Critical Thinking Paper Violent Behavior and Video Games

Introduction
Video games have become a major form of leisure activity played by all persons starting from teenage. While for some, they are harmless activities used as pastimes, they are considered a precursor for violent behavior for others. This has grown to be a major policy issue, especially in the US, where acts of violence, e.g., mass shootings, are a common social problem. In real-world settings, some have attached violent behavior with playing violent video games; however, it is also true that many play the same violent video games, and they still can't harm a fly.
This controversy is also evident in research findings where some argue violent video games cause violent behavior (Gentile, Bender & Anderson, 2017) while other research findings argue to the contrary (Cunningham, Engelstätter & Ward, 2016). Therefore, this paper takes a critical analysis of these two (Cunningham et al., 2016; Gentile et al., 2017) research findings that have divergent findings on the effect of violent video games on human behavior.
Analysis and comparison of the two papers
Cunningham et al. (2016) sought to determine the relationship between violent video games and violent behavior by conducting research that relied on real-world data. Using data on sales of video games considered violent and using crime as a form of violent behavior, the research tried to make the research reflective of real-world settings. The study involved comparing video game sales to report crime from official databases for the same period - 2005 to 2011.
The design and methodology adopted in this research were mainly done to avoid the settings dilemma in laboratory experiments where they do not reflect the real-world settings. From a methodological standpoint, it is obvious that this study method is limited. There was no way the researchers could control the other factors that affect criminal behavior in real-world settings. The study findings showed that an increase in video game sales didn't reflect an increase in crime; in any case, the analyzed data showed decreased reported crime.
The research by Gentile et al. (2017) similarly sought to determine the effect of playing violent video games on violent behavior. The research investigated the effects of violent video games on two physiological indicators of the fight-or-flight response (cardiovascular and cortisol changes) and the accessibility of aggressive thoughts among children.
The study utilized an explorative quantitative research design. Children participants were recruited randomly, and data was taken before and after playing a 25-minute video game that was either violent or non-violent. While this method allows for controlling some of the external factors that might affect the relationship between violent content in video games and human behavior, it completely does away with the real-world element.
Moreover, these findings are mainly short-term and might not be a true representation of what happens in the medium or long term, often when the relationship might manifest in real-world settings. The findings showed that violent video games increased cortisol and cardiovascular arousal more than other equally exciting but non-violent video games. Increased cortisol might elicit a fight-or-flight response in children, and thus, based on these findings, the researchers concluded that violent video games influence violent behavior.
Background and role of theories
The increase of violent video games triggered the controversy between violent video games and violent behavior played and children, and the increase of violent behavior by children, of a nature that depicts or mirrors the content in the violent video games being played, e.g., Sandy Hook School shooting which depicted violence in the Call of Duty games series (Markey, Markey & French, 2015).
A historical examination of the literature shows that this controversy was mainly brought about by the mainstream media that attributed the increased popularity of violent video games to increased homicide, and review of the literature shows that it goes as far back as to Columbine massacre of 1999 (American Psychological Association, 2015). The historical real-world observation that increases in violent video games coincided with increased homicide increased the controversy.
Theoretical models also take a social cognitive view of human aggression, advances in cognitive psychology, integrating social learning theory, script theory, biological influences, and developmental theories (Anderson, 2003). These theoretical models have increased the controversy mainly based on time of exposure, time after exposure, and the intensity of violence, which are described differently in these theories.
Review of evidential strength
The research by Cunningham et al. (2016) and Gentile et al. (2017) uses different data sets to support their findings. The data used by Cunningham et al. (2016) used sales in video games between 2005 and 2011 and the reported crime statistics of the same period. The assumption in this methodology is that the increase in video game sales would have a direct effect on reported crime.
On the other hand, Gentile et al. (2017) used data on physiological changes associated with playing violent video games and then used this data to predict the effect on violent behavior. It is considered that the data used by Gentile et al. (2017) is more scientifically logical, valid, reliable, and significant in concluding (Farrelly, 2013).
On the other hand, the data used by Cunningham et al. (2016) is too abstract, and it is not reliable and not trustworthy to allow for a valid scientific conclusion. Primarily, the probability that data on crime might not be related to the increase in video game sales is just too high. Some crimes, e.g., mugging, pickpocketing, and shoplifting, are mainly related to poverty other than violent content in video games.
Secondly, from biological influences and developmental theories, the behavior is indeed influenced by biological influences and developmental theories. Gentile et al. (2017) studied biological influences and developmental theories to explain the relationship between violent video games and violent behavior. Thus, the study by Gentile et al. (2017) is considered to bear more evidential strength.
Logical fallacies
Several fallacies are evident in both researches. First, the conclusion drawn by Cunningham et al. (2016) suffers from the slippery slope fallacy. The researchers conclude that if there is an increase in sales for violent video games, then there should an increase in violent crimes.
This is considered a logical fallacy as it is founded on the premise that an increase in crime, particularly violent crime, must be a direct result of the increase in the sales of video games. An increase in the sales of video games does not directly equate to an increase in violent crime. Moreover, there are numerous factors in the real-world settings that affect and determine the rate of crime and the violent nature of such crimes.
The two researches are considered to suffer from post hoc ergo propter hoc. The conclusions derived are mainly based on the assumption that the effect was due to the effect administered. In the research by Cunningham et al. (2016), the researchers assumed that the rise in crime must have been caused by the increased sale of violent video games.
This assumption of obviously misplaced because the data doesn't indicate that the violent games played were played. Secondly, there is no indication that the perpetrators of these crimes were active players of violent video games. In the research by Gentile et al. (2017), the researchers assumed that the rise in cortisol directly results from playing violent games.
Secondly, they assumed that the rise of cortisol was a direct indication of violent behavior. From a biological perspective, while it is true that cortisol is the fight-or-flight hormone, it is obvious that participation/perpetuation of violent behavior is a conscious decision that has to be made by an individual, and not just a biological response triggered by a hormone (Matthen, 2015). Moreover, violent behavior perpetuation is an attack and cannot be categorized as either fight and not flight.
Applicability and significance
The relation between violent video games and violent behavior is significant because it allows researchers to develop scientific explanations on mainstream media's popular narrative. The proliferation of violent video games affects promoting violent behavior among teenagers and youth (American Psychological Association, 2015). The findings put forward by researchers are important as they are applied by, among others, policymakers to craft and institute policies that are favorable in governing the production and distribution of violent video games. Also, as the nature of violent video games evolves, and the types of games available become more violent and role-play, the existing findings are significant and applicable in setting knowledge and psychological foundation for operations.
References
American Psychological Association. (2015). Resolution on Violent Video Games. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/about/policy/violent-video-games.aspx
Anderson, C. A. (2003). Violent video games: Myths, facts, and unanswered questions. Psychological Science Agenda, 16(5).
Cunningham, S., Engelstätter, B., & Ward, M. R. (2016). Violent video games and violent crime. Southern Economic Journal, 82(4), 1247-1265.
Farrelly, P. (2013). Issues of trustworthiness, validity, and reliability. British Journal of School Nursing, 8(3), 149-151.
Gentile, D. A., Bender, P. K., & Anderson, C. A. (2017). Violent video game effects on salivary cortisol, arousal, and aggressive thoughts in children. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 39–43.
Markey, P. M., Markey, C. N., & French, J. E. (2015). Violent video games and real-world violence: Rhetoric versus data. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 4(4), 277–295.
Matthen, M. (Ed.). (2015). The Oxford handbook of philosophy of perception. Oxford Handbooks.