The following video, detailing various tests, attempts to answer the hotly contested question. ..
Violent Video Games Reduce Brain Response to Violence and Increase Aggressive Behavior, University of Missouri Study Finds from MU News Bureau on Vimeo.
Upon first viewing, I was ready to go “well, this is certainly bullsh*t” after the first ten second alone. It’s a fact: scientists have yet to establish a definitive correlation between violent video games and violent behavior. The fact that there’s even a test to begin with somewhat validates this, otherwise, why have tests in the first place?
Anyhow, the basic question being posed is if violent video games makes players less responsive to violence, and perhaps even violent themselves? The first part is a logical assumption, but still not enough to establish a link to conclusion, and the tests that are conducted do little to provide insight imho. In particular is the one in which two subjects are pitted against each other, with the loser being more aggressive when the winner blew a sound in their ear. Simply put, aggression does not inherently lead to violence.
True, one can lead to the other, but they’re still very separate. Hell, the rise in aggression could also be a defense mechanism. And true, being defensive can lead to violence… which in turn asks us to then quantify and categorize different degrees and shades of violence. Which all of these kinds of tests are too chicken to attempt.
Also, by that virtue, shouldn’t a person who is desensitized due to violent video games be less responsive to provocation? After all, isn’t it supposed to take them more to get their blood boiling? Point being, the test above do little to actually address the problem… because in their defense, it’s difficult to really pin down, let alone completely articulate.
I have a pal whose a cop, and he is witness the most heinous things imaginable… to the point that stuff that would make anyone else seriously pass out has zero effect on the guy. Does that increase the chance of him adopting behavior that leads to actions whose results he constantly encounter? Of course not, that's ridiculous.
Thankfully the person who was driving these tests, the associate professor of psychology at the University of Missouri, Bruce Bartholow, came to the logical conclusion that no correlation can be established due to various outside factors. Which to be honest, should be readily apparent to almost anyone, though I guess these tests hopefully drove that message home to those who still don’t understand, questionable reasoning behind said tests not withstanding.