Before you read this article familiarise yourself with the debate of the effects of violent video games and the connection to outburst of rage leading to murders such as the Columbine High school massacre.
In recent studies of the effects of violent videogames on players, has seen the media being thrown in the middle as research shows the link between cause (media – violent videogames) and effect (desensitisation to violence) otherwise known as causality. Research such as Alfred Bandura’s Bobo doll , and Gerbner’s Cultivation Theory are some of the more popular research into this topic which suggest that the more exposed an individual is to violence the more desensitised they become thus an increase in the likelihood of future aggressive behaviour. However David Gauntlett explains, in “Ten things wrong with the ‘effects model’“that they are tackling the social problems backwards, suggesting they take a ‘Criminal Minds’ approach. Analysing social factors such as identity and background rather than “starting with the media and then trying to lasso connections” leaving room for inaccuracies. The view of mass media customers as inadequate and easily manipulated individuals coupled with studies conducted in unrealistically simulated surroundings, as well as the consideration of children more in terms of “what they cannot” than what they can, has created a statistics which paint a biased picture. However new studies are being conducted that asks the right questions from the start, rightfully rather assessing why than blaming the media. The research which can be found at:
Which suggests violence in videogames is only consistent in certain types of individuals specifically individuals with predisposition before they ever played the video game, so certain psychological profiles are more likely to be susceptible. Only by the analysis of these new studies can we really asses the role of the media and the affect it may have on its viewers.