Rebuttal Essay (First Draft) — Jon Gonzoph

Virtual Violence: Negative effects are not only unproven, but also roughly on par with playing a real game of football.

Due to the wide variety of contradicting sources and great controversy in the news media, it is conceivable for one who studies the effects of video game violence to come to the conclusion that it causes aggression. While it would be simple to write a rebuttal to this view using sources that do not support this theory, it would also be near pointless to do so – anyone who has any real support behind their belief would simply introduce a study to counter any of the conclusions I draw. Instead, I will proceed upon the hypothesis that video games do cause aggression, and defend against the common following argument that video games are causing definite harm. This also limits me to only the sources that do not directly refute that video games cause aggression. Despite this handicap, it is still evident that many of those studies suffer from a number of faults. There is little consensus on how long the increased aggression last, and if it will build up over time. These studies do not take into account at least one quite meaningful variable. Finally, there is nothing to explain why this increased aggression is more from video games is more of a danger than increased aggression from other media and activities.

The first important discrepancy between studies supporting violence in video games is their lack of agreement on the timeframe this aggression lasts. Many studies subscribe to the General Aggression Model (GAM), which states that in video game play that increases aggression in the short term will carry over and increase aggression on a longer timeframe. Some studies that use this interpretation this are the “Longer You Play” study by Christopher P. Barlett and the study of video game violence on German adolescents conducted by Muller and Krahe, though the former at least admits that more study is needed to conclusively prove this effect (Muller) (Barlett). Conveniently, Barlett and others followed this line of questioning and published a study titled “How long do the short-term violent video game effects last?” He tests for aggressive thoughts and feelings after playing a violent video game using the standard proven questionnaires, but also employs the hot sauce paradigm at either zero, five, or ten minutes after violent game play has ceased. The hot sauce paradigm is a test of aggressive behavior where a participant is informed that he is responsible for preparing a cup of hot chili sauce for another participant who does not like spicy foods; the level of aggression is measured by the type and amount of sauce given. After 10 minutes the measured levels of aggression spike sharply downward, indicating that the effects of video games only last this amount of time (Harris). While this does not completely disprove the GAM model, it casts doubt on studies with results that depend upon it, which greatly weakens support for the position that violence in video games causes significant effects.

Another point of contention that weakens these studies is that they do not control for all important variables. One of the most glaring examples of this is shown by Paul Adachi and Teena Willoughby, who conducted a two part study to test the effects of violence in a video game versus the effects of competitiveness, difficult, and pace of action.  The first part of the study found that both the violent action game and the nonviolent racing one produced an equal increase in aggression. The second study concluded that between four games, 2 violent and 2 nonviolent, the violent and nonviolent game that were judged to be more competitive showed a much greater increase in aggression than the two less competitive ones (Adachi). Though it may only be one variable, this is of paramount importance. If it is not violence in video games but rather competition that causes adverse effects, then any study that does not take this into account cannot give fully reliable conclusions.

A particularly determined individual may not be swayed by the above arguments. Regardless of the issues with the studies which find violence in video games produces a significant level of increased aggression, this individual may simply assume that more research could solve the problem. However, even if violence in video games is conclusively linked to an increase in aggression, one major problem still remains – a multitude of other things are also believed to increase aggression. Violence in television broadcasts has been linked to increase aggression for years, with many studies, such as one by Paul Haridakis, taking this for granted and instead trying to determine what causes the difference in aggression changes by examining the motivations and backgrounds of the participants (Haridakis). Playing sports has also been linked to increase aggression, as a study published in the Ovidius University Annals showed that 300 secondary school students who were involved in sports generally tested higher on aggression scales than 300 who were not (Arslan). One study even compared the level of aggression between those playing violent video games and those who ascribe to a traditional masculine ideology and found that both correlate with a higher level of aggression (Thomas). This means that just being exposed to the traditional gender roles has the chance to increase aggression, something that is nearly unavoidable. Despite this similarity in effect, many see sports and males conforming to traditional gender roles as healthy for children while simultaneously deriding television and video games for corrupting youth. And while it is certain that sports and television do produce a benefit, not much research has been done on what benefit video games produce. Without this additional research it is difficult to judge video games in relation the great number of other media and activities that also appear to cause increased aggression.

Clearly, even by only using sources that support an increase in aggression through video game use, the argument that video games cause significant harm is not very strong. There are few studies that prove to any extent that this aggression last longer than a very short time after play. Significant variables, such as the difficulty and competition inspired by the game, have not been taking into consideration when designing a majority of these studies. Further, there are a multitude of things that cause an increase in aggression, from sports to gender roles, and little evidence that increased aggression from video games causes any greater damage.

Works Cited

  1. Adachi, Paul J. C., and Teena Willoughby. “The Effect Of Video Game Competition And Violence On Aggressive Behavior: Which Characteristic Has The Greatest Influence?.” Psychology Of Violence 1.4 (2011): 259-274. PsycARTICLES. Web. 2 Apr. 2012.
  2. Arslan Fatma, et al. “The Study Of Aggression Level Of Secondary Students Who Play Sports And Do Not Play Sports.” Ovidius University Annals, Series Physical Education & Sport/Science, Movement & Health 9.2 (2009): 202-205. SPORTDiscus with Full Text. Web. 3 Apr. 2012.
  3. Barlett, Christopher P., Richard J. Harris, and Ross Baldassaro. “Longer You Play, The More Hostile You Feel: Examination Of First Person Shooter Video Games And Aggression During Video Game Play.” Aggressive Behavior 33.6 (2007): 486-497. Academic Search Premier. Web. 3 Apr. 2012
  4. Haridakis, Paul M. “Men, Women, And Televised Violence: Predicting Viewer Aggression In Male And Female Television Viewers.” Communication Quarterly 54.2 (2006): 227-255. Academic Search Premier. Web. 3 Apr. 2012.
  5. Harris, Richard, et al. “How Long Do The Short-Term Violent Video Game Effects Last?.” Aggressive Behavior 35.3 (2009): 225-236. Academic Search Premier. Web. 3 Apr. 2012.
  6.  Möller, Ingrid, and Barbara Krahé. “Exposure To Violent Video Games And Aggression In German Adolescents: A Longitudinal Analysis.” Aggressive Behavior 35.1 (2009): 75-89. Academic Search Premier. Web. 7 Mar. 2012.
  7. Thomas, Kimberly D., and Ronald F. Levant. “Does The Endorsement Of Traditional Masculinity Ideology Moderate The Relationship Between Exposure To Violent Video Games And Aggression?.” Journal Of Men’s Studies 20.1 (2012): 47-56. SPORTDiscus with Full Text. Web. 3 Apr. 2012.
This entry was posted in x Rebuttal Essay. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Rebuttal Essay (First Draft) — Jon Gonzoph

  1. Blueitem (Jon G.) says:

    Could you give me some feedback on this? I don’t really like my defintional essay, even if I rewrote it, so I’d prefer to rewrite this one instead.

  2. davidbdale says:

    I really appreciate the “even if you could prove it, it wouldn’t prove what you want it to prove” approach, John. Your tone is helpful, too, in establishing a low-investment evenhandedness on your part, very soothing to those who might resist if you came on too dogmatically.

    One point you should address is the blurriness of your claim that competitive sports cause aggression. At least as you relate the evidence, it could just as easily be interpreted to mean that aggressive kids take up competitive sports. In other words, you seem to mistake correlation with causation.

    I thought you missed an opportunity to attack the “TV causes aggression” study for its easy conclusions, but maybe your strategy is more subtle. You’re not attacking methodology or interim conclusions here: you’re letting the researchers draw their own inferences, then denying that they contribute to the BIG conclusion. It’s clever.

    Grade Recorded.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s