Comments on: Vids

By: Eric

Eric — Mon, 01 Aug 2005 23:33:53 +0000

Computer Scientists ALSO get a little touchy about this subject, because they were actually those kids who were playing the video games. They are also the people who now run the world’s information networks, the ones who design all of your nifty gadgets. So just because you’ve read (from the sounds of it) quite a few books on the subject, don’t pretend to know what actually happens to someone who is playing those types of games, unless you yourself have stayed up until 3 AM with an incredibly compelling game.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 01 Aug 2005 13:57:18 +0000

I’ve heard of that book. I’m suspicious of anyone who interprets a causal relationship between games and crime statistics though. WAAAY to many other factors to be considered. One thing I have always believed is that a hobby is a hobby. That is, a hobby’s value is simply the pleasure it brings. Usually, doing more of that hobby only gets you better at more of that hobby. More golf only makes you better at golf. It does not make you smarter or more educated or a better person. I’ve never understood, for example, why golf, football, baseball, and basketball have respect whereas video games do not. At a fundamental level, they are indistinguishable.

By: Jean

Jean — Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:34:10 +0000

Interesting…but wrong.

This articles flies in the face of decades of research documenting that videogames have negative effects on children and young adults.

The author makes connections between increases in video game playing and decreases in crime and increased SAT scores. Just because these things are co-occurring does not mean that there is a causal relationship. It’s far more likely that things like education reform, a re-norming of the SAT, and improved car security systems are the culprits of these changes, not the videogames.

Decades of research suggest that there is no cathartic effect of videogames (meaning that you “get your aggression out” while playing. Instead, research reliabily shows that children who play violent videogames are more aggressive with other children.

On the whole, high levels of videogame playing are associated with: decreased GPAs, less healthy peer relationships, and increased obesity. This research includes ALL videogames (including sports games) and a range of children and adolescents (meaning that this includes college students).

Any cognitive benefit that kids might take from the average videogame for sale on the market simply is not worth it, given the other issues involved.

For example, the Duke Nukem game requires players to strategically take over different “worlds.” Unfortuantely it also features naked prostitutes begging to be killed and moaning women encouraging Duke to take them to bed. It certainly doesn’t lay that out in the ratings.

Parents do need tools to help them, ratings are a good start (although it’s not always clear who does the ratings, how much is and should be included in them, and if their judgement should be trusted by parents). However, when stores sell videogames to underage kids and parents are faced with crap like this article, how on earth are they to make good decisions related to the issue? The government has a responsibility to give parents more tools and power to understand what their kids are up to and what it means.

Realistically, playing some videogames in fairly small doses is probably harmless for the average kid. However, if we can’t find a way to put parents in control…I say they’re just not worth it.

Anyway…I’ll get off my soapbox now…
Child Psychologists get touchy about stuff like this…