Print 59 comment(s) - last by RallyMaster.. on Dec 8 at 2:05 AM

Functional MRI study of Counting Interference Task - violent and non-violent game players

Functional MRI study of Emotional Stroop Task - violent and non-violent game players

A participant goes in for a brain scan - Images courtesy RSNA

A doctor points out the differences between to two groups - Images courtesy RSNA
Playing Medal of Honor and Need for Speed yield differing effects on brain

A new study has found that adolescents who play violent video games may exhibit lingering effects on brain function, including increased activity in the region of the brain that governs emotional arousal and decreased activity in the brain's executive function, which is associated with control, focus and concentration. The findings were presented earlier this week at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA).


"Our study suggests that playing a certain type of violent video game may have different short-term effects on brain function than playing a nonviolent – but exciting – game," said Vincent P. Mathews, M.D., professor of radiology at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis. Co-authors to the study are Yang Wang, M.D., Andrew J. Kalnin, M.D., Kristine M. Mosier, D.M.D., Ph.D., David W. Dunn, M.D., and William G. Kronenberger, Ph.D.


Dr. Mathews and colleagues randomly assigned 44 adolescents to play either a violent video game (Medal of Honor: Frontline) or a nonviolent video game (Need for Speed: Underground) for 30 minutes. The researchers then used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study brain function during a series of tasks measuring inhibition and concentration. One test used emotional stimuli and one did not.


fMRI measures the tiny metabolic changes that occur when a part of the brain is active. These changes will appear as a brightly colored area on the MR image, indicating the part of the brain that is being used to process the task. The two groups did not differ in accuracy or reaction time for the tasks, but analysis of the fMRI data showed differences in brain activation.


Compared with the group that played the nonviolent game, the group that played the violent video game demonstrated less activation in the prefrontal portions of the brain, which are involved in inhibition, concentration and self-control, and more activation in the amygdala, which is involved in emotional arousal.


"During tasks requiring concentration and processing of emotional stimuli, the adolescents who had played the violent video game showed distinct differences in brain activation than the adolescents who played an equally exciting and fun – but nonviolent – game," Dr. Mathews said. "Because of random assignment, the most likely factor accounting for these differences would be the group to which the volunteers were assigned."


The researchers hope to conduct additional research on long-term effects of violent video game exposure and the impact of these brain functioning differences.


"Additional investigation of the reasons for and effects of this difference in brain functioning will be important targets for future study, but the current study showed that a difference between the groups does exist," Dr. Mathews said.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Violence only difference?
By jatm on 12/1/2006 9:36:53 AM , Rating: 5
So, have they really proved that violence in games affect the brain, or just that Need for Speed and Medal of Honor affect the brain in different ways?

The reasearch does not say that there can not be an effect from violent games, but also not that there is one unless they are able to rule out all other differences between the games as the cause for the differing results.

There is usually a significant difference in pace in racing games and FPS games that even if both are "exciting" could easily affect how you use your brain in order to play the two. The tasks you perform are only very shallowly similar in the two games.

An FPS game tends to be much more "reactive" than a racing game. You constantly scan the environment for threats and react to them as they appear. A racing game is all about learning the track and to keep the perfect line. About repeating the same pattern down to perfection.

This kind of research does not sound very scientific to me. It's just intended to "prove" a point.

RE: Violence only difference?
By Live on 12/1/2006 9:44:28 AM , Rating: 5
If they really wanted to make this comparison right they could just have made two mods of the same game. One which includes violence and one where you shot water or something. This comparison shows they don't understand games. FPS is all about being alert and always wondering who will pop out where. Many people including me get a sense of being "scared" when an enemy jumps out. but its not really that I am scared its more of a way of trying to react really fast to unexpected events. Driving games are not like that. they are much more about getting in the flow and if you are good you can do it without much attention eg "I know this course and this car so I basically know what to do and what will happen"

Interesting study, to bad they didn't ask a gamer first of what to compare.

RE: Violence only difference?
By 7DrFunk7 on 12/1/2006 9:52:36 AM , Rating: 3
There are different types of "Violent" video games. Grand Teft Auto is a much different game than Medal of Honor. There are also different types of "non-violent" games like Need for Speed and NBA 2k7. I want to also see some satistics on this experiment not a picture of one persons brain activity.

I think this project is just being used to sterotype all "Violent" video games are bad for you.

RE: Violence only difference?
By Christopher1 on 12/2/2006 7:54:28 AM , Rating: 2
I have to agree that they are stereotyping that all violent games are bad for you. Frankly, I will say it again, I play imported Japanese games where rape and torture are main themes, and I am not doing them in real life.

Time to realize that the real issue behind violence in society is children being beaten by their parents and other children in schools and at home.

RE: Violence only difference?
By Wwhat on 12/3/2006 1:22:05 AM , Rating: 2
The conclusion was:
the group that played the violent video game demonstrated less activation in the prefrontal portions of the brain, which are involved in inhibition, concentration and self-control, and more activation in the amygdala, which is involved in emotional arousal.

So what are you saying? having emotion is bad now? and inhibition is always good?
You might just as well conclude that this study says non-violent games are emotionally stifling and should be discouraged, also they aren't worth their money for they create no emotional response.

RE: Violence only difference?
By augiem on 12/4/2006 12:10:39 PM , Rating: 3
I don't see anywhere where the researchers make a moral judjement on either. This is research that is very interesting research. You could possibly find some similarities between the brain activity during certain types of games and their real-life counterpart activities. That would be the holy grail of the future of "realistic" games. How can we get your brain to react just like in real life? A lot of potential...

RE: Violence only difference?
By Firebat5 on 12/4/2006 4:46:13 PM , Rating: 2
While I agree there is a difference in the two styles of games, I would like to point out that there is a similar learning curve to FPS maps in multiplayer. Good players learn the maps and where the enemy is most likely to appear and at which time, best defensive/offensive locations, etc.

RE: Violence only difference?
By The Arete on 12/1/2006 9:47:18 AM , Rating: 4
I agree. This has the smell of bullshit.

Where's the constant. Aka the group of People who play neither?
Any one in any sort of science field would immediately see the problem with this type of test. It yields results, but the question still remains, what are those results, what do they mean, and how did they derive them.

No shit, that a game alters your state of mind. Driving for pete sake, alters your state of mind. Everything has an effect on it. And so, how do we know that the other gamers weren't effected in any way shape or form by the "non-violent" games.

I'd like to see a little more research and evidence before I made any conclusions on the effects of Violence in Videogames has.

RE: Violence only difference?
By vhx500 on 12/1/2006 12:44:34 PM , Rating: 3
I agree wholeheartedly. 44 adolescents? You call this a good sample size to draw their conclusions from? Give me a break.

RE: Violence only difference?
By Aikouka on 12/1/2006 10:33:10 AM , Rating: 2
Going off on what you said... while playing a FPS game, most tend to try to startle the user or simply being injected into a fast-paced situation. These require the fight-or-flight thinking that the doctors noticed that the CoD players showed after playing. Now, these reactions aren't necessarily caused by violence... they're caused by a sudden situation in which failure is imminent unless proper actions are taken. FPS games can take it to a higher level with sound effects such as bullets or rockets or whatever it might be.

Essentially, the adrenaline released during such a stimuli don't just magically disappear. It will still exist in your system for a little bit and that's what these doctor's observed.

RE: Violence only difference?
By jatm on 12/1/2006 6:17:37 PM , Rating: 2
That was exactly my point.

Did the differences really stem from the violence, or other differences.

I am pretty sure you could create a non-violent game that induces the same kind of fight-or-flight syndrome.

It's pretty easy to compare apples and oranges and come to the conclusion that they are different.

RE: Violence only difference?
By clayclws on 12/1/2006 12:06:50 PM , Rating: 2
So...Medal of Honour is "violent"...based on ESRB I guess. Maybe they should compare Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas and Winning Eleven 8. I think they would have the results turn the other way around. Meaning the "violent" GTA:SA will not have as much effect as WE8 since WE8 needs more response and reaction from the players.

Yeah, we can do our own study too. We named it "Violent games are not as brain damaging as non-violent ones" whereby we kill people in The Sims 2 (Violent) and then, we play FIFA World Cup 2006 (non-violent). There, our "scientific" conclusion based on our "selective" test scenarios.

RE: Violence only difference?
By Arnoox on 12/5/2006 2:55:11 AM , Rating: 2
Medal of Honor is about as violent as Call of Duty and that is about as violent as bowling...sheesh. How about if they compare a "normally" violent game like Dark Messiah or Manhunt with a game like MoH or CoD.

P.S. Playing Dark Messiah doesn't make me want to kill people with a sword/dagger/staff/a random object and see everything bloody, THAT i want to do in a GAME and actually, seeing blood in real-life makes me a bit sick.

P.S.S. Dark Messiah is labelled "18" for the blood/gore

P.S.S.S. I'm 14

RE: Violence only difference?
By Spartan Niner on 12/7/2006 11:47:04 AM , Rating: 2
Sure the prefrontal regions are less active in an FPS: the whole point of an FPS is to quickly and simultaneously identify and eliminate a threat which is why the amygdala is more activated (as expected with threat ID)

And of course the prefrontal regions are more active in a driving sim: you don't just "react" - you have to make judgment calls and interpret stimuli in a more detailed fashion to corner properly - in an FPS you don't have time to process - fire first, ask questions later!

The research seems to be perfectly valid at first glance, but does not detail if there are lingering effects and certainly doesn't imply that violent games are bad. More media spin on this.

Awesome Comments
By ThisSpaceForRent on 12/1/2006 2:13:30 PM , Rating: 1
I have to say this article has some of the best comments I've ever read.

I think that everyone will agree that all this study managed to prove was that it takes less "brain power" to play a racing game than a FPS. Anyone who has ever played one of the endurance races on Gran Tursimo will agree with me on this one. After about lap 10 you're not even thinking anymore. You've learned what buttons to push when, and the brain goes on auto-pilot. If you can find the person who plays a FPS like that, they are either a god, or just a free kill.

RE: Awesome Comments
By Dino1 on 12/2/06, Rating: -1
RE: Awesome Comments
By FITCamaro on 12/2/2006 8:49:31 AM , Rating: 5
I play violent video games and now I have the sudden urge to hurt you. Must be because of the games....

If violent video games caused people to be more violent, then all the "geeks" and "nerds" out there in high school would be picking fights with those who made fun of them. Because that is the biggest group that normally plays video games.

RE: Awesome Comments
By CrazyBernie on 12/2/2006 12:31:54 PM , Rating: 2
I wasn't going to make a comment on this thread, but...

That's an awesome blanket statement you just made... you must also think that all asians are really good at math, or that all african-americans like fried chicken and watermelon. Excuse those of us who are calling bullshit from looking at the facts, and pointing out the inconsistencies of an obviously biased research project.

RE: Awesome Comments
By Wwhat on 12/3/2006 1:07:24 AM , Rating: 2
Thinking is not your strong suit.

RE: Awesome Comments
By Yames on 12/4/2006 12:52:05 PM , Rating: 2
“Thinking is not your strong suit.”

Look at your original argument. You have the critical thinking skills of a 9th grader.

I love how many idiots are trying to make mute arguments against this study. First we are reading someone’s report on a study, not the actual study. This may well be a preliminary study to go further if the results were promising, which they appear to be.

Scientists also found out that...
By Hare on 12/1/2006 11:18:10 AM , Rating: 2
...watching Barney the Dinosaur made all the participants violant and showed activity in parts of the brain that were previously thought to be just static tissue without functionality.

I really wish they would have compared a game of say dodgeball and Unreal Tournament. Comparing racing and fps is just stupid. What's next. Looking at algebra calculations can affect your brains compared to watching a red balloon?

RE: Scientists also found out that...
By drebo on 12/1/2006 12:30:24 PM , Rating: 1
All this study shows is exactly what those who funded the study wanted it to show.

Might there be a correllation between violent behavior and excessive video gaming? Possibly...even probably.

But, that doesn't explain causation at all. Which spurred which? Does the individual play violent video games as an outlet for pent up aggression or is the aggression a result of video gaming? This study, and all others like it, address neither.

We can go on and on about how different stimuli affect the brain and draw all kinds of irrelevant conclusions. I'd venture to say that golfers suffer the same kind of rage when they miss a birdie putt as a thirteen year-old boy suffers when he misses a head-shot in Counterstrike and is instead gunned down. Does that mean that golfing is inherently bad because it excites players to anger?

If we believe what these scientists say, then the answer must be yes.

RE: Scientists also found out that...
By Hare on 12/1/2006 3:33:33 PM , Rating: 2
Might there be a correllation between violent behavior and excessive video gaming? Possibly...even probably.
Or maybe people who have a tendancy for aggressive behaviour like violent games? Causality is more than difficult to prove.

I have an academic degree, I enjoy martial arts and I would never in IRL attack someone. Even the thought makes me... I would rather run away.

RE: Scientists also found out that...
By Wwhat on 12/3/2006 1:05:48 AM , Rating: 2
Well now you guy are arguing the one thing that was fair in this study, they didn't use 'violent-game players' but a random selection.

Uh huh
By KenGoding on 12/1/2006 9:35:56 AM , Rating: 2
This is one of those times when I just want to say "Duh!"

RE: Uh huh
By KaiserCSS on 12/1/2006 9:43:20 AM , Rating: 2
A recent study also shows that the brain functionality of those who study brain functionality is quite bizarre when compared to that of a veterinarian's.

I believe the same concept applies in this situation.

RE: Uh huh
By leidegre on 12/1/2006 9:51:00 AM , Rating: 2
The extent of this study is too small and too narrow minded to draw any conclusions from, but there is some truth to it.

They should factor in that people play these games about 8h straight on, and the also games like Medal Honor isn't that violent compared to other games. The study says "shoort-term" effects as well, which doesn't bother me that much either.

I myself find little satisfaction in these types of games, but one every now and then it's fun to blow things up! Keep at it, but do otherthings as well, that's my tip.

So, what are they trying to prove?
By Wolfstan on 12/1/2006 10:09:02 AM , Rating: 2
Of course, it doesn't seem like they're out to say "video games r bad," but I wonder how the general public is going to interpret this study?

By Transcendental Ego on 12/1/2006 10:30:03 AM , Rating: 3
I agree with you there; I also did not see anything threatening in this article. It was a small study and the only conclusion was there are short-term effects. But remember, it does not help the cause if every time it is hinted that video games cause violence you get up in arms and try to kill the “insolent” person who said it.

This is repulsively biased reporting
By nrb on 12/1/2006 10:20:07 AM , Rating: 2
How do they determine that it is the presence or absence of violence that causes the difference in brain activity between those two games? Answer: they can't. The study is useless.

However, even worse than that is the way that DT has reported this.
Our study suggests that playing a certain type of violent video game may have different short-term effects on brain function than playing a nonviolent – but exciting – game
How on Earth do you get from "short-term" effects to the "lasting effects" you so alarmingly scream about in the headline? You're simply inventing news to suit your own agenda.

By Marcus Yam on 12/1/2006 10:59:58 AM , Rating: 2
Hmm, I see your point (along with galloping wild horses). Changed the title.

Test TV and movies
By Hakuryu on 12/1/2006 2:02:49 PM , Rating: 2
As a gamer reading this article, it is clear to me that they want to show a bad reaction to violent video games.

Why not test something that is viewed daily by much more of the population- movies and TV. I'm sure if they tested 1000 people who watched Bambi and the Terminator, that the Terminator crowd would show results that the movie industry would try to squelch or discredit.

In my opinion violent TV and movies are a much bigger threat to people then violent video games. Maybe it is possible that a format (games) that has only been around 20 years or so is the cause of so much violence in the world, but more likely it is something that most people see everyday (movies and TV).

RE: Test TV and movies
By Wwhat on 12/3/2006 1:15:53 AM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately the effect of tv and movies has been discredited already, for tens of years they put morals and basic right and wrong messages in tv-shows and movies, and what do the people do that saw those all their life? they support torture by their western government, and that's but one thing. (I don't expunge to try to avoid 'that' political discussion)
For me this sort of disproves the direct 1:1 effects of TV people.

Before you get your pantaloons in a bunch...
By bdunosk on 12/2/2006 10:19:51 AM , Rating: 2
Look, they said temporary first of all. Second, fMRI is basically telling you what areas of the brain are more metabolically active - different parts of your limbic system (part of the brain involved with emotion) *should* be more or less active based on the way something makes you feel. The same goes for performing different tasks; if the driving game is operated via a steering wheel and pedals, but the FPS is mouse and keyboard, you'd expect to see different motor neuron activity in the prefrontal gyrus. It's just cool that we can map this stuff with technology.

By BitJunkie on 12/2/2006 11:26:00 AM , Rating: 2

Driving involves some degree of control and precision, fragging stuff is probably less about control and more about reactions and strategic thinking, maybe emotional response is a byproduct of that type of game.

I'm a total layman, but intuitively I'd say the differnce has more to do with the way the brain is required to parse data than necessarily the method of input / output. You know right away that it "feels" different to be playing these games, these guys are just trying to find some scientific way of framing that.

Even better study...
By CrazyBernie on 12/2/2006 2:24:58 PM , Rating: 2
Study: Doing Something Other Than Sitting There Like A Vegetable Affects The Brain.


RE: Even better study...
By bigbrent88 on 12/2/2006 8:24:36 PM , Rating: 2
I just saw a report in my moms AARP magazine, it concluded that playing games like Half Life 2 or Medal of Honor for 10 days will improve concentration. Humm, dueling studies? I guess I am in a good spot then, I play Half Life 2 and Gran Tourismo so whichever is right I'll be ok part of the time.

Duh is right!
By AdamMcC on 12/3/2006 1:19:28 AM , Rating: 3
Don't you guys see it? What you're saying is exactly the point.

I myself am a gamer, I have been for years. I even specifically played Medal of Honor for about 4 years. However, I stopped about six months ago. Therefore, I'm not biased in any way. Been there, done that.

You chaps are saying that FPS games are about scanning and reaction, while racing games are about memorizing the environment and staying on course with it, and that naturally the brain waves are going to be different.

Well that's exactly the point. FPS games teach a person to emotionally scan and react to a situation. Thereby, the our brains learn to not focus. We looks at one base entrance, and another, and another, and look for vehicles, etc. We are not focused or concentrated on one goal. It's about reaction.

On the other hand, a racing game would teach a person to memorize the course of life, and stay on track with it. They know that taking a left turn means taking a left turn, and when it comes again, they know what to do. They stay on the road and focus on not crashing. There's great concentration and one-thought proccessing in a game like NFS.

Now I'm not saying that if someone taps a FPS player on the shoulder they whip out their glock and headshot him, I'm saying that's the way the brain will react on a much more minor scale. As someone way above me said, things that happen to the brain don't disappear, they leave a slight trace, and build.

Thereby, I see this research subject as a start. Not definative in any way. It's really quite a poor job, but there's nothing wrong with it, and as you can see, they don't claim on any details. Quit defending games just because you play them.

If you think this research is bull, then examine your reaction, those who named it so.

You saw it as a threat to you and what you do, so without further research yourself, you simply denounced it as true. Tell me if that doesn't mirror how one plays a FPS.

RE: Duh is right!
By L1NUXownz1fUR1337 on 12/4/2006 1:52:43 AM , Rating: 1
Is that you Dwayne Dibbley ?

Let's get back in...

New Study
By Vysion on 12/1/2006 5:53:06 PM , Rating: 3
Study: Non-Violent Games Affect Brains

By RandomFool on 12/1/2006 9:55:14 AM , Rating: 2
Of course inhibitions are trigger by racing games, people who just stomp on the gas aren't going to do very well. An FPS on the other hand is more about running around shooting anything that moves. I'd also like to know whether there was a mix of gamers and non-gamers included.

By hemmy on 12/1/2006 11:06:48 AM , Rating: 2
Violent video games only possibly lead to real violence when the player is truly mentally unstable in the first place

Violence makes you smarter
By jp7189 on 12/1/2006 11:23:13 AM , Rating: 2
I know this study is trying to prove the opposite, but doesn't it say the violent gamers used less of their brain in followup tests, and I quote "The two groups did not differ in accuracy or reaction time for the tasks".

Might that indicate the MOA group needed less concentration to provide the same results of the NFS group?


By JNo on 12/1/2006 11:24:51 AM , Rating: 2
...including increased activity in the region of the brain that governs emotional arousal and decreased activity in the brain's executive function, which is associated with control, focus and concentration.

I think it's fair to say that different activities, even different types of computer games, have an effect on the *pattern* of activity within the brain and this study shows it conclusively.

However, it could be read, that it seems to imply that FPS games produce loss of control, and induce an emotional rather than rational reaction. Our ids and egos rearing their ugly heads. So far so negative.

What it does *not* address, is that maybe it is necessary and healthy for humans to have periods of emotional 'outlet' or a relatively controlled 'loss-of-emotional-control'. Maybe violent FPS players stop their games and are more likely to chill out afterwards. Maybe people who don't play violent FPS games are more likely to argue and beat their wives/kids. I'm not saying there's enough evidence either way, I'm just saying maybe. I can tell you for certain that it's too insubstantial to draw conclusions or pass laws based on the study.

It is relatively well documented that after pornography was legalised in Holland, the incidence of rape decreased in a statistically significant fashion. Food for thought...

By LumbergTech on 12/1/2006 7:41:20 PM , Rating: 2
they always say or imply conclusions that simply cannot be reached from the information that they provide.....

and none of these studies seems to prove that these games can translate into someone shooting up their school etc..

and even then, maybe in a small percentage of people it would, but then we could say that about anything...

maybe when someone sees the color green they get violent thoughts..should we reduce the color green's visibility in our world because of that?

By roflskates on 12/2/2006 7:57:58 AM , Rating: 2
I don't buy this crap

By Wwhat on 12/3/2006 1:30:28 AM , Rating: 2
It would be interesting if they, while they were at it, added a group that played WoW, that game has the weirdest effect on people I find.
Plus it's attractive to a range of people that had either a previous interest in 'non-violent' as well as 'violent' games.

damn. . .
By pitchblende on 12/3/2006 4:24:10 AM , Rating: 2
Damn-- the comments are better than the article!

Perhaps playing violent video games increases critical thinking skills? (Assuming that most of the people on this thread are gamers). This calls for a new study.

We know better
By marcusDOS on 12/5/2006 11:02:00 AM , Rating: 2
By jatm
So, have they really proved that violence in games affect the brain, or just that Need for Speed and Medal of Honor affect the brain in different ways?

By Live
If they really wanted to make this comparison right they could just have made two mods of the same game. One which includes violence and one where ...

I'm amaze with the quick respond with the public generation of this topic. which the reaction and answers are more accurate than the news itself. I agreed with this 2 gentleman's and I want to tell everyone to stand up and speak for our selfs, as we are our own results. people of another generation needs to stop blaming games and other factors which brings us joy, on our Actions(this case, Violence). We the "Players Know better" and I like how we prove this people wrong, keep the good Post up, and only we can stand up for our selfs.

By Randum on 12/5/2006 5:40:34 PM , Rating: 2
What a waste of time and money

Poor game comparison
By Screwballl on 12/6/2006 2:19:01 PM , Rating: 2
Rather than have an Apples to Oranges comparison, they should have compared something like WoW (World of Warcraft) to RoN (Rise of Nations) that use similar styles but one uses fantasy creatures and the other displays people and blood. If they want similar games to this study, compare the functions used with say Need For Speed: Underground with Grand Theft Auto.

By RallyMaster on 12/8/2006 2:05:16 AM , Rating: 2
can't trust those people from IU. Purdue needs to run its own study. IU only ran it because the clan members on their IUE5 Counter-Strike Server always get their a$$es handed to them by Purdue students such as myself...

By NotAok on 12/1/2006 4:59:03 PM , Rating: 1
These studies are getting more and more ridiculous. We've had more wars, crime, and brutal activity in the past when there were no video games. Now whenever someone as much as robs a store these "specialists" want to blame games. I wish they'd spend their time on something that actually mattered.

Cargo science
By oTAL on 12/2/2006 1:38:17 AM , Rating: 1
Richard Feynman called it best... cargo cult science! Looks like science... sounds, smells and tastes like science, for the untrained eye. But if you look through the curtain it is nothing more than bulshit. Search about Feynman and cargo cult science and you'll find an interesting read ;).

One of my favourite quotes that defines the internet era:
"Enough research tends to support your theory."

A better test.
By CBone on 12/3/2006 11:17:21 AM , Rating: 1
This study is worthless.
A better test would be a NERF style Total Conversion of a FPS that removed violent effects and environments vs.the unconverted version. Same levels, same gameplay, same mechanics. That would tell something scientifically useful.
Serious Sam with instagibs vs. Serious Sam w/ Dodgeballs (PWNT!) on a level without violent imagery and measure the differences.

Can you say JUNK SCIENCE?
By gunwilltravel3164 on 12/4/2006 7:37:19 PM , Rating: 1
It is an embarrassment to science that people are doing such sloppy work. No wonder the public distrusts scientific research; you can always find somebody to slap together a study purporting to prove whatever premise they want proven.

How about a study that shows the effect on test results of research grants from different entities?

Got I hate these studies
By edge929 on 12/1/06, Rating: 0
Why do I think it won't make any difference...
By cornfedone on 12/2/06, Rating: -1
By sscilli on 12/2/2006 3:49:30 PM , Rating: 2
Constantly being in a violent environment, and playing a violent video game are very different things. If your a soldier at war you are witnessing real life violence and are unable to get away from it. With a video game it's fake. When I kill someone in CS I know I didn't actually kill them, I just beat them at the game. And when I'm done playing I may remove myself to an environment of my choosing. And by the way what are your sources for the negative impacts these games have on MOST poeple.

"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki