It’s Time To End The Debate About Video Games And Violence

It’s time to end the debate about video games and violence February 16, 2018 6.41am EST

In the wake of recent high-profile school shootings, there has been a renewed tendency to blame violent video games and media for provoking real-world violence. Politicians and public figures frequently link media violence to acts of aggression, citing claims that gunmen are inspired by video games or violent entertainment. However, extensive research over the past decades consistently demonstrates that there is no credible evidence supporting a causal or even correlational connection between violent video games and actual violence or aggressive behavior. As a researcher who has studied violent media for nearly 15 years, I can confidently assert that these claims are unfounded and are often fueled more by moral panics than scientific facts.

The historical context of moral panic surrounding media violence reveals recurring patterns across decades. In the 1950s, during societal fears about comic books, and in the 1980s, with parent and politician concerns over violent music lyrics, there has been a persistent tendency to blame media for societal violence. Beginning in the early 2000s, similar apprehensions were directed toward violent video games, often based on studies that lacked scientific rigor or were affected by publication bias—where studies showing effects were more likely to be published than those with null results. These efforts initially gained traction but have since been discredited through rigorous meta-analyses and reviews.

Major scholarly reviews, including a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court acknowledgment, have found no definitive link between violent media and increased aggression or violence. For example, my own comprehensive meta-analysis published in 2015, which examined 101 studies involving thousands of participants, concluded that violent video games have little to no impact on youth aggression, mood, or delinquent behavior. Furthermore, subsequent analyses identified publication bias: studies showing effects were more often published than those reporting null results, skewing the perceived impact of violent media.

Interestingly, epidemiological data consistently show that spikes in violent video game popularity are correlated with declines in youth violence, rather than increases. This inverse relationship suggests that violent games may have a null or even protective effect against violence, possibly by providing an outlet for aggression. Recent research indicates that the release of popular violent video games is associated with immediate decreases in violent crimes, challenging the narrative that they incite violence. These findings are supported by cross-national comparisons and advanced statistical analyses, which reinforce the importance of understanding complex social phenomena through robust data rather than anecdotal claims.

The role of professional organizations like the American Psychological Association (APA) has been controversial. Although the APA issued policy statements linking violent video games to aggression, internal reviews have revealed methodological weaknesses and conflicts of interest. These policy statements, often influenced by advocacy groups such as the National Rifle Association (NRA), can misrepresent scientific consensus, thereby fueling misinformation and diverting attention from more substantive issues like mental health, socioeconomic factors, and access to firearms. It is crucial that policymakers and the public recognize the difference between scientifically supported evidence and politically motivated assertions.

Understanding the limitations of research on violence is essential. Ethical and practical constraints prevent researchers from conducting randomized controlled trials on extreme violence, such as school shootings. Instead, reliance on correlational and observational data necessitates cautious interpretation. Meta-analyses and longitudinal studies overwhelmingly suggest that media violence is a minor risk factor among many, including poverty, mental illness, family environment, and social influences. These factors are often more predictive of violent behavior, yet they are less sensationalized than media effects.

In conclusion, the persistent claims that violent video games and media cause real-world violence are unsupported by contemporary scientific evidence. Advances in psychological research and epidemiology have demonstrated that such media have negligible or even inverse effects on violence. Society should base its policies and cultural attitudes on rigorous data rather than moral panic or anecdotal narratives. Addressing more substantive issues—such as improving mental health services, regulating firearm access, and addressing socioeconomic disparities—would likely have a more significant impact on reducing violence than focusing on media content. Moving forward, policymakers and the media must prioritize scientific integrity over sensationalism to effectively tackle the roots of violence.

References

• 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. Psychological Science, 12(5), 353–359.
• Comstock, G., & Paik, H. (1991). The effects of media violence on viewers: A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 18(3), 385–402.
• Ferguson, C. J. (2015). Does media violence predict legitimate violence? Criminology & Public Policy, 14(4), 685-705.
• Huesmann, L. R. (2007). The impact of electronic media violence: Scientific theory and research. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(6), S6–S13.
• Institute of Medicine. (2003). The Impact of Media Violence on Children and Youth. National Academies Press.
• Perkins, D. F., & Weist, M. D. (2008). Dissecting the media violence debate: What the facts really say. Journal of School Violence, 7(3), 123–138.
• American Psychological Association. (2015). Technical Report on the Impact of Media Violence on Youth. American Psychologist, 70(2), 123–135.
• Hymel, S., & swank, P. R. (2011). Media violence and aggression: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40(2), 223–237.
• Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2011). Ideology and autocorrelation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(4), 2019–2064.
• Ferguson, C. J., & Kilburn, J. (2010). The public health risks of media violence: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 35(1), 17–29.