesis 3: The family environment can moderate the mediation effects of normative beliefs about aggression in exposure to violent video games and adolescent aggression; exposure to violent video games, family environment, normative beliefs about aggression, and aggression constitute a moderated mediation model.

Materials and Methods

Participants.

All subjects gave informed written consent for participation in this investigation, and their parents signed parental written informed consent. The study was reviewed and approved by the Professor Committee of School of Psychology, Nanjing Normal University, which is the committee responsible for providing ethics approvals. A total of 648 Chinese middle school students participated in this study, including 339 boys and 309 girls; 419 students were from cities and towns, and 229 from the countryside. There were 277 and 371 junior and high school students, respectively. Ages ranged from 12 to 19 years, averaging 14.73 ( SD  = 1.60).

Video Game Questionnaire (VGQ)

The Video Game Questionnaire ( Anderson and Dill, 2000) required participants to list their favorite five video games and assess their use frequencies, the degree of violent content, and the degree of violent images on a 7-point scale (1, participants seldom play video games, with no violent content or image; 7, participants often play video games with many violent contents and images). Methods for calculating the score of exposure to violent video games: (score of violent content in the game + score of violent images in the game) × use frequency/5. Chen et al. (2012) found that the Chinese version of this questionnaire had high internal consistency reliability and good content validity. The Chinese version was used in this study, and the Cronbach’s α coefficient of the questionnaire was 0.88.

Aggression Questionnaire (AQ)

There were 29 items in AQ ( Buss and Perry, 1992 ), including four dimensions: physical aggression, verbal aggression, anger, and hostility. The scale used 5-point scoring criteria (1, very incongruent with my features; 5, very congruent with my features). Scores for each item were added to obtain the dimension score, and dimension scores were summed to obtain the total score. The Chinese version of AQ had good internal consistency reliability and construct validity ( Ying and Dai, 2008 ). In this study, the Chinese version was used and its Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.83.

Family Environment Scale (FES)

The FES ( Moos, 1990 ) includes 90 true-false questions and is divided into 10 subscales, including cohesion, expressiveness, conflict, independence, achievement-orientation, intellectual-cultural orientation, active-recreational orientation, moral-religious emphasis, organization, and control. The Chinese version of FES was revised by Fei et al. (1991) and used in this study. Three subscales closely related to aggression were selected, including cohesion, conflict, and moral-religious emphasis, with 27 items in total. The family environment score was the sum of scores of these three subscales (the conflict subscale was first inverted). The Cronbach’s α coefficient of the questionnaire was 0.75.

Normative Beliefs About Aggression Scale (NOBAGS)

There are 20 items in the NOBAGS ( Huesmann and Guerra, 1997 ), which includes retaliation (12 items) and general (8 items) aggression belief. A 4-point Likert scale is used (1, absolutely wrong; 4, absolutely right). The subjects were asked to assess the accuracy of the behavior described in each item. High score means high level of normative beliefs about aggression. The revised Chinese version of NOBAGS consists of two factors: retaliation (nine items) and general (six items) aggression belief. Its internal consistency coefficient and test-retest reliability are 0.81 and 0.79. Confirmative factor analysis showed that this version has good construct validity: χ 2  = 280.09, df  = 89, χ 2 / df  = 3.15, RMSEA = 0.07, SRMR = 0.04, NFI = 0.95, NNFI = 0.96, and CFI = 0.96 ( Shao and Wang, 2017 ). In this study, the Cronbach’s α coefficient of the Chinese version was 0.88.

Group testing was performed in randomly selected classes of six middle schools. All subjects completed the above four questionnaires.

Data Analysis

IBM SPSS Statistics 22 was used to analysis the correlations among study variables, the mediating effect of normative beliefs about aggression on the relationship between exposure to violent video games and aggression, and the moderating role of family environment in the relationship between exposure to violent video games and normative beliefs about aggression. In order to validate the moderated mediation model, Mplus 7 was also used.

Correlation Analysis Among Study Variables

In this study, self-reported questionnaires were used to collect data, and results might be influenced by common method bias. Therefore, the Harman’s single-factor test was used to assess common method bias before data analysis. The results showed that eigenvalues of 34 unrotated factors were greater than 1, and the amount of variation explained by the first factor was 10.01%, which is much less than 40% of the critical value. Accordingly, common method bias was not significant in this study.

As described in Table 1 , the degree of exposure to violent video games showed significant positive correlations to normative beliefs about aggression and aggression; family environment was negatively correlated to normative beliefs about aggression and aggression; normative beliefs about aggression were significantly and positively related to aggression. The gender difference of exposure to violent video games ( t  = 7.93, p  < 0.001) and normative beliefs about aggression ( t  = 2.74, p  < 0.01) were significant, which boys scored significantly higher than girls.

Means, standard deviations, and Pearson correlations among study variables.

Mediating Effect Analysis

To examine the mediation effect of normative beliefs about aggression on the relationship between exposure to violent video games and aggression, gender factor was controlled firstly. Stepwise regression analysis showed that the regression of aggression to violent video games ( c  = 0.28, t  = 6.96, p  < 0.001), the regression of normative beliefs about aggression to violent video games ( a  = 0.19, t  = 4.69, p  < 0.001), and the regression of aggression to violent video games ( c ′ = 0.22, t  = 5.69, p  < 0.001) and normative beliefs about aggression ( b  = 0.31, t  = 8.25, p  < 0.001) were all significant. Thus, normative beliefs about aggression played a partial mediating role in exposure to violent video games and aggression. The mediation effect value was 0.06, accounting for 21.43% (0.06/0.28) of the total effect.

Moderated Mediation Effect Analysis

After standardizing scores of exposure to violent videogames, normative beliefs about aggression, family environment, and aggression, two interaction terms were calculated, including family environment × exposure to violent video games and family environment × normative beliefs about aggression. Regression analysis was carried out after controlling gender factor ( Table 2 ).

Moderated mediation effect analysis of the relationship between violent video exposure and aggression.

V VE, violent video exposure; FE, family environment; NBA, normative beliefs about aggression; AG, aggression.

In the first step, a simple moderated model (Model 1) between exposure to violent video games and aggression was established. The result showed that exposure to violent video games had a significant effect on aggression ( c 1  = 0.24, t  = 6.13, p  < 0.001), while the effect of family environment × exposure to violent video games on aggression was not significant ( c 3  = 0.05, t  = −1.31, p  = 0.19), indicating that the relationship between exposure to violent video games and aggression was not moderated by family environment.

Next, a moderated model (Model 2) between exposure to violent video games and normative beliefs about aggression was established. The results showed that exposure to violent video games had a significant effect on normative beliefs about aggression ( a 1  = 0.13, t  = 3.42, p  < 0.001), and the effect of family environment × exposure to violent video games on normative beliefs about aggression was significant ( a 3  = −0.13, t  = −3.63, p  < 0.01).

In the third step, a moderated mediation model (Model 3) between exposure to violent video games and aggression was established. As shown in Table 2 , the effect of normative beliefs about aggression on aggression was significant ( b 1  = 0.24, t  = 6.15, p  < 0.001), and the effect of family environment × exposure to violent video games on normative beliefs about aggression was not significant ( b 2  = 0.02, t  = 0.40, p  = 0.69). Because both a 3 and b 1 were significant, exposure to violent video games, family environment, normative beliefs about aggression, and aggression constituted a moderated mediation model. Normative beliefs about aggression played a mediating role between exposure to violent video games and aggression, while family environment was a moderator between exposure to violent video games and normative beliefs about aggression. Mplus analysis proved that the moderated mediation model had good model fitting (χ 2 / df  = 1.54, CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.98, RMSEA = 0.03, and SRMR = 0.01).

To further analyze the moderating effect of the family environment and exposure to violent video games on normative beliefs about aggression, the family environment was divided into the high and low groups, according to the principle of standard deviation, and a simple slope test was performed ( Figure 1 ). The results found that for individuals with high score of family environment, prediction of exposure to violent video games to normative beliefs about aggression was not significant ( b  = 0.08, SE  = 0.08, p  = 0.37). For individuals with low score of family environment, exposure to violent video games could significantly predict normative beliefs about aggression ( b  = 0.34, SE  = 0.09, p  < 0.001). Based on the overall findings, individuals with high scores of family environment showed a nonsignificant mediating effect of normative beliefs about aggression on the relation of exposure to violent video games and aggression; however, for individuals with low scores of family environment, normative beliefs about aggression played a partial mediating role in the effect of exposure to violent video games on aggression.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is fpsyg-10-00384-g001.jpg

The moderating effect of the family environment on the relationship between violent video game exposure and normative beliefs about aggression.

Main Findings and Implications

This study found a significantly positive correlation between exposure to violent video games and adolescent aggression, corroborating existing studies ( Anderson, 2004 ; Anderson et al., 2010 ; DeLisi et al., 2013 ; Greitemeyer and Mugge, 2014 ). Anderson et al. (2017) assessed teenagers in Australia, China, Germany, the United States, and other three countries and found that exposure to violent media, including television, movies, and video games, is positively related to adolescent aggression, demonstrating cross-cultural consistency; 8% of variance in aggression could be independently explained by exposure to violent media. In this study, after controlling for gender and family environment, R 2 for exposure to violent video games in predicting adolescent aggression was 0.05, indicating that 5% of variation in adolescent aggression could be explained by exposure to violent media. These consistent findings confirm the effect of exposure to violent video games on adolescent aggression and can be explained by the GAM. According to the GAM ( Bushman and Anderson, 2002 ; Anderson and Carnagey, 2014 ), violent video games can make teenagers acquire, repeat, and reinforce aggression-related knowledge structures, including aggressive beliefs and attitude, aggressive perceptual schemata, aggressive expectation schemata, aggressive behavior scripts, and aggression desensitization. Therefore, aggressive personality is promoted, increasing the possibility of aggressive behavior. The Hypothesis 1 of this study was validated and provided evidence for the GAM.

As shown above, normative beliefs about aggression had a partial mediation effect on the relationship between exposure to violent video games and aggression. Exposure to violent video games, on the one hand, can predict adolescent aggression directly; on the other hand, it had an indirect effect on adolescent aggression via normative beliefs about aggression. According to the above results, when exposure to violent video games changes by 1 standard deviation, adolescent aggression varies by 0.28 standard deviation, with 0.22 standard deviation being a direct effect of exposure to violent video games on adolescent aggression and 0.06 standard deviation representing the effect through normative beliefs about aggression. Too much violence in video games makes it easy for individuals to become accustomed to violence and emotionally apathetic towards the harmful consequences of violence. Moreover, it can make individuals accept the idea that violence is a good way of problem solving, leading to an increase in normative beliefs about aggression; under certain situational cues, it is more likely to become violent or aggressive. This conclusion is supported by other studies ( Gentile et al., 2014 ; Anderson et al., 2017 ; Huesmann et al., 2017 ). Like Hypothesis 1, Hypothesis 2 was validated the GAM.

One of the main findings of this study was the validation of Hypothesis 3: a moderated mediation model was constructed involving exposure to violent video games, family environment, normative beliefs about aggression, and aggression. Family environment moderated the first half of the mediation process of violent video games, normative beliefs about aggression, and aggression. In this study, family environment encompassed three factors, including (1) cohesion reflecting the degree of mutual commitment, assistance, and support among family members; (2) conflict reflecting the extent of anger, aggression, and conflict among family members; and (3) moral-religious emphasis reflecting the degree of emphasis on ethics, religion, and values. Individuals with high scores of family environment often help each other; seldom show anger, attack, and contradiction openly; and pay more attention to morality and values. These positive aspects would help them understand violence in video games from the right perspective, reduce recognition and acceptance of violence or aggression, and diminish the effect of violent video games on normative beliefs about aggression. Hence, exposure to violent video games could not predict normative beliefs about aggression of these individuals. By contrast, individuals with low scores of family environment are less likely to help each other; they often openly show anger, attack, and contradiction and do not pay much attention to morality and values. These negative aspects would not decrease but increase their acceptance of violence and aggression. For these individuals, because of the lack of mitigation mechanisms, exposure to violent video games could predict normative beliefs about aggression significantly.

The moderated mediation model of the relationship between exposure to violent video games and aggression could not only help reveal that exposure to violent video games can affect aggression but also provide an elaboration of the influencing mechanism. According to this model, for individuals with high scores of family environment, exposure to violent video games had only direct effect on aggression. However, for those with low scores of family environment, there was not only a direct effect of exposure to violent video games on aggression but also an indirect effect mediated by normative beliefs about aggression. In short, exposure to violence video games affecting aggression through normative beliefs about aggression is more likely to happen to adolescents with poor family environment than those with good family environment. That is, generation of adolescent aggression is not only related to internal cognitive factors but also to external situations. As Piotrowski and Valkenburg ( Piotrowski and Valkenburg, 2015 ; Valkenburg, 2015 ) pointed out, the effect of violent video games/media on adolescents is a complex interaction of dispositional, developmental, and social factors, and individual differences in susceptibility to these three factors determine the nature and the extent of this influence. The proposed model incorporated some perspectives of GAM and CM: while confirming the effect of exposure to violent video games on aggression occurrence, the combined effect of individual and environmental factors was verified.

Compared with the simple mediation or moderation model, the present moderated mediation model provided deeper insights into the internal mechanism of the effect of violent video games on aggression, providing inspirations for preventing adolescent aggression. First, in view of the close relationship between exposure to violent video games and adolescent aggression, relevant government departments should continue to improve the grading system of video games; meanwhile, parents should appropriately monitor the types of video games used by teenagers as well as the time spent and reduce the degree of exposure to violent video games. Second, by allowing teenagers to objectively distinguish between violence in games and reality, the mediating role of normative beliefs about aggression could inspire people to identify rational ways to solve violence problems and to experience the hurtful consequences of aggression. This would help adolescents change normative beliefs about aggression, establish a correct view of right and wrong, and reduce the occurrence of aggression. Finally, the moderating effect of family environment on the mediation process suggests that more attention should be paid to the important role of family environment. On the one hand, family education is closely related to adolescent aggression. Then, parents should create a good family atmosphere, publicly show anger and aggression as little as possible, and advocate and practice positive moral values. Parents should adopt authoritative styles, abandoning autocratic and indulgent parenting styles ( Casas et al., 2006 ; Sandstrom, 2007 ; Underwood et al., 2009 ; Kawabata et al., 2011 ) to minimize the negative effect of exposure to violent video games. On the other hand, for teenagers with poor family environment, while reducing exposure to violent video games, it is particularly important to change their normative beliefs about aggression, no longer viewing aggression as an alternative way to solve problems.

Limitations

Limitations of the current study should be mentioned. First, only Chinese school students were assessed, in a relatively small number, which could affect sample representativeness. A large sample of teenagers from different countries and in different ages, also including juvenile offenders, would be more accurate in revealing the effect of violent video games on adolescent aggression. Second, this study only focused on violent video games, not involving violent media such as internet and television, daily life events, wars, and other major social events. Indeed, these factors also have important effects on adolescent aggression, and their influencing mechanisms and combined effect are worth investigating further. Third, this study mainly adopted the self-report method. Use of peer, parent, or teacher reports to assess exposure to violent video games and aggression would help improve the effectiveness of the study. Fourth, there might be other mediators, moderating variables and relational models. In addition to normative beliefs about aggression and family environment, individual emotions, personality characteristics, school climate, and companions may play mediating or moderating roles in the relationship between violent video games and aggression. This study developed a moderated mediation model between family environment and normative beliefs about aggression, but the possibility of multiple mediation and mediated moderation models cannot be ruled out.

The current study showed that exposure to violent video games is positively related to adolescent aggression; normative beliefs about aggression have a mediating effect on exposure to violent video games and adolescent aggression, while the family environment regulates the first part of the mediation process. For individuals with good family environment, exposure to violent video games only has a direct effect on aggression; however, for those with poor family environment, there is an indirect effect mediated by normative beliefs about aggression alongside a direct effect. This moderated mediation model incorporates some perspectives of GAM and CM, enriching studies of generative mechanism of adolescent aggression.

Author Contributions

YW and RS conceived the idea of the study. RS analyzed the data. YW and RS interpreted the results and wrote the paper. YW discussed the results and revised the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Funding. This study was supported by a grant from the National Social Science Foundation of China (14CSH017) to YW.

  • Anderson C. A. (2004). An update on the effects of playing violent video games . J. Adolesc. 27 , 113–122. 10.1016/j.adolescence.2003.10.009, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Anderson C. A., Bushman B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: a meta-analytic review of the scientific literature . Psychol. Sci. 12 , 353–359. 10.1111/1467-9280.00366 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Anderson C. A., Carnagey N. L. (2014). “ The role of theory in the study of media violence: the general aggression model ” in Media violence and children. ed. Gentile D. A. (Westport, CT: Praeger; ), 103–133. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Anderson C. A., Carnagey N. L., Flanagan M., Benjamin A. J., Eubanks J., Valentine J. C. (2004). Violent video games: specific effects of violent content on aggressive thoughts and behavior . Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 36 , 199–249. 10.1016/S0065-2601(04)36004-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Anderson C. A., Dill K. E. (2000). Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78 , 772–790. 10.1037/0022-3514.78.4.772, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Anderson C. A., Sakamoto A., Gentile D. A., Ihori N., Shibuya A., Yukawa S., et al.. (2008). Longitudinal effects of violent video games on aggression in Japan and the United States . Pediatrics 122 , e1067–e1072. 10.1542/peds.2008-1425, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Anderson C. A., Shibuya A., Ihori N., Swing E. L., Bushman B. J., Sakamoto A., et al.. (2010). Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: a meta-analytic review . Psychol. Bull. 136 , 151–173. 10.1037/a0018251, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Anderson C. A., Suzuki K., Swing E. L., Groves C. L., Gentile D. A., Prot S., et al.. (2017). Media violence and other aggression risk factors in seven nations . Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 43 , 986–998. 10.1177/0146167217703064, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Bailey C. A., Ostrov J. M. (2008). Differentiating forms and functions of aggression in emerging adults: associations with hostile attribution biases and normative beliefs . J. Youth Adolesc. 37 , 713–722. 10.1007/s10964-007-9211-5 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Bailey K., West R., Anderson C. A. (2011). The association between chronic exposure to video game violence and affective picture processing: an ERP study . Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 11 , 259–276. 10.3758/s13415-011-0029-y, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Bandura A. (1989). “ Social cognitive theory ” in Annals of child development: Six theories of child development. ed. Vasta R. (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press; ), 1–60. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Batanova M., Loukas A. (2014). Unique and interactive effects of empathy, family, and school factors on early adolescents’ aggression . J. Youth Adolesc. 43 , 1890–1902. 10.1007/s10964-013-0051-1, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Boxer P., Groves C. L., Docherty M. (2015). Video games do indeed influence children and adolescents’ aggression, prosocial behavior, and academic performance: a clearer reading of Ferguson (2015) . Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10 , 671–673. 10.1177/1745691615592239, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Burton K. A., Dan F., Wygant D. B. (2013). The role of peer attachment and normative beliefs about aggression on traditional bullying and cyberbullying . Psychol. Schools 50 , 103–115. 10.1002/pits.21663 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Bushman B. J., Anderson C. A. (2002). Violent video games and hostile expectations: a test of the general aggression model . Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 28 , 1679–1686. 10.1177/014616702237649 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Buss A. H., Perry M. (1992). The aggression questionnaire . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 63 , 452–459. 10.1037/0022-3514.63.3.452, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Casas J. F., Weigel S. M., Crick N. R., Ostrov J. M., Woods K. E., Jansen Yeh E. A., et al. (2006). Early parenting and children’s relational and physical aggression in the preschool and home contexts . J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 27 , 209–227. 10.1016/j.appdev.2006.02.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Chen H., Liu Y., Cui W. (2012). The relationship between online violent video games and aggressive behavior: the mediating effect of college students’ attitudes towards violence . Chinese J. Special Educ. 8 , 79–84. [ Google Scholar ]
  • DeLisi M., Vaughn M. G., Gentile D. A., Anderson C. A., Shook J. (2013). Violent video games, delinquency, and youth violence: new evidence . Youth Violence Juv. J. 11 , 132–142. 10.1177/1541204012460874 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Duan D., Zhang X., Wei L., Zhou Y., Liu C. (2014). The impact of violent media on aggression: the role of normative belief and empathy . Psychol. Dev. Educ. 30 , 185–192. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Fei L., Shen Q., Zheng Y., Zhao J., Jiang S., Wang L., Wang X. (1991). Preliminary evaluation of Chinese version of FACES and FES: comparison of normal families and families of schizophrenic patients . Chin. Ment. Health. J. 5 , 198–202, 238. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ferguson C. J. (2007). Evidence for publication bias in video game violence effects literature: a meta-analytic review . Aggress. Violent Behav. 12 , 470–482. 10.1016/j.avb.2007.01.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ferguson C. J. (2013). Adolescents, crime, and the media: A critical analysis. New York, NY: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ferguson C. J. (2015). Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children’s and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance . Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10 , 646–666. 10.1177/1745691615592234, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ferguson C. J., Rueda S., Cruz A., Ferguson D., Fritz S., Smith S. (2008). Violent video games and aggression: causal relationship or byproduct of family violence and intrinsic violence motivation? Crim. Justice Behav. 31 , 2231–2237. 10.1002/chin.200028107 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ferguson C. J., San Miguel C., Garza A., Jerabeck J. M. (2012). A longitudinal test of video game violence influences on dating and aggression: a 3-year longitudinal study of adolescents . J. Psychiatr. Res. 46 , 141–146. 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2011.10.014, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ferguson C. J., San Miguel C., Hartley R. D. (2009). A multivariate analysis of youth violence and aggression: the influence of family, peers, depression, and media violence . J. Pediatr. 155 , 904–908. e903. 10.1016/j.jpeds.2009.06.021, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Fikkers K. M., Piotrowski J. T., Valkenburg P. M. (2017). A matter of style? Exploring the effects of parental mediation styles on early adolescents’ media violence exposure and aggression . Comput. Hum. Behav. 70 , 407–415. 10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.029 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Fikkers K. M., Piotrowski J. T., Weeda W. D., Vossen H. G. M., Valkenburg P. M. (2013). Double dose: high family conflict enhances the effect of media violence exposure on adolescents’ aggression . Societies 3 , 280–292. 10.3390/soc3030280 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Furuya-Kanamori L., Doi S. A. (2016). Angry birds, angry children, and angry meta-analysts: a reanalysis . Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 11 , 408–414. 10.1177/1745691616635599, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Gentile D. A. (2015). What is a good skeptic to do? the case for skepticism in the media violence discussion . Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10 , 674–676. 10.1177/1745691615592238, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Gentile D. A., Li D., Khoo A., Prot S., Anderson C. A. (2014). Mediators and moderators of long-term effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior: practice, thinking, and action . JAMA Pediatr. 168 , 450–457. 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2014.63 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Greitemeyer T. (2014). Intense acts of violence during video game play make daily life aggression appear innocuous: a new mechanism why violent video games increase aggression . J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 50 , 52–56. 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.09.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Greitemeyer T., Mugge D. O. (2014). Video games do affect social outcomes: a meta-analytic review of the effects of violent and prosocial video game play . Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 40 , 578–589. 10.1177/0146167213520459, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Groves C. L., Anderson C. A., DeLisi M. (2014). A response to Ferguson: more red herring . PsycCRITIQUES 59 , 9. 10.1037/a0036266 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Huesmann L. R., Dubow E. F., Boxer P., Landau S. F., Gvirsman S. D., Shikaki K. (2017). Children’s exposure to violent political conflict stimulates aggression at peers by increasing emotional distress, aggressive script rehearsal, and normative beliefs favoring aggression . Dev. Psychopathol. 29 , 39–50. 10.1017/S0954579416001115, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Huesmann L. R., Guerra N. G. (1997). Children’s normative beliefs about aggression and aggressive behavior . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 72 , 408–419. 10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.408, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Kawabata Y., Alink L. R. A., Tseng W. L., Van Ijzendoorn M. H., Crick N. R. (2011). Maternal and paternal parenting styles associated with relational aggression in children and adolescents: a conceptual analysis and meta-analytic review . Dev. Rev. 31 , 240–278. 10.1016/j.dr.2011.08.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Kepes S., Bushman B. J., Anderson C. A. (2017). Violent video game effects remain a societal concern: reply to Hilgard, Engelhardt, and Rouder (2017) . Psychol. Bull. 143 , 775–782. 10.1037/bul0000112, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Kowalski R. M., Giumetti G. W., Schroeder A. N., Lattanner M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: a critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth . Psychol. Bull. 140 , 1073–1137. 10.1037/a0035618, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Krahe B., Busching R. (2014). Interplay of normative beliefs and behavior in developmental patterns of physical and relational aggression in adolescence: a four-wave longitudinal study . Front. Psychol. 5 :1146. 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01146, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Li J. B., Nie Y. G., Boardley I. D., Dou K., Situ Q. M. (2015). When do normative beliefs about aggression predict aggressive behavior? an application of I3 theory . Aggress. Behav. 41 , 544–555. 10.1002/ab.21594, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Lim S. H., Ang R. P. (2009). Relationship between boys’ normative beliefs about aggression and their physical, verbal, and indirect aggressive behaviors . Adolescence 44 , 635–650. PMID: [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Linder J., Werner N. E. (2012). Relationally aggressive media exposure and children’s normative beliefs: does parental mediation matter? Fam. Relat. 61 , 488–500. 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2012.00707.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Liu Y., Teng Z., Lan H., Zhang X., Yao D. (2015). Short-term effects of prosocial video games on aggression: an event-related potential study . Front. Behav. Neurosci. 9 :193. 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00193, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Machackova H., Pfetsch J. (2016). Bystanders’ responses to offline bullying and cyberbullying: the role of empathy and normative beliefs about aggression . Scand. J. Psychol. 57 , 169–176. 10.1111/sjop.12277, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Markey P. M. (2015). Finding the middle ground in violent video game research lessons from Ferguson (2015) . Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10 , 667–670. 10.1177/1745691615592236 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Moos R. H. (1990). Conceptual and empirical approaches to developing family-based assessment procedures: resolving the case of the Family Environment Scale . Fam. Process 29 , 199–208; discussion 209-111. 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1990.00199.x, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Nathanson A. I. (1999). Identifying and explaining the relationship between parental mediation and children’s aggression . Commun. Res. 26 , 124–143. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Padilla-Walker L. M., Coyne S. M., Collier K. M. (2016). Longitudinal relations between parental media monitoring and adolescent aggression, prosocial behavior, and externalizing problems . J. Adolesc. 46 , 86–97. 10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.11.002, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Piotrowski J. T., Valkenburg P. M. (2015). Finding orchids in a field of dandelions: understanding children’s differential susceptibility to media effects . Am. Behav. Sci. 59 , 1776–1789. 10.1177/0002764215596552 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Rasmussen E. E. (2014). Proactive vs. retroactive mediation: effects of mediation’s timing on children’s reactions to popular cartoon violence . Hum. Commun. Res. 40 , 396–413. 10.1111/hcre.12030 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Rosenthal R., Rosnow R. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis. New York, NY: McGraw Hill. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Rothstein H. R., Bushman B. J. (2015). Methodological and reporting errors in meta-analytic reviews make other meta-analysts angry: a commentary on Ferguson (2015) . Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10 , 677–679. 10.1177/1745691615592235, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sandstrom M. J. (2007). A link between mothers’ disciplinary strategies and children’s relational aggression . Brit. J. Dev. Psychol. 25 , 399–407. 10.1348/026151006X158753 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Shao R., Wang Y. (2017). Reliability and validity of normative beliefs about aggression scale among middle school students . Chin. J. Clin. Psychol. 25 , 1035–1038. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sherry J. L. (2001). The effects of violent video games on aggression . Hum. Commun. Res. 27 , 409–431. 10.1093/hcr/27.3.409 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Underwood M. K., Beron K. J., Rosen L. H. (2009). Continuity and change in social and physical aggression from middle childhood through early adolescence . Aggress. Behav. 35 , 357–375. 10.1002/ab.20313, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Valkenburg P. M. (2015). The limited informativeness of meta-analyses of media effects . Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10 , 680–682. 10.1177/1745691615592237, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Werner N. E., Hill L. G. (2010). Individual and peer group normative beliefs about relational aggression . Child Dev. 81 , 826–836. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01436.x, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Wiegman O., Schie E. G. (1998). Video game playing and its relations with aggressive and prosocial behaviour . Brit. J. Soc. Psychol. 37 , 367–378. 10.1111/j.2044-8309.1998.tb01177.x, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Wright M. F., Li Y. (2013). Normative beliefs about aggression and cyber aggression among young adults: a longitudinal investigation . Aggress. Behav. 39 , 161–170. 10.1002/ab.21470, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Yang G. S., Huesmann L. R., Bushman B. J. (2014). Effects of playing a violent video game as male versus female avatar on subsequent aggression in male and female players . Aggress. Behav. 40 , 537–541. 10.1002/ab.21551, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ying X., Dai C. (2008). Empathy and aggressive behavior of middle school students: the mediating effect of the anger-hostility action . Psychol. Dev. Educ. 24 , 73–78. [ Google Scholar ]

The evidence that video game violence leads to real-world aggression

A 2018 meta-analysis found that there is a small increase in real-world physical aggression among adolescents and pre-teens who play violent video games. Led by Jay Hull, a social psychologist at Dartmouth College, the study team pooled data from 24 previous studies in an attempt to avoid some of the problems that have made the question of a connection between gaming and aggression controversial.

Many previous studies, according to a story in Scientific American, have been criticized by “a small but vocal cadre of researchers [who] have argued much of the work implicating video games has serious flaws in that, among other things, it measures the frequency of aggressive thoughts or language rather than physically aggressive behaviors like hitting or pushing, which have more real-world relevance.”

Hull and team limited their analysis to studies that “measured the relationship between violent video game use and overt physical aggression,” according to the Scientific American article .

The Dartmouth analysis drew on 24 studies involving more than 17,000 participants and found that “playing violent video games is associated with increases in physical aggression over time in children and teens,” according to a Dartmouth press release describing the study , which was published Oct. 1, 2018, in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences .

The studies the Dartmouth team analyzed “tracked physical aggression among users of violent video games for periods ranging from three months to four years. Examples of physical aggression included incidents such as hitting someone or being sent to the school principal’s office for fighting, and were based on reports from children, parents, teachers, and peers,” according to the press release.

The study was almost immediately called in to question. In an editorial in Psychology Today , a pair of professors claim the results of the meta-analysis are not statistically significant. Hull and team wrote in the PNAS paper that, while small, the results are indeed significant. The Psychology Today editorial makes an appeal to a 2017 statement by the American Psychological Association’s media psychology and technology division “cautioning policy makers and news media to stop linking violent games to serious real-world aggression as the data is just not there to support such beliefs.”

It should be noted, however, that the 2017 statement questions the connection between “serious” aggression while the APA Resolution of 2015 , based on a review of its 2005 resolution by its own experts, found that “the link between violent video game exposure and aggressive behavior is one of the most studied and best established. Since the earlier meta-analyses, this link continues to be a reliable finding and shows good multi-method consistency across various representations of both violent video game exposure and aggressive behavior.”

While the effect sizes are small, they’ve been similar across many studies, according to the APA resolution. The problem has been the interpretation of aggression, with some writers claiming an unfounded connection between homicides, mass shootings, and other extremes of violence. The violence the APA resolution documents is more mundane and involves the kind of bullying that, while often having dire long-term consequences, is less immediately dangerous: “insults, threats, hitting, pushing, hair pulling, biting and other forms of verbal and physical aggression.”

Minor and micro-aggressions, though, do have significant health risks, especially for mental health. People of color, LGBTQ people , and women everywhere experience higher levels of depression and anger, as well as stress-related disorders, including heart disease, asthma, obesity, accelerated aging, and premature death. The costs of even minor aggression are laid at the feet of the individuals who suffer, their friends and families, and society at large as the cost of healthcare skyrockets.

Finally, it should be noted that studies looking for a connection between game violence and physical aggression are not looking at the wider context of the way we enculturate children, especially boys. As WSU’s Stacey Hust and Kathleen Rodgers have shown, you don’t have to prove a causative effect to know that immersing kids in games filled with violence and sexist tropes leads to undesirable consequences, particularly the perpetuation of interpersonal violence in intimate relationships.

No wonder, then, that when feminist media critic Anita Saarkesian launched her YouTube series, “ Tropes vs. Women in Video Games ,” she was the target of vitriol and violence. Years later she’d joke about “her first bomb threat,” but that was only after her life had been upended by the boys club that didn’t like “this woman” showing them the “grim evidence of industry-wide sexism.”

Read more about WSU research and study on video games in “ What’s missing in video games .”

What do you think? Leave a respectful comment.

There is no evidence to support these claims that violent media and real-world violence are connected. Photo by kerkezz/Ad...

Christopher J. Ferguson, The Conversation Christopher J. Ferguson, The Conversation

  • Copy URL https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/analysis-why-its-time-to-stop-blaming-video-games-for-real-world-violence

Analysis: Why it’s time to stop blaming video games for real-world violence

In the wake of the El Paso shooting on Aug. 3 that left 21 dead and dozens injured, a familiar trope has reemerged: Often, when a young man is the shooter, people try to blame the tragedy on violent video games and other forms of media.

This time around, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick placed some of the blame on a video game industry that “ teaches young people to kill .” Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California went on to condemn video games that “dehumanize individuals” as a “problem for future generations.” And President Trump pointed to society’s “glorification of violence,” including “ gruesome and grisly video games .”

These are the same connections a Florida lawmaker made after the Parkland shooting in February 2018, suggesting that the gunman in that case “was prepared to pick off students like it’s a video game .”

Kevin McCarthy, the GOP House minority leader, also tells Fox News that video games are the problem following the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton. pic.twitter.com/w7DmlJ9O1K — John Whitehouse (@existentialfish) August 4, 2019

But, speaking as a researcher who has studied violent video games for almost 15 years, I can state that there is no evidence to support these claims that violent media and real-world violence are connected. As far back as 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that research did not find a clear connection between violent video games and aggressive behavior.

Criminologists who study mass shootings specifically refer to those sorts of connections as a “ myth .” And in 2017, the Media Psychology and Technology division of the American Psychological Association released a statement I helped craft, suggesting reporters and policymakers cease linking mass shootings to violent media, given the lack of evidence for a link.

A history of a moral panic

So why are so many policymakers inclined to blame violent video games for violence? There are two main reasons.

The first is the psychological research community’s efforts to market itself as strictly scientific. This led to a replication crisis instead, with researchers often unable to repeat the results of their studies. Now, psychology researchers are reassessing their analyses of a wide range of issues – not just violent video games, but implicit racism , power poses and more.

The other part of the answer lies in the troubled history of violent video game research specifically.

An attendee dressed as a Fortnite character poses for a picture in a costume at Comic Con International in San Diego, California, U.S., July 19, 2019. Photo by REUTERS/Mike Blake

An attendee dressed as a Fortnite character poses for a picture in a costume at Comic Con International in San Diego, California, U.S., July 19, 2019. Photo by REUTERS/Mike Blake

Beginning in the early 2000s, some scholars, anti-media advocates and professional groups like the APA began working to connect a methodologically messy and often contradictory set of results to public health concerns about violence. This echoed historical patterns of moral panic, such as 1950s concerns about comic books and Tipper Gore’s efforts to blame pop and rock music in the 1980s for violence, sex and satanism.

Particularly in the early 2000s, dubious evidence regarding violent video games was uncritically promoted . But over the years, confidence among scholars that violent video games influence aggression or violence has crumbled .

Reviewing all the scholarly literature

My own research has examined the degree to which violent video games can – or can’t – predict youth aggression and violence. In a 2015 meta-analysis , I examined 101 studies on the subject and found that violent video games had little impact on kids’ aggression, mood, helping behavior or grades.

Two years later, I found evidence that scholarly journals’ editorial biases had distorted the scientific record on violent video games. Experimental studies that found effects were more likely to be published than studies that had found none. This was consistent with others’ findings . As the Supreme Court noted, any impacts due to video games are nearly impossible to distinguish from the effects of other media, like cartoons and movies.

Any claims that there is consistent evidence that violent video games encourage aggression are simply false.

Spikes in violent video games’ popularity are well-known to correlate with substantial declines in youth violence – not increases. These correlations are very strong, stronger than most seen in behavioral research. More recent research suggests that the releases of highly popular violent video games are associated with immediate declines in violent crime, hinting that the releases may cause the drop-off.

The role of professional groups

With so little evidence, why are people like Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin still trying to blame violent video games for mass shootings by young men? Can groups like the National Rifle Association seriously blame imaginary guns for gun violence?

A key element of that problem is the willingness of professional guild organizations such as the APA to promote false beliefs about violent video games. (I’m a fellow of the APA.) These groups mainly exist to promote a profession among news media, the public and policymakers, influencing licensing and insurance laws . They also make it easier to get grants and newspaper headlines. Psychologists and psychology researchers like myself pay them yearly dues to increase the public profile of psychology. But there is a risk the general public may mistake promotional positions for objective science.

In 2005 the APA released its first policy statement linking violent video games to aggression. However, my recent analysis of internal APA documents with criminologist Allen Copenhaver found that the APA ignored inconsistencies and methodological problems in the research data.

The APA updated its statement in 2015, but that sparked controversy immediately: More than 230 scholars wrote to the group asking it to stop releasing policy statements altogether. I and others objected to perceived conflicts of interest and lack of transparency tainting the process.

It’s bad enough that these statements misrepresent the actual scholarly research and misinform the public. But it’s worse when those falsehoods give advocacy groups like the NRA cover to shift blame for violence onto non-issues like video games. The resulting misunderstanding hinders efforts to address mental illness and other issues, such as the need for gun control, that are actually related to gun violence.

This article was originally published in The Conversation. Read the original article . This story was updated from an earlier version to reflect the events surrounding the El Paso and Dayton shootings.

Christopher J. Ferguson is a professor of psychology at Stetson University. He's coauthor of " Moral Combat: Why the War on Violent Video Games is Wrong ."

Support Provided By: Learn more

Educate your inbox

Subscribe to Here’s the Deal, our politics newsletter for analysis you won’t find anywhere else.

Thank you. Please check your inbox to confirm.

video games encourage violence essay

El Paso shooting is domestic terrorism, investigators say

Nation Aug 04

  • Work & Careers
  • Life & Arts
  • Currently reading: Do video games encourage violent acts?
  • Pixels, snowflakes and Japanese scrolls: the evolving world of game aesthetics
  • Player 2 no longer: how games outgrew the movies
  • When does a video game become art?
  • Does gaming still have a woman problem?
  • Cats, cancer and mental breakdown: the unexpected joys of indie games
  • What’s the appeal of games that recreate mundane reality?

Do video games encourage violent acts?

Games such as 'Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3' have been accused of glorifying violence

  • Do video games encourage violent acts? on x (opens in a new window)
  • Do video games encourage violent acts? on facebook (opens in a new window)
  • Do video games encourage violent acts? on linkedin (opens in a new window)
  • Do video games encourage violent acts? on whatsapp (opens in a new window)

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

Following mass shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, that claimed 31 lives, Donald Trump called out “gruesome and grisly video games” for contributing to the “glorification of violence in our society”. Dan Patrick, lieutenant governor of Texas, went further, saying the gaming industry “teaches young people to kill”. Games have long been blamed for degrading young minds, with violent games being prominently implicated in US mass shootings such as Columbine in 1999, Virginia Tech in 2007 and Sandy Hook in 2012.

The hashtag #VideoGamesAreNotToBlame soon started trending on Twitter in response to Trump’s statement. But looking at the science, does playing violent games actually encourage violent acts? Academics have shown varying results, but slowly a consensus is forming: several recent studies, including a compelling report from the Oxford Internet Institute, found no connection between violent games and aggressive behaviour in teens. Another useful perspective is to compare national statistics: no correlation is apparent between video game spending per capita and violent crime. If there were, countries such as Japan or South Korea, where more money is spent on games per capita, would have similar rates of violent crime to the US. In fact, their violent crime rates are among the lowest in the world.

Games are blamed for real-world violence because they’re an easy target. In these recent shootings, they have again become a scapegoat, distracting from more complex and systemic causes of youth violence. In particular they shift the blame from the prevalence of real guns to virtual ones. This aligns neatly with the interests of the US gun lobby. The NRA’s chief executive Wayne LaPierre once called video games a “callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells and stows violence against its own people”.

Even if they don’t cause mass shootings, the ultra-violence of contemporary games still warrants scrutiny. Today’s virtual gore is more realistic than ever, with series such as Mortal Kombat delighting in spine-shucking, organ-slicing fatalities. Grand Theft Auto has been criticised for its moral ambiguity, allowing players to steal, murder and mow down pedestrians by the dozen without significant consequence — one American detractor called the game “the gravest assault upon children in this country since polio”. Meanwhile some military shooters such as Call of Duty are so committed to ballistic authenticity that they pay firearms manufacturers for the licence to feature their weapons in-game. When players buy these titles, more money flows into the arms trade.

Given that developers can create anything they like from computer graphics, defaulting to combat demonstrates a striking lack of imagination

These games are created to satisfy a demand: clearly millions of players love to hack, slash and slaughter. While this desire might be considered unsavoury, it can also be understood as an outlet for our aggression and darker desires, in a safe fantasy world where nobody dies forever.

Violence is often the central mechanic of progress and reward in games. Given that developers can create anything they like from computer graphics, defaulting to combat demonstrates a striking lack of imagination. It’s not as if gamers aren’t interested in non-violent offerings: there is a healthy appetite for sports, puzzles and simulation games . There is also a community of gamers retooling violent games to pacifist ends by removing enemies, allowing players to roam unimpeded and admire the scenery, which is often intricate and imaginatively designed. Assassin’s Creed: Origins even provides an educational mode for schools, where students can explore Ptolemaic Egypt and learn more about the game’s historical context.

'Assassin's Creed: Origins' features an educational mode

Perhaps the future is not games that encourage violence, but those that interrogate it. Series such as Hitman and Dishonored reward players who navigate their missions without bloodshed. Certain games have been praised for challenging the player’s willingness to commit violence. Spec Ops: The Line , a subversive shooter that nods to Heart of Darkness , leads players into chaotic battles where they may kill civilians, even with chemical weapons, and must then bear the responsibility and emotional fallout. In the neon-soaked Hotline Miami you slaughter hundreds of thugs until the music screeches to a halt, leaving you to retrace your steps on a path strewn with corpses in eerie silence. These titles don’t provide an alternative to violence, but they do question the thoughtlessness with which we pull the trigger.

Promoted Content

Explore the series.

Games such as 'Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3' have been accused of glorifying violence

Follow the topics in this article

  • Gaming Add to myFT
  • Tom Faber Add to myFT

International Edition

Book cover

Handbook of Anger, Aggression, and Violence pp 1–22 Cite as

Violent Video Games and Aggression

A discussion based on the main theoretical frameworks

  • H. Andaç Demirtaş-Madran 4  
  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online: 23 November 2022

145 Accesses

Whether or not exposure to violent media is a risk factor for aggressive behavior has been the subject of numerous studies over many years. Research, which was mostly focused on the effects of television during the first decades, started to shift its focus in the 1980s to video games. The interactive and rewarding nature of video gaming and the active role it imposes on players not only facilitates the comprehension of educational content, but also accelerates the modeling and reinforcement of negative orientations. Studies have generally shown that violent video games can trigger harmful effects in physical, cognitive, emotional, and behavioral terms. This chapter presents an overview of current findings from experiments, longitudinal and cross-sectional studies, meta-analyses, and conclusions based on the main theoretical frameworks. Initially, a comparison of the effects of violent video games and violent television is presented. Then, research findings concerning the effects of violent video game and theoretical explanations of the underlying processes are reviewed in detail. This is followed by a summary of research findings concerning the effect of violent video games on aggressive tendencies in accordance with the main theoretical frameworks and ongoing academic conflicts based on disagreements in method, tool, sampling, and statistical dimensions. Finally, a comprehensive discussion is presented along with various recommendations.

  • Violent media
  • Video games

Violent video games

  • Media effects
  • Video game effects
  • Violent video game effects
  • Violent games

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Abbreviations

Adachi T, Willoughby T (2011) The effect of violent video games on aggression. Is it more than just the violence? Aggress Violent Behav 16:55–62

Article   Google Scholar  

Addo PC, Fang J, Kulbo NB et al (2021) Violent video games and aggression among young adults: the moderating effects of adverse environmental factors. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 24(1):17–23. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.0018

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Anderson CA, Berkowitz L, Donnerstein E (2003) The influence of media violence on youth. Psychol Sci Public Interest 4(3):81–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2003.pspi_1433.x

Anderson CA (2002) Violent video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. In: Calvert SL, Jordan AB, Cocking RR (eds) Children in the digital age. Praeger, Westport, pp 101–119

Google Scholar  

Anderson CA, Bushman BJ (2001) Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: a meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychol Sci 12:353–359

Anderson CA, Bushman BJ (2002) The effects of media violence on society. Science 295(5564):2377–2379. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1070765

Anderson CA, Carnagey NL (2004) Violent evil and the general aggression model. In: Miller A (ed) The social psychology of good and evil. Guilford, New York, pp 168–192

Anderson CA, Carnagey NL (2009) Causal effects of violent sports video games on aggression: is it competitiveness or violent content? J Exp Soc Psychol 45:731–739

Anderson CA, Dill KE (2000) Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. J Pers Soc Psychol 78:772–790

Anderson CA, Carnagey NL, Flanagan M et al (2004) Violent video games: specific effects of violent content on aggressive thoughts and behavior. In: Zanna MP (ed) Advances in experimental social psychology, vol 36. Elsevier Academic Press, pp 199–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(04)36004-1

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Anderson CA, Gentile DA, Buckley KE (2007) Violent video game effects on children and adolescents: theory, research, and public policy. Oxford University Press, New York

Book   Google Scholar  

Anderson CA, Shibuya A, Ihori N et al (2010) Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: a meta-analytic review. Psychol Bull 136(2):151–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018251

Anderson CA, Suzuki K, Swing EL et al (2017) Media violence and other aggression risk factors in seven nations. Personal Soc Psychol Bull 43(7):986–998. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217703064

Ballard ME, Lineberger R (1999) Video game violence and confederate gender: effects on reward and punishment given by college males. Sex Roles 41:541–558

Ballard ME, Wiest JR (1996) Mortal Kombat (TM): the effects of violent video game play on males’ hostility and cardiovascular responding. J Appl Soc Psychol 26:717–730

Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall

Bandura A (2001) Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Annu Rev Psychol 52:1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1

Barlett CP, Harris RJ, Baldassaro R (2007) Longer you play, the more hostile you feel: examination of first person shooter video games and aggression during video game play. Aggress Behav 33(6):486–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20227

Barlett CP, Branch O, Rodeheffer C et al (2009) How long do the short-term violent video game effects last? Aggress Behav 35(3):225–236. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20301

Bartholow BD, Bushman BJ, Sestir MA (2006) Chronic violent video game exposure and desensitization to violence: behavioral and event-related brain potential data. J Exp Soc Psychol 42(4):532–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.08.006

Bender PK, Plante C, Gentile DA (2018) The effects of violent media content on aggression. Curr Opin Psychol 19:104–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.04.003

Bensley L, Van Eenwyk J (2001) Video games and real-life aggression: review of the literature. J Adolesc Health 29(4):244–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1054-139x(01)00239-7

Bleakley A, Vaala S, Jordan AB et al (2017) The Annenberg media environment survey: media access and use in US homes with children and adolescents. In: Jordan AB, Romer D (eds) Media and the well-being of children and adolescents. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 1–19

Bond RM, Bushman BJ (2017) The contagious spread of violence among US adolescents through social networks. Am J Public Health 107(2):288–294. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2016.303550

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Bryant J, Zillmann D, Oliver MB (eds) (2002) Media effects, advances in theory and research, 2nd edn. Routledge, New York. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410602428

Bushman BJ (1998) Effects of television violence on memory for commercial messages. J Exp Psychol Appl 4(4):291–307. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.4.4.291

Bushman BJ, Huesmann LR (2001) Effects of televised violence on aggression. In: Singer DG, Singer JL (eds) Handbook of children and the media. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 223–254

Bushman BJ, Newman K, Calvert SL et al (2016) Youth violence: what we know and what we need to know. Am Psychol 71:17–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039687

Carnagey NL, Anderson CA (2004) Violent video game exposure and aggression: a literature review. Minerva Psichiatr 45(1):1–18

Carnagey NL, Anderson CA (2005) The effects of reward and punishment in violent video games on aggressive affect, cognition, and behavior. Psychol Sci 16(11):882–889. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01632.x

Crick NR (1995) Relational aggression: the role of intent attributions, feelings of distress, and provocation type. Dev Psychopathol 7(2):313–322. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579400006520

Delhove M, Greitemeyer T (2021) Violent media use and aggression: two longitudinal network studies. J Soc Psychol 161(6):697–713. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2021.1896465

Donnerstein E, Slaby RG, Eron LD (1994) The mass media and youth aggression. In: Eron LD, Gentry JH, Schlegel P (eds) Reason to hope: a psychosocial perspective on violence & youth. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp 219–250. https://doi.org/10.1037/10164-010

Drew B, Waters J (1986) Video games: utilization of a novel strategy to improve perceptual motor skills and cognitive functioning in the non-institutionalized elderly. Cogn Rehab 4(2):26–31

Drummond A, Sauer JD, Garea SS (2018) The infamous relationship between violent video game use and aggression: uncharted moderators and small effects make it a far cry from certain. In: Ferguson CJ (ed) Video game influences on aggression, cognition, and attention. Springer, Cham, pp 23–40

Elson M, Mohseni MR, Breuer J et al (2014) Press CRTT to measure aggressive behavior: the unstandardized use of the competitive reaction time task in aggression research. Psychol Assess 26(2):419–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035569

Evra JV (2004) Television and child development. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale

Ferguson CJ (2015) Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children’s and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspect Psychol Sci 10(5):646–666. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615592234

Ferguson CJ, Beresin E (2017) Social science’s curious war with pop culture and how it was lost: the media violence debate and the risks it holds for social science. Prev Med Int J Devot Pract Theory 99:69–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.02.009

Ferguson CJ, Colwell J (2017) Understanding why scholars hold different views on the influences of video games on public health. J Commun 67:305–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12293

Ferguson CJ, Kilburn J (2010) Much ado about nothing: the misestimation and overinterpretation of violent video game effects in Eastern and Western nations: comment on Anderson et al. (2010). Psychol Bull 136(2):174–178. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018566

Ferguson CJ, Wang JC (2019) Aggressive video games are not a risk factor for future aggression in youth: a longitudinal study. J Youth Adolesc 48(8):1439–1451

Ferguson CJ, Rueda S, Cruz A et al (2008) Violent video games and aggression: causal relationship or byproduct of family violence and intrinsic violence motivation? Crim Justice Behav 35:311–332

Ferguson CJ, Ivory JD, Beaver KM (2013) Genetic, maternal, school, intelligence and media use predictors of adult criminality: a longitudinal test of the catalyst model in adolescence through early adulthood. J Aggress Maltreat Trauma 22:447–460

Ferguson CJ, Copenhaver A, Markey P (2020) Reexamining the findings of the American Psychological Association’s 2015 task force on violent media: a meta-analysis. Perspect Psychol Sci 15(6):1423–1443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620927666

Ferguson CJ, Gryshyna A, Kim JS et al (2022) Video games, frustration, violence, and virtual reality: two studies. Br J Soc Psychol 61(1):83–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12471

Feshbach S (1955) The drive-reducing function of fantasy behavior. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 50(1):3–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042214

Gardner H (1991) The unschooled mind: how children think and how schools should teach. Basic Books, New York

Geen RG, Donnerstein E (eds) (1998) Human aggression: theories, research, and implications for social policy. Academic Press, Cambridge, MA

Gentile DA (ed) (2003) Media violence and children: a complete guide for parents and professionals. Praeger/Greenwood, Santa Barbara

Gentile DA, Anderson CA (2003) Violent video games: The newest media violence hazard. In: Gentile DA (ed) Media violence and children: A complete guide for parents and professionals. Praeger Publishers/Greenwood Publishing Group, pp 131–152

Gentile DA, Anderson CA (2006) Video games. In: Salkind NJ (ed) Encyclopedia of human development, vol 3. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 1303–1307

Gentile DA, Gentile RJ (2008) Violent video games as exemplary teachers: a conceptual analysis. J Youth Adolesc 37:127–141

Gentile DA, Lynch PJ, Linder JR et al (2004) The effects of violent video game habits on adolescent hostility, aggressive behaviors, and school performance. J Adolesc 27(1):5–22

Gentile DA, Li D, Khoo A et al (2014) Mediators and moderators of long-term effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior: practice, thinking, and action. JAMA Pediatr 168(5):450–457. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2014.63

Gerbner G, Gross L, Morgan M et al (1994) Growing up with television: the cultivation perspective. In: Bryant J, Zillmann D (eds) Media effects: advances in theory and research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., pp 17–41

Graybill D, Kirsch JR, Esselman ED (eds) (1985) Effects of playing violent versus non-violent video games on the aggressive ideation of children. Child Study J 15:199–205

Greitemeyer T (2014) Intense acts of violence during video game play make daily life aggression appear innocuous: a new mechanism why violent video games increase aggression. J Exp Soc Psychol 50:52–56

Greitemeyer T (2018) The spreading impact of playing violent video games on aggression. Comput Hum Behav 80:216–219

Greitemeyer T (2019) The contagious impact of playing violent video games on aggression: longitudinal evidence. Aggress Behav 45(6):635–642. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21857

Greitemeyer T (2022) The dark and bright side of video game consumption: effects of violent and prosocial video games. Curr Opin Psychol 46:101326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101326

Greitemeyer T, McLatchie N (2011) Denying humanness to others: a newly discovered mechanism by which violent video games increase aggressive behavior. Psychol Sci 22(5):659–665. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611403320

Greitemeyer T, Mügge DO (2014) Video games do affect social outcomes: a meta-analytic review of the effects of violent and prosocial video game play. Personal Soc Psychol Bull 40(5):578–589. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213520459

Greitemeyer T, Osswald S (2010) Effects of prosocial video games on prosocial behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol 98(2):211–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016997

Griffiths MD, Hunt N (1998) Dependence on computer games by adolescents. Psychol Rep 82(2):475–480. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1998.82.2.475

Gunter B (2016) Does playing video games make players more violent? Springer, London

Harris RJ (2004) A cognitive psychology of mass communication. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah

Hilgard J, Engelhardt CR, Rouder JN (2017) Overstated evidence for short-term effects of violent games on affect and behavior: a reanalysis of Anderson et al. (2010). Psychol Bull 143:757–774. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000074

Huesmann LR (1986) Psychological processes promoting the relation between exposure to media violence and aggressive behavior by the viewer. J Soc Issues 42(3):125–139

Huesmann LR (1988) An information processing model for the development of aggression. Aggress Behav 14:13–24

Huesmann LR (2010) Nailing the coffin shut on doubts that violent video games stimulate aggression: comment on Anderson et al. (2010). Psychol Bull 136(2):179–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018567

Huesmann LR (2018) An integrative theoretical understanding of aggression: a brief exposition. Curr Opin Psychol 19:119–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.04.015

Huesmann LR, Miller LS. Long-term effects of repeated exposure to media violence in childhood. In Huesmann LR. Aggressive behavior: current perspectives. Plenum Press; 1994, p. 153–186 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9116-7_7

Ihori N, Sakamoto A, Kobayashi K et al (2003) Does video game use grow children’s aggressiveness?: results from a panel study. In: Arai K (ed) Social contributions and responsibilities of simulation and gaming. Japan Association of Simulation and Gaming, Tokyo, pp 221–230

Kestenbaum GI, Weinstein L (1985) Personality, psychopathology, and developmental issues in male adolescent video game use. J Am Acad Child Psychiatry 24(3):329–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-7138(09)61094-3

Király O, Griffiths MD, King DL et al (2018) Policy responses to problematic video game use: a systematic review of current measures and future possibilities. J Behav Addict 7(3):503–517. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.6.2017.050

Kirsh SJ (1998) Seeing the world through mortal Kombat-colored glasses: violent video games and the development of a short-term hostile attribution bias. Childhood 5:177–184

Kirsh SJ, Olczak PV, Mounts JRW (2005) Violent video games induce an affect processing bias. J Media Psychol 7:239–250

Krahé B (2013) The social psychology of aggression, 2nd edn. Psychology Press, Hove. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315804521

Kühn S, Kugler DT, Schmalen K et al (2019) Does playing violent video games cause aggression? A longitudinal intervention study. Mol Psychiatry 24(8):1220–1234

Lynch PJ (1994) Type A behavior, hostility, and cardiovascular function at rest and after playing video games in teenagers. Psychosom Med 56:152

Lynch PJ (1999) Hostility, type a behavior, and stress hormones at rest and after playing violent video games in teenagers. Psychosom Med 61:113

Lynch PJ, Gentile DA, Olson AA et al (2001) The effects of violent video game habits on adolescent aggressive attitudes and behaviors. Biennial Conference of the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis. http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED461420.pdf

Milani L, Camisasca E, Caravita SCS et al (2015) Violent video games and children’s aggressive behaviors: an Italian study. SAGE Open 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015599428

Mullin CR, Linz D (1995) Desensitization and resensitization to violence against women: effects of exposure to sexually violent films on judgments of domestic violence victims. J Pers Soc Psychol 69(3):449–459. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.3.449

Olson CK, Kutner LA, Warner DE (2008) The role of violent video game content in adolescent development: boys’ perspectives. J Adolesc Res 23(1):55–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558407310713

Paik H, Comstock G (1994) The effects of television violence on antisocial behavior: a meta-Analysis1. Commun Res 21(4):516–546. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365094021004004

Palaus M, Marron EM, Viejo-Sobera R et al (2017) Neural basis of video gaming: a systematic review. Front Hum Neurosci 22(11):248. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00248

Prot S, Anderson CA, Gentile DA et al (2014) The positive and negative effects of video game play. In: Jordan AB, Romer D (eds) Media and the well-being of children and adolescents. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 109–128

Sestir MA, Bartholow BD (2010) Violent and nonviolent video games produce opposing effects on aggressive and prosocial outcomes. J Exp Soc Psychol 46(6):934–942

Shao R, Wang Y (2019) The relation of violent video games to adolescent aggression: an examination of moderated mediation effect. Front Psychol 10:384. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00384

Sherry JL (2001) The effects of violent video games on aggression: a meta analysis. Hum Commun Res 27(3):409–431

Sherry JL (2004) Media effects theory and the nature/nurture debate: a historical overview and directions for future research. Media Psychol 6:83–109. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532785xmep0601_4

Shibuya A, Sakamoto A, Ihori N et al (2008) The effects of the presence and contexts of video game violence on children: a longitudinal study in Japan. Simul Gaming 39(4):528–539. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878107306670

Silvern SB, Williamson PA (1987) The effects of video game play on young children’s aggression, fantasy and prosocial behavior. J Appl Dev Psychol 8:453–462

Smith SL, Donnerstein E. Harmful effects of exposure to media violence: learning of aggression, emotional desensitization, and fear. In Geen RG, Donnerstein E, edıtors. Human aggression: Theories, research, and implications for social policy. Academic Press; 1998, p. 167–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012278805-5/50008-0

Statista (2022). https://www.statista.com/statistics/748044/number-video-gamers-world/ . Accessed April 2022

Tannenbaum PH, Zillmann D (1975) Emotional arousal in the facilitation of aggression through communication. In: Berkowitz L (ed) Advances in experimental social psychology, vol VIII. Academic Press, New York, pp 149–192

Tian Y, Gao M, Wang P et al (2020) The effects of violent video games and shyness on individuals’ aggressive behaviors. Aggress Behav 46(1):16–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21869

Unsworth G, Devilly GJ, Ward T (2007) The effect of playing violent video games on adolescents: should parents be quaking in their boots? Psychol Crime Law 13(4):383–394

Van Schie EG, Wiegman O (1997) Children and videogames: leisure activities, aggression, social integration, and school performance. J Appl Soc Psychol 27(13):1175–1194

Warburton WA, Anderson CA (2015) Social psychology of aggression. In: Wright J, Berry J (eds) International encyclopedia of social and behavioral sciences, vol 1, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 373–380

Wiederhold BK (2021) Violent video games: harmful trigger or harmless diversion? Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 24(1):1–2. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.29203

Wiegman O, Van Schie EGM (1998) Video game playing and its relations with aggressive and prosocial behavior. Br J Soc Psychol 37:367–368

Winkel M, Novak DM, Hopson H (1987) Personality factors, subject gender, and the effects of aggressive video games on aggression in adolescents. J Res Pers 21(2):211–223

Zhang Q, Cao Y, Tian J (2021) Effects of violent video games on aggressive cognition and aggressive behavior. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 24(1):5–10. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0676

Zheng X, Chen H, Wang Z et al (2021) Online violent video games and online aggressive behavior among Chinese college students: the role of anger rumination and self-control. Aggress Behav 47(5):514–520. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21967

Zillmann D (2002) Exemplification theory of media influence. In: Bryant J, Zillmann D (eds) Media effects: advances in theory and research. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 19–41

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Comm, Başkent University, Ankara, Turkey

H. Andaç Demirtaş-Madran

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. Andaç Demirtaş-Madran .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Institute for Clinical and Applied Health Research, University of Hull, Hull, UK

Colin Martin

King's College London, London, UK

Victor R. Preedy

University of Westminster, London, UK

Vinood B. Patel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Demirtaş-Madran, H.A. (2022). Violent Video Games and Aggression. In: Martin, C., Preedy, V.R., Patel, V.B. (eds) Handbook of Anger, Aggression, and Violence. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98711-4_21-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98711-4_21-1

Received : 26 May 2022

Accepted : 12 June 2022

Published : 23 November 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-98711-4

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-98711-4

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

  • Publish with us

Policies and ethics

  • Find a journal
  • Track your research

60 Violence in Video Games Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

🏆 best violent games essay topics and examples, 📌 most interesting video game argument topics, 🎮 video games cause violence – essay topics, ❓ research questions about video games and violence.

  • Video Games and Violence in Children There have been arguments that such behavior is as a result of a pre-disposition to violence in the media as well as in video games.
  • Do Violent Video Games Lead to Aggressive Behavior? Everyone is however in agreement that the violent video games are in compromise of morals and expose the young kids to in appropriate content. We will write a custom essay specifically for you by our professional experts 808 writers online Learn More
  • Violence exposure in real-life, video games, television, movies, and the internet: Is there desensitization? The article under consideration entitled “Violence exposure in real-life, video games, television, movies, and the internet: Is there desensitization?” investigates the links between the violent content of TV programs, video games and the increase of […]
  • Do Violent Video Games Contribute to Youth Violence? The violence and aggression that stains the youth of today, as a result of these video games, is unquestionably a cancer that ought to be uprooted or at least contained by parents, school leaders, governments […]
  • Violent Video Games and How They Affect Youth Violence However, despite the overwhelming outcry against the youth playing violent video games, there are a number of researchers and advocates who oppose the idea of directly linking the exposure of young adults to violent scenes […]
  • The Negative Effects of Video Games on Children Essay Development of knuckle pads in children is associated with addiction to playing video games. Most of the young children tend to think that what they see in video games is a reality.
  • Video Games and Violent Behavior As opposed to watching the violence on TV, in these video games the player is the one who commits the acts of violence. In the survey, a group of 10 young men were allowed to […]
  • Research of Violence in the Media The left frontal lobe of the participants was analyzed and found to be more active in the control group than in the exposed group. Exposure of children to violence in the mass media leads to […]
  • Does Violence in Video Games Affect Youth? Our concern in this paper is to concentrate on the violent video games, the effects to the youths through participation in the violent video games, the counter arguments and finally the remarks or conclusion.
  • Violence in Video Games To conclude, it is assumed that the dispute among researchers, the public, and authorities on the question of the relationship between violent video games and aggressive behavior may not have a universal answer.
  • Examining the Perception of Violence in Video Games To examine the perception of violence in video games and their effects a survey was conducted addressing the current view on video games in general and the visualized violence in particular.
  • A Look at the Violence in Video Games, Movies and Music: A Bad Influence on Our Children
  • An Analysis of the Negative Effects of Violence in Video Games
  • An Analysis of Violence in Video Games and Violence in Teens
  • An Argument Against the Claim That Violence in Video Games Promote Violence in Real Life
  • An Argument Against the Opinion on Effects of Violence in Video Games
  • Blame Games: Does Violence In Video Games Influence Players To Commit Mass Shootings
  • Children And Violence in Video Games
  • Critical Argumentations on Violence in Video Games
  • Dangers in Media: How Violence in Video Games Affects the Youth
  • Does Violence In Video Games Affect Children’s Behavior
  • Does Violence in Video Games Contribute to Misconduct
  • How Does the Portrayal of Violence in Video Games Influence Children
  • Increase In Violence In Video Games Targeted At Children
  • Legal and Ethical Issues Concerning Violence in Video Games
  • Positive Influence of Violence in Video Games
  • Presence Of Sex And Violence In Video Games
  • The Consequences Of Video Game Violence In Video Games
  • The Debate over Whether the Government Should Restrict Violence in Video Games
  • The Depiction of Violence in Video Games
  • The Impact of Violence in Video Games on the Intellectual Development of Young People: Grand Theft Auto
  • The Problem of Violence in Video Games
  • The Use Of Violence In Video Games And Its Impact On Young
  • The Vehement Vilification Of Violence In Video Games
  • Violence In Video Games and Aggression
  • Violence in Video Games and the Role of the Government
  • Violence in Video Games Can Be Transferred to the Children’s Real-Life Attitudes and Behaviors
  • Violence in Video Games Does Not Create Violence
  • Violence in Video Games Do Not Affect Agression
  • Violence in Video Games Increases Violence in Children
  • What Is Your Take on Violence in Video Games, Movies, and Music?
  • Can Violence in Video Games Have a Bad Influence on Our Children?
  • What Could Be the Analysis of the Negative Consequences of Violence in Video Games?
  • What Argument Can Be Made Against the Claim?
  • Violence in Video Games Contributes to Violence in Real Life?
  • What Are the Arguments Against the Opinion About the Consequences of Violence in Video Games?
  • Does Violence in Video Games Affect Children?
  • How Does Violence in Video Games Relate to Violence in Reality?
  • Can Video Game Violence Affect Players in Mass Shootings?
  • Can Violence in Video Games Encourage Misconduct?
  • How Do Video Game Depictions of Violence Can Affect Children?
  • What Are the Legal and Ethical Aspects of Violence in Video Games?
  • What Is the Connection Between Video Game Violence and Future Technology?
  • How Is Youth Aggression Related to Video Game Violence?
  • How Negatively Does Aggression in Video Games Affect Today’s Youth?
  • How Does Violence in Video Games Cause Ethical Issues?
  • What Can Be Done To Prevent the Development of Violence in Children?
  • How Can Parents Influence the Development of Violence in Children?
  • How Does Violence in Video Games Affect the Maladaptive?
  • How Does Violence in Video Games Generally Affect Society?
  • Chicago (A-D)
  • Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, November 30). 60 Violence in Video Games Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/violence-in-video-games-essay-examples/

"60 Violence in Video Games Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 30 Nov. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/violence-in-video-games-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2023) '60 Violence in Video Games Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 30 November.

IvyPanda . 2023. "60 Violence in Video Games Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 30, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/violence-in-video-games-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "60 Violence in Video Games Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 30, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/violence-in-video-games-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "60 Violence in Video Games Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 30, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/violence-in-video-games-essay-examples/.

  • Video Game Topics
  • Media Violence Titles
  • Entertainment Ideas
  • Domestic Violence Paper Topics
  • Juvenile Delinquency Essay Titles
  • Child Development Research Ideas
  • Youth Violence Research Topics
  • Computers Essay Ideas
  • Bullying Research Topics
  • Cognitive Development Essay Ideas
  • School Violence Ideas
  • Censorship Essay Ideas
  • Critical Thinking Essay Ideas
  • Emotional Development Questions
  • Human Behavior Research Topics

video games encourage violence essay

Do Video Games Promote Violence? Answered by Research

video games encourage violence essay

There is a lot of debate about whether video games promote violence or not. Many experts believe that video games that encourage violence bring out violent tendencies in gamers. However, research has a clear answer.

Several studies have shown that video games increase aggression. Over the past five decades, studies have shown that engaging with violent media, including playing violent video games, increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior. However, aggressive behavior does not always lead to real-world violence and crime. Moreover, there are other more significant risk factors for real-world violence, than violent video games.

In this blog post, we will examine studies on whether video games promote violence or not, what experts think, and how video games affect the brain.

 If you are worried about someone's relationship with video games, take this quiz to gain more insight into why they play games:

Where Did We Get the Idea That Video Games Promote Violence?

Hands holding a video game controller in grayscale.

Can playing video games lead to violence?

Even before video games existed, the idea that violent media results in violent behavior in youth was widely debated. People and news media often blamed television shows and movies with violent graphic scenes for the youth’s violent acts. In fact, over the past 50 years, researchers have conducted many studies that show that watching violent television, watching violent films, or playing violent video games increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior.

Anderson and co. published a comprehensive meta-analysis of the effects of violent video games. They concluded that the “evidence strongly suggests that exposure to violent video games is a causal risk factor for increase in aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect and decrease in empathy and prosocial behavior.”

However, Anderson says that violent media, including video games, are only among the many risk factors for aggressive and violent behavior. A healthy, well-adjusted person who gets exposed to a few risk factors, including violent video games, will not suddenly become a criminal. However, there is an impact of video games on aggression and anti-social behavior.

Click here to check out the parent’s guide to managing a short-tempered child/

Let’s discuss how violent video games affect your child’s brain and what you can do to wean your child off violent video games.

How Do Video Games Affect the Brain

Video games affect the brain in multiple ways. They affect our learning circuitry, emotional circuitry, and a psychological pattern called the triumph circuit. You can learn more about how video games affect the brain in this article. For now, we will go over the correlation between video games and violent behavior.

my son gets angry very easily

Numerous studies show that exposure to violent video games leads to a significant increase in aggression. Moreover, young men who are already prone to aggression are especially vulnerable to video games’ aggression-enhancing effects.

Some studies have tried to contest this finding. For example, Kuhn et al. conducted a longitudinal study that took a sample of 90 college students and divided them into three groups. For two months, one group played the violent video game Grand Theft Auto V, one played the generally considered prosocial game Sims 3, and one played no games. The researchers found no statistically significant changes in aggressive behavior among the three groups after two months.

However, it is essential to note that this study’s sample size was too small (90 initial participants, others dropping out further into the study). The mean age was 28, and more than half of the participants were women. That is much different from the young, 18 to 25-year-old males that are typically at risk of increased aggression from exposure to violent video games. Moreover, the participants were only advised to play for at least 30 minutes a day, which does not seem to be enough for a statistically significant behavior change, even over two months. Other studies that show similar results suffer from similar methodological issues.

All gamers know the surge of adrenaline that they experience when they find themselves in high-stress gameplay situations. The research backs this up — studies have found that video games trigger the fight-or-flight response, which causes the release of adrenaline and cortisol. These hormones prepare your body for high-stress situations by:

  • Dilating your pupils to let in more light and thus, improve your vision.
  • Blood flow to extremities gets reduced while blood flow to the muscles, brain, legs, and arms increases.
  • The heartbeat and breathing rate increases to provide more oxygen to other parts of the body, to fuel its sudden increase in demand for fuel.
  • The muscles tense and become primed for quick movement, which results in trembling.

The fight-or-flight response evolved to combat physical dangers. However, our minds and bodies cannot distinguish between real danger (an attack from a tiger) and fake danger (death in a video game). Therefore, the response is the same in either case. The body is not designed to sustain this response for hours. The fight or flight response is designed to kick in and help you get to safety and then turn off. However, when gamers play intense, violent video games for several hours, the fight-or-flight response stays “on” the entire duration. It results in prolonged secretion of adrenaline and cortisol.

Over time, persistent surges of adrenaline can damage your blood vessels , increase your blood pressure, and elevate your risk of heart attacks or stroke. It can also result in anxiety, weight gain, headaches, and insomnia.

Emotional Suppression

brain-dopamine-addiction

The amygdala is the part of our brain that governs negative emotions such as fear, anger, shame, etc. fMRI studies have shown that when we experience negative emotions and turn on a video game, the activity in the amygdala reduces. Therefore, video games suppress negative emotions.

Over time, this results in the development of a sub-clinical condition called alexithymia. Alexithymia is the inability to determine your inner emotional state. Men are especially susceptible to developing alexithymia. That is because societally, they are only encouraged to display anger.

When we suppress negative emotions such as fear, shame, and frustration, they don’t just vanish. They lie dormant and often come out during intense gaming sessions in the form of anger. That is one reason for gamer rage being so commonplace and possibly why video games increase aggression.

Do Violent Video Games Affect Children?

Child playing video games

Children pick up behaviors through a process called observational learning. Overall, if your child gets exposed to many violent games, they are likely to develop some aggressive behaviors, especially if they play video games excessively.

Click here to check out this article on how to reduce your child’s time spent playing video games.

For kids and teens 5 to 18 years, experts recommend that parents place limits on time spent playing video games. Gaming should not take up time that would otherwise go towards getting enough sleep and physical activity. Parents should set limits on their kid’s gaming hours to keep gaming from affecting their schoolwork, chores, and physical activity.

Additionally, parents should also make sure that their child is playing video games suitable for their age group.

Entertainment Software Rating Board rates and labels all video games. Steer clear of any games they rate “M” for “mature.” Those are for ages 17 and up, and can contain heavy-duty violence, strong language, and sexual content. Also, keep in mind that even games that are “suitable for children” may contain cartoon violence.

Whether your child will become violent as a result of playing violent video games is not known. However, James Ivory, professor and researcher , says that when it comes to actual serious criminal violence, there’s virtually no evidence that video games matter.” Instead, other predictors of violent crime such as poverty, substance abuse, and child abuse seem to be much more relevant.

What if My Child Plays Excessive Video Games?

video games encourage violence essay

If your child or teenager struggles to reduce their gaming habit, then we can help. Ultimately, the most successful path forward to overcome video game addiction for 90% of kids is to become a healthy gamer. Building a healthy relationship with them and helping them overcome their video game addiction can reduce the effects of video games that promote violence.

Healthy Gamer Parent Coaching is a 12-week virtual coaching solution created by Dr. Alok Kanojia, known as Dr. K, the world expert on video game psychology. It covers the most frustrating, difficult, and common dynamics around excessive gaming.

  • 12 Weeks of Parent Coaching: Work with your Healthy Gamer Coach in a group format with up to 5 other families to develop strategies and reflect on progress and setbacks in a supportive environment.
  • 12 Learning Modules: Cover key concepts of gamer psychology, parent-child communication, and boundary-setting to create an alliance with your child.
  • Approach your child’s unique circumstances and psychology in weekly 90-minute Parent Coaching Sessions with a Healthy Gamer Coach.

For 12 consecutive weeks, participants get access to a workshop and Q&A with Dr. K and weekly support groups led by Healthy Gamer Coaches. The dual support structure helps parents get started and follow-through in helping their children combat excessive gaming.

Build the Life You Want to Live

video games encourage violence essay

Mental Health Newsletter

Get the latest in mental health research, industry updates, and more, latest posts, hg at the american psychiatric association annual conference 2022.

video games encourage violence essay

HG High-Level Research Methodology

The scientific benefits of touching grass.

video games encourage violence essay

Work with an HG Coach

Explore dr. k's guide to mental health, quick links, dr. k’s guide to parenting gamers.

Parent online coaching session | Healthy Gamer Images

Parent Coaching

Online coaching session | Healthy Gamer Images

Connect with us

  • International edition
  • Australia edition
  • Europe edition

An esports-themed hotel in Japan. The study found no evidence that harm from playing violent games accumulates over time.

Playing video games doesn't lead to violent behaviour, study shows

Analysis of 28 global studies dating back to 2008 found a minuscule positive correlation

Video games do not lead to violence or aggression, according to a reanalysis of data gathered from more than 21,000 young people around the world.

The researchers, led by Aaron Drummond from New Zealand’s Massey University, re-examined 28 studies from previous years that looked at the link between aggressive behaviour and video gaming, a method known as a meta-analysis.

The new report, published in the journal Royal Society Open Science on Wednesday, found that, when bundled together, the studies showed a statistically significant but minuscule positive correlation between gaming and aggression, below the threshold required to count as even a “small effect”.

“Thus, current research is unable to support the hypothesis that violent video games have a meaningful long-term predictive impact on youth aggression,” the report said.

Between them, the various studies included in the research dated back to 2008, and had reported a range of effects, including a small positive correlation between violence and video-game use in around a quarter of them and no overall conclusion in most of the rest, with one 2011 study finding a negative correlation.

One common argument for a negative effect of gaming is that small harms can accumulate over time: if a player ends every game slightly more aggressive then, over the long term, that might add up to a meaningful change in temperament. But the study finds no evidence for such an accumulation, and in fact finds evidence pointing in the opposite direction.

Studies consistently find that the “long-term impacts of violent games on youth aggression are near zero”, they write.

“We call on both individual scholars as well as professional guilds such as the American Psychological Association to be more forthcoming about the extremely small observed relationship in longitudinal studies between violent games and youth aggression,” the authors conclude.

While that link may be slim, other studies have shown interesting effects on wider emotional behaviour. Research from the University of New South Wales in 2018 , for instance, found that people who frequently played violent video games were less distracted by violent images in other contexts, a phenomenon the study author called “emotion-induced blindness”.

  • New Zealand

Most viewed

  • Text editing
  • Free AI Essay Writer
  • AI Detector
  • AI Essay Checker
  • AI Outline Generator
  • AI Paragraph Generator
  • Caktus AI Review
  • Copy.AI Review
  • Editpad Review
  • EssayAILab Review
  • EssayGenius AI Review
  • Humata AI Review
  • Hyperwrite AI Review
  • Inferkit Review
  • Jasper AI Review
  • Jenni AI Review
  • Kipper Review
  • Notion AI Review
  • Perplexity Review
  • Smodin.io Review
  • Sudowrite Review
  • Sudowrite vs ChatGPT
  • Textero.ai Review
  • The Good AI Review
  • TinyWow Review
  • ToolBaz Review
  • UPDF Review
  • Best AI Detectors
  • ChatGPT Detector Review
  • Content At Scale AI Review
  • GPTZero Review
  • Originality AI Detector Review
  • Passed AI Review
  • Turnitin AI Detector Review
  • Winston AI Review
  • Writefull AI Detector Review
  • Writer.com AI Detector Review
  • ZeroGPT Review
  • GPTzero vs Turnitin
  • Best AI Tools for Academic Research
  • Best AI Chrome extensions for college students
  • Top AI Coding Tools
  • Best AI Translation Tools
  • Plagiarism Checker
  • Paragraph Expander
  • Essay Expander
  • Literature Review Generator
  • Research Paper Generator
  • Thesis Generator
  • Best Plagiarism Checker
  • Copyleaks Review
  • Chegg Plagiarism Check Review
  • Grammarly Review
  • iThenticate Review
  • Originality AI Review
  • PlagiarismCheck Review
  • Plagium Review
  • Plagscan Review
  • Quetext Review
  • Quillbot Review
  • Scribbr Review
  • Turnitin Review
  • Grammarly vs Turnitin
  • Quillbot vs Grammarly
  • Scribbr vs Turnitin
  • Copyleaks vs Turnitin
  • Quillbot Coupons
  • Grammarly Coupons
  • Smallseotools vs Turnitin
  • Best Essay Writing Service Reviews
  • Fast Essay Writing Service
  • 123HelpMe Review
  • 99Papers Review
  • CheapWritingService Review
  • CustomWritings Review
  • DoMyEssay Review
  • EduBirdie Review
  • EssayHub Review
  • EssayPro Review
  • EssayShark Review
  • EssayWriter Review
  • ExtraEssay Review
  • Nerdify Review
  • Paperhelp Review
  • PapersOwl Review
  • PaperCoach Review
  • SpeedyPaper Review
  • StudyBay Review
  • StudyMoose Review
  • WritePaperFor.me Review
  • How to Write a Reconsideration Letter
  • How to Write a Travelogue
  • How to Write an Autobiography
  • How to Write a Brochure
  • How to Write an Evaluation Letter
  • How to Write a Progress Report
  • How to Write an Informal Letter
  • How to Write a Complimentary Letter
  • How to Make a Newsletter
  • How to Write a College Deferral Letter
  • How to Write a Process Paper
  • How to Write a Meeting Agenda
  • How to Write a Hardship Letter
  • How to Write a Refund Letter
  • How to Write Meeting Minutes
  • Dissertation vs Thesis
  • How Long Is a Dissertation?
  • How to Write a Dissertation Abstract
  • How to Write a Dissertation Proposal
  • How to Write an Academic Assignment
  • Writing Guides for Students
  • Writing Essentials
  • How to Write a Review
  • How to Write an Essay
  • How to Write a Research Paper
  • How to Write a Letter
  • Creative Writing Guides
  • Business Writing Guides
  • General Writing Guides
  • Stages of the Writing Process
  • Grammar Handbook
  • Summarizing Tool
  • AI Content Shortener
  • Paraphrasing tool
  • AI Rephraser
  • AI Rewording Tool
  • AI Sentence Rewriter
  • AI Paragraph Rewriter
  • Citation Generator
  • Reference Finder
  • Book Citation Generator
  • Legal Citation Generator
  • Journal Citation Generator
  • Reference Citation Generator
  • Scientific Citation generator
  • Source Citation Generator
  • Website Citation Generator
  • URL citation generator
  • Best Article Rewriter
  • AISEO Review
  • Article Rewriter Review
  • Article Rewriter Tool Review
  • Conch AI Review
  • Duplichecker Review
  • Editpad Paraphrasing Tool Review
  • Frase Review
  • Hypotenuse AI Review
  • IvyPanda Review
  • Paraphrase-Online Review
  • PrePostSEO Review
  • Quillbot Paraphraser Review
  • Rephrase Review
  • Rewriter Review
  • SearchEngineReports Review
  • Sentence Checkup Review
  • SEOMagnifier Rewriter Review
  • SmallSEOTools Review
  • Undetectable AI Review
  • Wordvice Review
  • Best Grammar Checker
  • Ginger Software Review
  • GrammarCheck Review
  • Grammarly Grammar Checker Review
  • Grammar.com Review
  • JSpell Checker Review
  • LanguageTool Review
  • ProWritingAid Review
  • Quillbot Grammar Checker Review
  • Reverso Review
  • Sapling Review
  • Scribbr Grammar Checker Review
  • SpellCheckPlus Review
  • Writer.com Grammar Checker Review
  • Ginger vs ProWritingAid
  • ProWritingAid vs Quillbot
  • Grammarly vs Ginger
  • Languagetool vs Prowritingaid
  • ProWritingAid vs Grammarly
  • Languagetool vs Grammarly
  • Best Citation Generator
  • BibGuru Review
  • BibMe Review
  • CitationMachine Review
  • CiteThisForMe Review
  • EasyBib Review
  • MyBib Review
  • TypeSet (SciSpace) Review
  • EasyBib vs CitationMachine
  • Easybib Coupons
  • AI Writing Guides
  • AI Detection Guides
  • Citation Guides
  • Grammar Guides
  • Paraphrasing Guides
  • Plagiarism Guides
  • Summary Writing Guides
  • Python Homework Help Websites
  • AllAssignmentHelp Review
  • Assignmentcore Review
  • AssignmentOverflow Review
  • CallTutors Review
  • CodersArts Review
  • CodingHomeworkHelp Review
  • CodingZap Review
  • CWassignments Review
  • DoMyAssignments Review
  • DoMyCoding Review
  • DoMyHomework123 Review
  • FavTutor Review
  • GeeksProgramming Review
  • GlobalAssignmentHelp Review
  • HomeworkforYou Review
  • HomeworkHelpOnline Review
  • MyCodingPal Review
  • MyHomeworkDone Review
  • ProgrammingAssignment Review
  • Tutorbin Review
  • Python Guides
  • Javascript Guides
  • HTML Guides
  • Java Guides
  • Matlab Guides
  • Machine Learning Guides
  • Bug Tracking Tools
  • Best Free Coding Bootcamps
  • Statistics Homework Help Sites
  • Best Coding Challenge Websites
  • CameraMath Review

Desmos Review

  • Mathpapa Review

Mathway Review

  • Microsoft Math Solver Review

Most Popular

12 days ago

10 days ago

The Ballad of Songbirds And Snakes Summary

How to find circumference when given radius, why teens should not be allowed to play violent video games essay sample, example.

Admin

Times when children would spend their entire free time playing with peers in the streets have mostly gone. Modern children and teenagers prefer calmer forms of entertainment, such as watching television, or in a large degree, playing video games. Although video games can contribute to a child’s development, many of them, unfortunately, are extremely violent. Moreover, games propagating murder and violence, such as Mortal Kombat, Outlast, Grand Theft Auto, and so on, are popular and are being advertised everywhere, making teenagers willing to play them; the fact that they are marked by the ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board) does not help much. However, considering the nature of such games, they should not be allowed for teens to play.

For the human brain, there is no big difference between a real-life situation, and an imaginary one; this is why we get upset even if we think about something unpleasant. For children and teens, who usually have a rich imagination, everything is even more intense. Virtual experiences for them may feel as real as daily life; this happens due to advanced technologies, making computer graphics look extremely close to reality, and also because players take a first-person role in the killing process (often with the view “from a character’s eyes”). If they would passively watch a violent game, it would make less harm than acting as a character who makes progress through a plot by murdering people and destroying what is in the character’s path. This situation is negative, as a child’s or teen’s brain forms new connections every day—they actually learn and memorize what is going on in their favorite games ( HuffingtonPost ).

Moreover, violent games directly reward violent behavior; many modern games do not simply make make players kill virtual reality characters of other players online, but also grant them with scores (experience) or points for successful acts of violence. These points are usually spent on making a player’s character even more efficient in killing, unlocking new cruel ways of murdering, and so on. Sometimes, players will be even praised directly, verbally; for example, in many online shooters, after conducting a killing, players hear phrases like “Nice shot!” encouraging further violence. This is much worse than watching TV, as TV programs do not offer a reward directly tied to the viewer’s behavior, and do not praise viewers for doing something anti-social ( ITHP ).

According the American Psychological Association, violent video games increase children’s aggression. Dr. Phil McGraw explains, “The number one negative effect is they tend to inappropriately resolve anxiety by externalizing it. So when kids have anxiety, which they do, instead of soothing themselves, calming themselves, talking about it, expressing it to someone, or even expressing it emotionally by crying, they tend to externalize it. They can attack something, they can kick a wall, they can be mean to a dog or a pet.” Additionally, there’s an increased frequency of violent responses from children who play these kinds of video games ( Roanna Cooper ).

Unfortunately, many modern games incorporate violence. Having youth play these video games are dangerous, as teenagers and children usually take a first person role in the killing process, and even get rewarded or praised for doing so. According to numerous studies, this leads to an increase of aggression in them.

John, Laura St. “8 Ways Violent Games Are Bad for Your Kids.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

“The Effects of Violent Video Games. Do They Affect Our Behavior?” ITHP. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

“Children and Violent Video Games.” Dr. Phil.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

Follow us on Reddit for more insights and updates.

Comments (0)

Welcome to A*Help comments!

We’re all about debate and discussion at A*Help.

We value the diverse opinions of users, so you may find points of view that you don’t agree with. And that’s cool. However, there are certain things we’re not OK with: attempts to manipulate our data in any way, for example, or the posting of discriminative, offensive, hateful, or disparaging material.

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

More from Best Persuasive Essay Examples

Outdoor activities

May 28 2023

How does outdoor exercises impact our health and well-being? Essay Sample, Example

Screen time limits

Should Screen Time Be Limited? Essay Sample, Example

Video games for the brain

Why Video Games are Good for the Brain. Essay Sample, Example

Related writing guides, writing a persuasive essay.

Remember Me

What is your profession ? Student Teacher Writer Other

Forgotten Password?

Username or Email

Home / Essay Samples / Entertainment / Video Games

Video Games and Violence Relation

Essay details

Information Science and Technology , Social Issues , Entertainment

Impact of Technology

Impact of Video Games , Video Game Violence , Video Games

  • Words: 920 (2 pages)

Please note! This essay has been submitted by a student.

Get quality help now

video games encourage violence essay

writer-Justin

Verified writer

Proficient in: Impact of Technology

video games encourage violence essay

+ 75 relevant experts are online

More Video Games Related Essays

The journey to video game popularity is a blend of art, science, and culture. Engaging gameplay, compelling storytelling, innovative technology, effective marketing, cultural relevance, and community engagement collectively ...

"The Last of Us," developed by Naughty Dog and released in 2013, stands as a landmark achievement in the world of video games. While the gaming industry has often been associated with action-packed adventures and immersive ...

Through an interactive on-line gaming module, the Mini Sims game allowed me to take on the role of a marketing decision maker. I had the opportunity to virtually make decisions to create a backpack that would be practical for a ...

As the modern technology grows, computers and the internet begin to occupy a major portion of the lives of students; moreover, a new sport, namely the electronic sport, has gradually emerged among contemporary youths, and become ...

These days, video games have become a very common form of entertainment, with 2471 million (Statista 2019) active video gamers worldwide. Children, adolescents, and adults today spend a great deal of time playing various types ...

The impact of personalized gaming characters in aggressive video games on aggressive behavior has been affecting the teens. Ongoing improvement in computer games is that players can plan and customize their very own in-diversion ...

World is not so much a game as a cultural asset. Half the time you need to spend in the menu, looking at the pictograms invented 15 years ago, and for every mistake you hit by a scaled freight train. But criticizing the game for ...

Video games are now one of the largest forms of entertainment in the world. Because they are so popular, it’s no surprise to hear about them in the news from time to time. Most of this news, however, is about the negative ...

Every day, technology is becoming an integral part of human life. Advancements in technology have transformed almost every aspect of human life including the way people socialize, do business, move from one place to another, ...

apologies

This feature is still in progress, but don't worry – you can place an order for an essay with our expert writers

We use cookies to offer you the best experience. By continuing, we’ll assume you agree with our Cookies policy .

Choose your writer among 300 professionals!

You cannot copy content from our website. If you need this sample, insert an email and we'll deliver it to you.

Please, provide real email address.

This email is exists.

IMAGES

  1. Violence in Video Games Essay

    video games encourage violence essay

  2. Video Games And Violence Essay

    video games encourage violence essay

  3. ≫ Video Games Causing Violence is a Misconception Free Essay Sample on

    video games encourage violence essay

  4. Games and Violence Essay

    video games encourage violence essay

  5. Violence in Video Games Essay

    video games encourage violence essay

  6. 001 Violence In Video Games Essay Example ~ Thatsnotus

    video games encourage violence essay

VIDEO

  1. Video games cause violence

COMMENTS

  1. Do Video Games Promote Violence Essa…

    102 Citations 2353 Altmetric Metrics Abstract It is a widespread concern that violent video games promote aggression, reduce pro-social behaviour, increase …

  2. Do Video Games Promote Violence Essa…

    102 Citations 2353 Altmetric Metrics Abstract It is a widespread concern that violent video games promote aggression, reduce pro-social behaviour, increase …

  3. Violence in Video Games Essay

    February 13, 2024 by Prasanna Violence in Video Games Essay: Video games are online interactive, sometimes multiplayer games where people play for survival in the digital fantasy world. Many research articles state the positive and negative effects of playing video games.

  4. Do Violent Video Games Trigger Aggression?

    The meta-analysis does tie violent video games to a small increase in physical aggression among adolescents and preteens. Yet debate is by no means over. Whereas the analysis was undertaken...

  5. Violent video games and young people

    Blood and gore. Intense violence. Strong sexual content. Use of drugs. These are just a few of the phrases that the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) uses to describe the content of several games in the Grand Theft Auto series, one of the most popular video game series among teenagers.

  6. Pro and Con: Violent Video Games

    Exposure to violent video games is linked to lower empathy and decreased kindness. Video games that portray violence against women lead to more harmful attitudes and sexually violent actions towards women.

  7. Do Video Games Influence Violent Behavior?

    The authors reported three main findings: 1) participants who played one of violent video games would choose to punish their opponents with significantly more high-noise blasts than those who played the nonviolent games; 2) habitual exposure to violent media was associated with higher levels of recent violent behavior; and 3) interactive forms o...

  8. Does playing violent video games cause aggression? A longitudinal

    Jürgen Gallinat Molecular Psychiatry 24 , 1220-1234 ( 2019) Cite this article 538k Accesses 102 Citations 2353 Altmetric Metrics Abstract It is a widespread concern that violent video games...

  9. Do Video Games Cause Violence? 9 Pros and Cons

    Playing violent video games causes more aggression, bullying, and fighting. 60% of middle school boys and 40% of middle school girls who played at least one Mature-rated (M-rated) game hit or beat up someone, compared with 39% of boys and 14% of girls who did not play M-rated games. [ 2]

  10. The Relation of Violent Video Games to Adolescent Aggression: An

    The result showed that exposure to violent video games had a significant effect on aggression (c 1 = 0.24, t = 6.13, p < 0.001), while the effect of family environment × exposure to violent video games on aggression was not significant (c 3 = 0.05, t = −1.31, p = 0.19), indicating that the relationship between exposure to violent video games ...

  11. The evidence that video game violence leads to real-world aggression

    The Dartmouth analysis drew on 24 studies involving more than 17,000 participants and found that "playing violent video games is associated with increases in physical aggression over time in children and teens," according to a Dartmouth press release describing the study, which was published Oct. 1, 2018, in the Proceedings of the National Acade...

  12. PDF Violent Video Games and Aggressive Behavior: What, If Any, Is the

    Their research article "Violent Video Game Effects on Aggression, Empathy, and Prosocial Behavior in Eastern and Western Countries: A Meta-Analytic Review" demonstrates that the period spent on playing video games is a leading factor in aggressive behavior (Sandra et al. 2017). They use the meta-analytic procedures as their primary approach.

  13. Analysis: Why it's time to stop blaming video games for real-world violence

    Analysis: Why it's time to stop blaming video games for real-world violence. In the wake of the El Paso shooting on Aug. 3 that left 21 dead and dozens injured, a familiar trope has reemerged ...

  14. Video Games and Violent Behavior Essay (Critical Writing)

    The video game Goldeneye 007 is one of the current video games depicting violence. In the game, the bad characters who are killed do not disappear but rather conduct some maneuvers after their death. It is a shooting video game and involves performing different maneuvers depending on where the character has been shot.

  15. Do video games encourage violent acts?

    The NRA's chief executive Wayne LaPierre once called video games a "callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells and stows violence against its own people". Even if they don ...

  16. Violent Video Games and Aggression

    Violent video games are designed to encourage players to harm other characters. Meta-analytic studies conducted since 2000 have shown that VVGs can lead to increased aggressive tendencies. Excessive violent media can lead to four primary effects; aggressive effect, victim effect, bystander effect, and appetite effect.

  17. Videogames, Violence, and Vulgarity

    Many people believe that video games contain obscene content, cause mental and physical health problems, and lead to violence. The first reason video games are an issue is that many video games made today possess content that many people would consider to be obscene. The term obscene covers violence, profanity, and sexual images (obviously).

  18. 60 Violent Video Games Essay Topics and Ideas

    Video Games and Violence in Children. There have been arguments that such behavior is as a result of a pre-disposition to violence in the media as well as in video games. Everyone is however in agreement that the violent video games are in compromise of morals and expose the young kids to in appropriate content. We will write.

  19. Do Video Games Promote Violence? Answered by Research

    April 21, 2021 Do Video Games Promote Violence? Answered by Research There is a lot of debate about whether video games promote violence or not. Many experts believe that video games that encourage violence bring out violent tendencies in gamers. However, research has a clear answer. Several studies have shown that video games increase aggression.

  20. APA reaffirms position on violent video games and violent behavior

    Based on a review of the current literature, the new task force report (PDF, 285KB) reaffirms that there is a small, reliable association between violent video game use and aggressive outcomes, such as yelling and pushing. However, these research findings are difficult to extend to more violent outcomes. These findings mirror those of an APA ...

  21. Playing video games doesn't lead to violent behaviour, study shows

    Alex Hern. Video games do not lead to violence or aggression, according to a reanalysis of data gathered from more than 21,000 young people around the world. The researchers, led by Aaron Drummond ...

  22. Do Video Games Promote Violence Essay

    747 Words3 Pages Do Video Games Promote Violence? Does virtual violence lead to actual violence? As we all know at this age of sophisticated technology and information, children are more exposed to video gaming compared to the past decades. As a result, video gaming industry has gained tremendous growth since coming into the market in the 1980s.

  23. Violent Video Games: Persuasive Essay

    Although video games can contribute to a child's development, many of them, unfortunately, are extremely violent. Moreover, games propagating murder and violence, such as Mortal Kombat, Outlast, Grand Theft Auto, and so on, are popular and are being advertised everywhere, making teenagers willing to play them; the fact that they are marked by ...

  24. Video Games And Violence Relation

    'Violent video games such as Doom, Call of Duty, and Grand Theft Auto (shortened to GTA) are often pointed at as the source for acts of aggression. Since 1976 with "Death Race", a game based on the cult movie "Death Race 2000", many controversies surrounding violence in video games have risen across the news.

  25. Video Games Don't Cause Violence Essay

    Jenkins, Henry. "Reality Bytes: Eight Myths About Video Games Debunked ." PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 2005, www.pbs.org/kcts/videogamerevolution/impact/myths.html. "Violent Video Games May Serve as an Outlet for Aggression, Not a Precursor, Says Virginia Tech Expert."