Cyclone Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 The media go on about radicalised jihadis . Has anyone mentioned that radicalisation or , to put it another way , de sensitisation to violence , might be due to violent computer games where the next level becomes actual physical violence with a corresponding sense of achievement? Who buys and plays violent computer games ? Surely it's angry testosterone filled young men with no outlet for their feelings? Just considering another dimension which the Msm never touch....... No. I doubt that such an affect exists, in the same way that violent games do not create violent people (several studies have looked into this, non have found any causal link). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPC464 Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 The media go on about radicalised jihadis . Has anyone mentioned that radicalisation or , to put it another way , de sensitisation to violence , might be due to violent computer games where the next level becomes actual physical violence with a corresponding sense of achievement? Who buys and plays violent computer games ? Surely it's angry testosterone filled young men with no outlet for their feelings? Just considering another dimension which the Msm never touch....... Surely the video games ARE an outlet for these feelings... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 I think the OP is wrong in several points. Firstly, desensitisation to violence is NOT the same as radicalisation. Secondly, there is no evidence that game violence (or film violence) actually do desensitise to real violence. He then makes an unsupported supposition about who it is that buys FPS computer games. It's pretty much a complete fail from start to finish as theories go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Surely the video games ARE an outlet for these feelings... I would have thought that going over to Syria and killing people would be the outlet for those feelings. On the odd and rare occasion I get time for it, I play Call Of Duty. I can't say it's much of an outlet for any feelings, if anything it's a time of concentrating your thought on tactics and awareness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Recruiting through online games doesn't mean the games are fuelling the desire to be jihadi's, nor does it make folks desensitised to violence. It is just another channel aptly used to recruit people. We live in a highly globalised and networked world and posts like the OP show that folks still have a lot of understanding to do of the consequences of that. The Gran Turismo computer game is used by Nissan to recruit new drivers too. Since 2008 the GT academy has been held, online qualifiers take part in a real life racing event at Silverstone. The winner gets a racing contract with Nissan. If you like cars, you will probably like racing car games. If you like the idea of becoming a terrorist, you'll probably be into war games. It does NOT work the other way around. ---------- Post added 09-09-2014 at 08:54 ---------- I would have thought that going over to Syria and killing people would be the outlet for those feelings. On the odd and rare occasion I get time for it, I play Call Of Duty. I can't say it's much of an outlet for any feelings, if anything it's a time of concentrating your thought on tactics and awareness. And then losing it and having to go to GAME for a new control pad...........or is that just me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firemanbob Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 No. I doubt that such an affect exists, in the same way that violent games do not create violent people (several studies have looked into this, non have found any causal link). Also worth noting is that non have proved that there isn't a causal link. John M. Grohol, Psy.D. Has long been skeptical of the direct causation link some professionals pronounce exists between increased violence and playing violent video games (or video games with violence in them). So it wasn’t surprising for him to read that more and more researchers are questioning these links, and suggesting that while there may be a link, it is a complex and nuanced one. It’s not one that easily fits into a 30-second sound bite. The most recent data that we have on the links between video game use and aggressive behavioural outcomes comes from a meta-analysis, published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin in January 2014. Researchers from the University of Innsbruck looked at 98 studies, testing nearly 37,000 participants since 2009. They found that, overall, video games do affect the social behaviour of players – violent video game use is linked to an increase in aggressive outcomes and a decrease in prosocial outcomes. On the other hand prosocial games show the opposite effect – they’re linked to a reduction in aggressive behaviour and an increase in prosocial, cooperative behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Also worth noting is that non have proved that there isn't a causal link. John M. Grohol, Psy.D. Has long been skeptical of the direct causation link some professionals pronounce exists between increased violence and playing violent video games (or video games with violence in them). So it wasn’t surprising for him to read that more and more researchers are questioning these links, and suggesting that while there may be a link, it is a complex and nuanced one. It’s not one that easily fits into a 30-second sound bite. The most recent data that we have on the links between video game use and aggressive behavioural outcomes comes from a meta-analysis, published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin in January 2014. Researchers from the University of Innsbruck looked at 98 studies, testing nearly 37,000 participants since 2009. They found that, overall, video games do affect the social behaviour of players – violent video game use is linked to an increase in aggressive outcomes and a decrease in prosocial outcomes. On the other hand prosocial games show the opposite effect – they’re linked to a reduction in aggressive behaviour and an increase in prosocial, cooperative behaviour. Without diving into semantics or philosophy of science too much, it is the 'increases' that is highly tenuous. There is simply no way to demonstrate that outside of a clinical setting. Also, there is no research into whether the opposite is true, ie. playing violent games REDUCES aggressive behaviour. I play when I am angry, it acts as a valve, I'd wager that is the case for the vast majority of gamers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Interesting to know how many on this forum know of anyone who's been through the legal system and charged of a crime based on the use or result of use of computer gaming. If conclusive evidence was found that gaming was a prime factor in the "Grooming of UK jihadis"..then what? Round up all Muslims? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 You can't prove negatives though, nobody has ever proven that http://twentytwowords.com/funny-graphs-show-correlation-between-completely-unrelated-stats-9-pictures/ all these things don't cause each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 And then losing it and having to go to GAME for a new control pad...........or is that just me? Never felt any anger at all, also I use the rifle on the Wii rather than a control pad ---------- Post added 09-09-2014 at 10:10 ---------- Also worth noting is that non have proved that there isn't a causal link. That's not worth noting at all. Whenever there's a claim, proposal, theory put forward, the onus of proof is on the one who makes the claim. It's not anyone's duty to prove their idea wrong. It's like saying nobody has proved that unicorns don't exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.