What Extent Is A Programmer Who Helps Develop A Violent Vide

O What Extent Is A Programmer Who Helps Develop A Violent Video Game R

To what extent is a programmer who helps develop a violent video game responsible for any consequences of that game? Should children’s access to video games be restricted? If so, how and by whom? What about other groups in society, such as convicted criminals? Developing computer games require a high level of computer expertise and can be very lucrative. Is this really the best use of this intellectual resource? How could it be redirected to be “best FOR the world”?

Paper For Above instruction

The responsibility of programmers who develop violent video games is a complex and multifaceted ethical issue. While programmers do not typically have direct control over how their creations are used or consumed, their role in designing and developing such games does raise questions about personal accountability. To assess the extent of their responsibility, it is essential to understand the nature of their involvement and the broader societal implications of violent content in digital entertainment.

Programmers are creators of the technical framework of video games, meaning they design algorithms, mechanics, graphics, and interactive features. They contribute significantly to the immersive and engaging experience that makes violent video games appealing. However, the moral responsibility for the potential societal harm often lies not only with the programmers but also with game publishers, marketers, policymakers, and consumers. Historically, the responsibility has been diffuse; developers create the product, publishers finance and promote it, and consumers choose whether to engage with it.

Research exploring the impact of violent video games on behavior has yielded mixed results. Some studies suggest a correlation between violent gaming and increased aggression, especially in children and adolescents, while others argue there is no direct causal link. Nonetheless, given the potential for influence, many argue that programmers do bear some moral responsibility for how their work might impact vulnerable populations, particularly children. This scrutiny raises questions about whether access to violent games should be limited, especially for minors.

In terms of restricting access, various strategies have been proposed. Parental controls and age ratings, such as the ESRB rating system, are currently the primary means of regulating game exposure. Critics suggest that these measures are insufficient and advocate for stricter regulations or even outright bans on certain violent content. However, implementing such restrictions involves multiple stakeholders, including government regulators, industry bodies, and parents. The challenge lies in balancing artistic expression, individual rights, and societal protection.

Beyond children, other groups in society, notably convicted criminals, might be considered for controlled access to violent video games. The idea is that controlled exposure could potentially serve as a tool for rehabilitation or anger management, although empirical evidence for such benefits remains scarce. Ethical concerns arise regarding the potential reinforcement of violent tendencies or desensitization to violence if such games are used without adequate supervision.

The development of computer games is both a highly skilled and lucrative endeavor. Programmers often possess advanced technical expertise, and the industry can generate significant profits. However, this raises questions about the ethical use of intellectual resources. Is it justifiable to prioritize profitable and entertainment-focused game development over projects that could contribute positively to society? The ethical dilemma hinges on whether the societal harm associated with violent games outweighs their economic and artistic value.

Redirecting the intellectual resources involved in violent game development could take various forms. For instance, programmers and developers could focus on creating educational games, simulations for scientific research, or applications that promote social cohesion and mental well-being. Such shifts would transform the industry into a force for good, leveraging technical expertise to address societal challenges rather than exacerbating them. This transition requires policy changes, industry incentives, and collective societal will.

In conclusion, while programmers may not be solely responsible for the societal impact of violent video games, their role in creating these products does carry moral weight. Society must consider appropriate restrictions on access, especially for vulnerable groups like children and possibly offenders undergoing rehabilitation. Ultimately, redirecting technological expertise toward constructive and beneficial projects is crucial for ensuring that digital ingenuity is used to serve the greater good, fostering a healthier and more equitable society.

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.
  • Ferguson, C. J. (2015). Does media violence predict societal violence? It depends on what you look at and when. Journal of Communication, 65(1), E12–E20.
  • Gentile, D. A., & Anderson, C. A. (2003). Violent video games: The effects on children and adolescent health and behavior. In D. Chalmers (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Digital Violence.
  • Griffiths, M. (2010). The psychology of computer use: Research and practice. Influence of violent video games on children’s behavior.
  • Huesmann, L. R. (2007). The impact of electronic media violence. The Future of Children, 17(1), 17-31.
  • Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2009). Social consequences of the internet for adolescents: A decade of research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(1), 1-5.
  • Marsh, K. L., & Hansen, C. (2016). The ethics of video game development: Responsibility and societal impacts. Game Studies, 16(2).
  • Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2019). Violent video game engagement is not associated with aggression: A longitudinal study. Psychological Science, 30(5), 828-835.
  • Thornton, M., & Mehta, N. (2018). The role of industry regulation in violent game content. Journal of Media Ethics, 33(4), 213-226.
  • Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (2015). The social psychology of video games: A societal perspective. American Psychologist, 70(2), 89-102.

Related Assignments