Video: Researcher Says Violent Games Can be Good for Kids

July 10, 2007 -
olson.jpgCould it be that violent video games actually have a positive effect on adolescents?

Possibly, according to a new study.

A TV news report highlights research done by Cheryl Olson, an Sc.D. at Massachusetts General Hospital. Olson, who surveyed more than 1,200 7th and 8th graders, said:
We found that most boys 12- to 14-years-old are playing mature-rated video games, so this idea that M-rated games cause shootings or major violence just doesn't hold water.

We don't know whether playing to get anger out is a good thing or a bad thing for any individual child, but we suspect that it might be healthy for a lot of kids.

Olson also credited playing video games as a social activity.
They're more likely to play with a group of friends in the same room or over the Internet, so this stereotype of a solitary violent gamer up in his room wasn't borne out, at least in our study.

[Video games are] not going to ruin them. They're not going to go out and pick up a gun. Violent video game play is typical and normal for kids nowadays. That doesn't mean that parents have to like it, but they shouldn't panic about it.

Olson's study was published in the Journal of Adolescent Health.

GP: We gave this study a mention a few days back, but Dr. Olson's comments provide some rather compelling additional context.

Comments

"We found that most boys 12- to 14-years-old are playing mature-rated video games, so this idea that M-rated games cause shootings or major violence just doesn’t hold water."

Lets edit that a bit, shall we?

"We found that most boys 12- to 14-years old are playing mature-rated video games because their parents are buying it for them, so this idea that M-rated games cause shootings or major violence just doesn't hold water."

There you go. Now thats a good statement.

I thank you for your work, I totally agree and know by first hand experiance that you guys know what your talking about. I'm a 16 year old teenager who plays games with all ages from (friends little brother) to 20 year olds and violent games are incorperated into all of these, the only time games are truely affecting a youth is when they are first exposed and may take their reaction a little overboard (that is to say pretending to shoot, or bopping somone over the head coppying something like tekken) but this is a very small child were talking about and they are socially supposed to copy what they see to learn from it. Any other age is fully aware of what reality is and how copying these violent games will have a negative outcome.

Kid is bored.

Scenario 1:
Kid plays video game to assuage his boredom. Kid becomes awesome at and becomes a pro "cyberathlete", makes bank, gets the house, the car, the girl, and retires happy.

Scenario 2:
Kid gets self into trouble to assuage his boredom. Kid falls in with the wrong crowd, becomes a meth addict, gets arrested for dealing, and ultimately gets "shanked" in prison, broke, single, and in meth withdrawal.

Games FTW!

Wonderful. And it couldn't come at a better time, what with this "Games are as addicting as heroin!" nonsense out there right now.

Oh sure. I might get irritable and edgy if I don't get to play games for a few days, but I've never gone into cold sweats...

take that, jack thompson..... lol


point set and match :)

Other than action or anti-hero violence like The Punisher, Grand Theft Auto series and the like. What about horror violence? I mean, the violence inside doesn't count, but what if the horror content scares the children and make them suffer sleepless nights unnecessarily? I know that some children have no fear for such content, but what if some of them are faint hearted?

I wonder in these aggression studies if they also add non-violent games to the mix to test as well. I don't feel more aggressive at all when I play Half-Life 2. But when I play Trauma Center for the Wii (in which you are doing the very opposite of harming people, I feel quite aggressive. But thats because the game is freaking HARD.

My point exactly. We don't need to keep violent games out of the hands of kids. What we need are parents who will teach thier kids good morals and get them psychological help if they need it. I'm sure this will go completely under the radar of those who twist medical research to try to bash violent games. I admire this woman's courage and I hope to see others like her speak out as well.

I love this woman.

@ Zippy

Maybe it was because I started beating the crap out of my bullies at school. Who knows?

Jack Thompson's nonsensical responce in 3, 2, 1

finally, someone in the medical field who isn't biased against video games

@ JC, I think the point is that this study shows a wider audience than us that videogames, even or perhaps especially violent ones, are a healthy part of adolescent life. NOTHING is healthy when done all day every day; even activities generally agreed to be healthy such as sports or reading must be moderated; and we've been saying all along that it is the role of parents to see that children get a variety of passtimes and none inappropriate for the individual child. There was never a chance of people misconstruing such a study as saying that all kids should play violent or mature-rated games. What we see in this is a reality check, a revelation that there is nothing innately harmful in violent games such that they need to be legally restricted from all minors. We WANT parents to step up and decide whether their child should play this game or that; we don't want out-of-touch politicians shoving their moral or political views on such games down the throats of an entire nation. This study and others like it can only bring good results, because they inform parents that there's nothing inherently bad about letting kids play video games in general or violent/mature ones in specific. This gives those trying to legislate video game violence no leg to stand upon. Whether parents choose to take an active role in moderating and understanding, even helping to select, their children's videogames and gameplay is nothing that can be siolved by any study, however, and there will always be parents who do a good job encouraging their kids to try a multitude of activities, parents who use media to babysit, and parents who give their kids whatever they ask for, amongst many types. This study won't change that, for better or worse, but maybe more like it can up the call for parents to do their jobs effectively and lower the rush to scapegoat video games in kids' problems.

Brokenscope
I think the point is games are relaxing,and male kids tend to need it other wise they hit things LOL
:P

Hmm, does this mean we are right again? WHat does this make now?

My estimates make this about 500-1* for us.
*There is an error of 1 point, see if you can find it.

I'm probably in the minority here. I can agree that it helps teens get rid of anger, but not the kids 12 and under.
I wouldn't consider gaming all day to be healthy for a child in the long run. They need some exercise or something else to do. If they get bored of those games, what would happen after they get tired of scoring headshots continuously in the game?
It may keep them out of trouble, but it can lead them to it if they don't interact physically with others for other social activities.
It is a healthy thing, when moderated...

I do like it though, that yet anothr researcher points out that this outcome is likely true, but I rather not have it misconstrued that all children should be allowed to play such games. It really needs to be up to the parents in the long run as no child is exactly alike to another.

This is certainly some reassuring news and I'm glad that there are studies out there being conducted by rational people rather than those with a knee jerk reaction and only a hearsay knowledge of gaming. It's a shame though that we might not hear this on the mainstream media, but we should definitely voice our opinion on this issue to help soldify that games do not create heathens, delinquents, terrorists, murderers, thieves or any other social misfit.

To add to the getting the rage out with games, it would work quite well though not so much if it was with an already infuriating game.

@Eville1

Don't give me the "back in my day" I played games on an old black and white lisa Mac, with a sub game and crystal quest. I played games on a ps2 running dos 5.5. I played track and field and contra on an NES. I was in the "old days"

I'm not really sure what connectivity had to do with my comment though. I was just stating that none of my relaxing activities help me deal with anger.

I also said I was skeptical, I didn't say that it was bullshit. I guess it just doesn't work for me.

Serrenity:
I find issue with that survey. The study says kids read an avg. of 8 minutes a day. How do you read for only 8 minutes? That average means nothing to me. I can't read for any less than an hour if I read at all. maybe it's just me.

Of course games causing violent crimes is nonsense, games help rid those emotions.

Brokenscope Says: Really? You don't get the anger part? How about this;

Back in my day there was no online connectivity. We had to sit there and play by ourselves, I used to play Marathon, I used to play punch out, I used to play a lot of games without anyone else around me.

There was a time where games exsisted without online play. I'd come home from a bad day at school and beat the crap out of Tyson for a few rounds and I did indeed feel better afterwards.

Games help me relieve stress, but if I'm really pissed of about something, none of my hobbies(Games, programming, shooting, reading, ect ect) do me a bit of good. My hobbies are relaxing but most of them require a focus I can't bring up when I'm really pissed of about something. I have to calm down and stop being angry before I can do anything to relieve stress.

At that point all I can really do is go and wear myself out running or going to the gym. Thankfully I almost never get that angry.

For those of you who are skeptical about a games ability to work out anger, I'm curious, what is your opinion of the $8 piece of nerf known as the Stress Ball?

That's a great way of putting it. Video games are a perfect social activity. A good friend of mine and i became good friends from playing San Andreas a lot.

A few headshots in game, it really reliefs anger. Better than doing it in real life.

@Terrible Tom
Here Here my good man.

It's pretty true. It's also a great place to hang out with people if theres no one around to just chill with. I've met a lot of awesome people, some of which I talk to outside the games. Playing games is just a great way to hang out with others, on and offline.

better to vent the anger out playing a game (doesn't even have to be violent, although the violent ones vent faster) rather than at a school with a gun...

ME = Vindicated once again!

While still a little narrow in scope, the researcher still points out that everyone is an individual and everyone reacts differently to various situations.

People need to realize that aggression isn't caused by what someone is exposed to. Aggression is the result of a complex mixture of emotions, personality, and life experiences that comes up when an individual is exposed to anything.

While it's true that the ability to interact (in a sport, a debate, a video game, etc) may increase anger, frustration, competitivness, and other emotions in a negative way for some individuals, it is also true that being able to interact may actually decrease some of those feelings (ie "blowing off steam") for other individuals. The same is true of non-interactive situations (reading a book, watching a movie/TV, being in an audience of a sport event or a heated debate, etc) as the lack of ability to interact may increase or decrease emotions.

And while studies may claim "Oh look, an increase in aggression!", they lack pointing out that the aggression may be all those other emotions, the ability or lack thereof to interact, and other factors.

This study simply shows that there are individuals who can receive a benefit from such interactivity. But it also admits that not everyone can. And that alone is good research. While it still doesn't represent the full spectrum of what individuals are exposed to, it still shows people that not everything and not everyone is "bad".

Nightwng2000
NW2K software

Could this be the start of experts finally getting the picture? Just a few people here and there saying that games are ok isn't enough yet, so I'm going to withold judgement on the matter until it's obviously a growing trend.

I agree with this statement because thats how it works for me. But I've never done any research on it. All I know is when I'm pissed and want to crack someone's skull Ill pop in God of War, GTA, Socom, Fight Night or something else violent to blow off some steam. Not to mention I'll enjoy a nice cold brew while I'm doing so.

While I agree with the social part I am rather skeptical of the getting anger out part.

I love this woman! Thank you, finally someone gets it and is actually willing to go against the grain and tell the rest of the people the truth. I mean usually when we hear something even remotely like this there is still some biting criticism about video games being too violent or some and damaging children despite not turning them into killers. But this finally just gets rid of all of the BS and tells the truth.

well it depends if you are good at the game or not, if you suck, you'll just get even more angry.

I'm not sure I believe that the violence in games serves as a genuine outlet for anger. A video game in general may be an outlet, but the violence itself has never influenced how I felt during or after play, which is the only thing I can base my opinions on since I'm not a researcher. Video game violence is so different from anything in real life that I can't draw any kind of emotional association, positive or negative.

What strikes me as the most positive thing about games is that they keep kids occupied and out of real-world mischief during their most psychologically challenging years. What I'm saying is based on nothing more than my own thoughts and teenage experiences, but for me the best thing about growing up with games is that they simply gave me something to do, and I was less tempted to put myself in harmful situations.

This isn't the first time we've seen results like this come out of research into violent games and children. But it is the first in a long time that has received any media attention; especially attention that doesn't seek to sensationalize or take the information out of context to twist the meaning. I hope this the start of a trend in researchers and the media toward seeing results as what they are, or could be on both sides of the coin, instead of just reading what they want to find, ie: Games make killers.

Boo-ya.

That's what we've been TRYING to tell you.

can i play bad games

I couldn't understand some parts of this article Video: Researcher Says Violent Games Can be Good for Kids, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonhttp://imgur.com/XzpWeWw here is the twiter exchange in question.10/19/2014 - 1:39pm
Andrew EisenI either don't remember or didn't see it. Still have a link?10/19/2014 - 1:38pm
Matthew Wilsonits the twiter exchange I linked too a few days ago.10/19/2014 - 1:29pm
Andrew EisenThat link doesn't work. Browsed the Twitter feed but couldn't find anything. Did find someone claiming a Gawker writer advocated bullying but didn't say who or where.10/19/2014 - 1:05pm
Neo_DrKefkaGawker loses advertiser MERCED ES https://mobile .twitter.com/TheRalphRetort/status/522813815260733441/photo/1 after Gawker writer advocates bullying of nerds with an anti Gamergate rant10/19/2014 - 12:32pm
Matthew Wilsonhttps://soundcloud.com/totalbiscuit/weaponised-charity a interesting audio log.10/19/2014 - 12:04pm
prh99Also there is no story in rational and respectful discussion (where you can find it).10/19/2014 - 10:44am
prh99Well they are probably doing it on Twitter and probably the GG hashtag so any voice reason gets drowned out by idiocy. Also it's far easier to broad brush a group.10/19/2014 - 10:41am
Wonderkarpdont fool yourself, Technogeek. Remember Mass Effect 3? How about the ferver against Phil Fish?10/19/2014 - 10:18am
MechaTama31None of which is the fault or responsibility of the people who are not trolling, harassing, threatening, doxxing, etc. So why is their opinion hostage to the people who are?10/19/2014 - 10:06am
TechnogeekIf the developer were male there wouldn't have been a "conversation" in the first place.10/19/2014 - 2:27am
Montetrolls are just at their absolute worst when it comes to women and feminist. You could bet good money that if the developer were male the trolls would be silent and the conversation would actually focus on the journalism.10/18/2014 - 9:18pm
MontePapa: Not the first time we've had a journalism scandals before, but the harassment never got close to this level; the difference with this scandal is that feminists are involved. Without the feminist angle, their would be A LOT less harrassment10/18/2014 - 9:15pm
Papa MidnightMonte: That's honestly rather short-sighted. As has been proven with other persons who have been targeted, if it wasn't Quinn, it would be someone else.10/18/2014 - 6:26pm
AvalongodI think that's part of what gives an esoteric news story like this real life...it taps into a larger narrative about misogyny in society outside of games.10/18/2014 - 3:29pm
Avalongod@Monte, well the trolls made death threats that came to police (and media attention). I think this is tapping into a larger issue outside of games about how women are treated in society (like all the "real rape" stuff during the last election)10/18/2014 - 3:28pm
WonderkarpZippy : Havent tried the PS4 controller. might later.10/18/2014 - 2:37pm
MonteSeirously, If Quinn was not involved and GG was instead about something like the Mordor Marketing contracts, the trolling would have never grown so vile and disgusting. There have been plenty of movements in the past that never sufferred from behavior..10/18/2014 - 1:57pm
MonteWe have seen scandel's before but the trolling has never been as vile as what we see with GG. Trolls usually have such a tiny voice you can barely notice them, but its like moths to a flame whenever femistist are involved.10/18/2014 - 1:53pm
ZippyDSMleeWonderkarp: You might be able to if you had a PS4 controller.10/18/2014 - 1:00pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician