The Instigator
kendall-rox-ur-sox
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
larztheloser
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Do video games cause bad behavior in Children?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/17/2011 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 8,439 times Debate No: 14829
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

kendall-rox-ur-sox

Con

Do video games cause bad behavior in children? Multiple studies have shown that violent games can act like magnets using an unknown force to compel adolescents to want to play the games with bigger guns, extensive maps, and more bad guys. But the question is, do violent video games create aggressive children? Or do violent children play aggressive games? Studies taken have shown that children who play violent video games also show a slightly more hostile attitude in classrooms and as well as at home. However, a significant amount of studies show that the only effect of video-games in children include poor concentration.
larztheloser

Pro

Game on!

As I am pro video games causing bad behavior in children, let me define a few terms:
VIDEO GAME: Any set of machine-readable instructions and associated data that is designed exclusively or almost exclusively for interactive entertainment.
BAD BEHAVIOR: Levels of violence - not just criminal violence.
CHILDREN: People under the age of 13.

It is my contention that video games DO cause bad behavior in children. Note that I know that not all children will react in the same way to the same video game. What I need to prove is that some children will react more violently.

What I suspect my opponent will argue is that most children do not respond more violently to most video games. That may very well be true (depending on the game in question). However, the motion isn't about those children. It's about whether any children at all will behave badly because of video games. I am arguing that children who behave badly because of video games exist. It is as noted researcher Dr Craig Anderson testified before the US Senate: "Some studies have yielded non-significant video game effects, just as some smoking studies failed to find a significant link to lung cancer. But when one combines all relevant empirical studies using meta-analytic techniques it shows that violent video games are significantly associated with: increased aggressive behavior, thoughts, and affect; increased physiological arousal; and decreased pro-social (helping) behavior."[1]

The evidence for there being some encouraging effect of bad behavior in many children who are exposed to violent video games is astounding. One study has found boys exposed to violent video games were much more physically and verbally aggressive than boys who were exposed to non-violent video games [2]. The study was a carefully controlled experiment, so one can draw valid conclusions from it. A later study found that children exposed to violent video games were also more likely to have violent thoughts [3]. A year ago, a meta-study of 130 previous studies concluded that there was strong evidence of a link between violent video games and violence in children [4]. The American Psychological Association summarizes: "Psychological research confirms that violent video games can increase children's aggression." [1]

So I guess the rating system will solve the problem, right? I mean, surely games rated E ("Everyone") aren't violent? Wrong. Dr Craig Anderson again: "The rating itself does not tell you whether it is a healthy or unhealthy game. Any game that involves killing or harming another character in order to advance is likely to be teaching inappropriate lessons to whoever is playing it." Right from the earliest days, violence has been a common feature of all video game design [5]. I grew up playing Caesar III, an "E" rated game, and smashing invading armies into oblivion. I've seen kids playing Hearts of Iron, a world war 2 simulation game, also "E" rated. The real problem, however, is that more violent games are easily accessible for kids. Parents rarely read the warning signs and illegal software downloads are within easy reach of children. M-rated games are actively promoted to children: LittleBigPlanet, for instance, is an E-rated game containing content which promotes Metal Gear Solid 4, an M-rated game [6].

What typically happens to these violent kids? Well, parents keep them under control for a while. Then, when they are able to act on their violent impulses, they do. Xiao Yi. Damori Miles. These are extreme examples, and usually the violence does not extend beyond schoolyard bullying. But that's not to say it doesn't happen. There are kids who are violent because of video games. As video games become more violent, we can expect increasing levels of bad behavior in children.

Well, that concludes my argument for round one. I'd like to thank my opponent for this debate and wish him luck in round two.

Sources:
1 - http://en.wikipedia.org...
2 - Irwin, A. Roland, & Gross, Alan M. (1995). Cognitive tempo, violent video games, and aggressive behavior in young boys. Journal of Family Violence, 10(3), 337-350.
3 - Kirsh, Steven J. (1997, April). Seeing the world through "Mortal Kombat" colored glasses: Violent video games and hostile attribution bias. Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Washington, DC.
4 - http://www.usatoday.com...
5 - Crawford, Chris. (1984) The Art of Computer Game Design. California: Osborne/McGraw-Hill.
6 - http://www.media-awareness.ca...
Debate Round No. 1
kendall-rox-ur-sox

Con

kendall-rox-ur-sox forfeited this round.
larztheloser

Pro

Extend my args. Vote pro.
Debate Round No. 2
kendall-rox-ur-sox

Con

kendall-rox-ur-sox forfeited this round.
larztheloser

Pro

My opponent has clearly forfeited this debate. Vote pro.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by jat93 3 years ago
jat93
i'd consider debating this if the word "cause" is used more loosely. not a cause in the sense that one given person or thing is solely responsible for an action, but maybe one of many causes.
Posted by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
Ore_Ele
cause? no. effect? yes.
No votes have been placed for this debate.