The Instigator
cloudmayo
Pro (for)
Losing
10 Points
The Contender
DaPro7822
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

is video games bad for kids

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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 7 votes the winner is...
DaPro7822
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/15/2014 Category: Games
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,464 times Debate No: 63281
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (14)
Votes (7)

 

cloudmayo

Pro

The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, American Psychological Association, American Medical Association, American Academy of Family Physicians, and American Psychiatric Association, wrote in a July 26, 2000 "Joint Statement on the Impact of Entertainment Violence on Children" available at www.aap.org:
"Children who see a lot of violence are more likely to view violence as an effective way of settling conflicts. Children exposed to violence are more likely to assume that acts of violence are acceptable behavior

Viewing violence can lead to emotional desensitization towards violence in real life. It can decrease the likelihood that one will take action on behalf of a victim when violence occurs.

Entertainment violence feeds a perception that the world is a violent and mean place. Viewing violence increases fear of becoming a victim of violence, with a resultant increase in self-protective behaviors and a mistrust of others.

Viewing violence may lead to real life violence. Children exposed to violent programming at a young age have a higher tendency for violent and aggressive behavior later in life than children who are not so exposed.

Although less research has been done on the impact of violent interactive entertainment (video games and other interactive media) on young people, preliminary studies indicate that the negative impact may be significantly more severe than that wrought by television, movies, or music."

July 26, 2000- American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
American Academy of Family Physicians
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Medical Association
American Psychiatric Association (APA)
American Psychological Association
Craig Anderson, PhD, Director of the Center for the Study of Violence, wrote in a 2009 article "FAQs on Violent Video Games and Other Media Violence," available on psychology.iastate.edu:
"The results, overall, have been fairly consistent across types of studies (experimental, cross-sectional, and longitudinal) and across visual media type (television, films, video games). There is a significant relation between exposure to media violence and aggressive behavior. Exposing children and adolescents (or 'youth') to violent visual media increases the likelihood that they will engage in physical aggression against another person. By 'physical aggression' we mean behavior that is intended to harm another person physically, such as hitting with a fist or some object. A single brief exposure to violent media can increase aggression in the immediate situation. Repeated exposure leads to general increases in aggressiveness over time. This relation between media violence and aggressive behavior is causal."

2009- Craig Anderson, PhD
David Greenfield, PhD, founder of The Center for Internet and Technology Addiction and Assistant Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Connecticut School of Medicine, said in a Sep. 20, 2013 panel discussion titled "Growing Up GTA" available at huffingtonpost.com:
"My opinion on video game violence, which has a very powerful reward system wired into it, is that continued exposure desensitizes people to the experience of violence. But the other big issue, along with the reward structure, is that it teaches them a skill set that they might not otherwise develop, especially the first person shooter games. I have a real problem with giving people, in the name of entertainment, a technology that desensitizes violence, and then teaches you how to commit violence more accurately " and then elevating people's levels of dopamine"

[T]hose studies have been absolutely supported. When you put people on a PET scanner or an functional MRI, their brain lights up like a Christmas tree when they're doing these games, especially when they hit the reward points that are designed by the gamers to" keep people gaming because that's how these games make their money.

Nothing is engaged in at the levels that I see gaming at, as a form of entertainment or dopamine elevation, unless it's a narcotic like cocaine for instance. How could you be exposed to something this toxic and have it not affect you?"

Sep. 20, 2013- David N. Greenfield, PhD
Leland Yee, PhD, State Senator (D-CA) wrote in a June 22, 2009 amicus brief filed with the US Supreme Court for Video Software Dealers Association v. Schwarzenegger:
"The interactive nature of video games is vastly different than passively listening to music, watching a movie, or reading a book. With interactive video games, the child becomes a part of the action which serves as a potent agent to facilitate violence and over time learns the destructive behavior.

This immersion results in a more powerful experience and potentially dangerous learned behavior in children and youth...

Just as the technology of video games improves at astonishing rates, so to does the body of research consistently demonstrate the harmful effects these violent interactive games have on minors. Over three thousand peer-reviewed studies, produced over a period of 30 years documenting the effects of screen violence (including violent video games), have now been published...

These data suggest very strongly that participating in the playing of violent video games by children and youth increase aggressive thought and behavior; increase antisocial behavior and delinquency; engender poor school performance; desensitize the game player to violence."

June 22, 2009- Leland Yee, PhD
Brad Bushman, PhD, Professor of Communication and Psychology at The Ohio State University, stated the following in a Feb. 18, 2013 article titled "Why Do People Deny Violent Media Effects?" available at psychologytoday.com
"People want to believe that if millions of people play violent video games and they don"t all become killers, then those games must be harmless. Unfortunately, that"s not true. We haven"t 'proven' video games directly cause violence because it can"t be proven. There is no way to ethically run experiments that see if some threshold of playing a violent game like Call of Duty may push a person into violence. But that doesn"t mean we are left without evidence. We know that video game violence is certainly correlated with violence " just like smoking is correlated with lung cancer. However, this does not mean that the research does not show causal effects; in fact it does, over and over again. We recently conducted a comprehensive review of 136 articles reporting 381 effects involving over 130,000 participants from around the world. These studies show that violent video games increase aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, physiological arousal (e.g., heart rate, blood pressure), and aggressive behavior. Violent games also decrease helping behavior and feelings of empathy for others. The effects occurred for males and females of all ages, regardless of what country they lived in. So the question then becomes why people and journalists repeatedly shrug off this compelling body of work."

Feb. 18, 2013- Brad J. Bushman, PhD
Pamela Eakes, Founder of Mothers Against Violence in America (MAVIA), wrote in an article titled "Do You Know What Video Games Your Children Are Playing?" on www.pbs.org (accessed Oct. 6, 2014):
"Parents do know that children learn by observing, imitating what they observe, and acting on the world around them. According to child psychologist Michael Rich, children develop what psychologists call 'behavioral scripts.' They interpret their experiences and respond to others using those scripts.

One can easily see how repeated exposure to violent behavioral scripts can lead to increased feelings of hostility, expectation that others will behave aggressively, desensitization to the pain of others, and an increased likelihood of interacting and responding to others with violence.

Violent video games are an ideal environment in which to learn violence. Violent video games:

Place the player in the role of th
DaPro7822

Con

Cloud mayo, all i have to say is that you have only copy and pasted. The criteria is not good because you only provide 5 minutes for the opponent to respond. Since you copy and pasted, that is called plagiarism, and therefore your whole debate should be disregarded. Thankyou
Debate Round No. 1
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Malacoda 2 years ago
Malacoda
Well. This debate has half a year to attract new voters.
Posted by PaoPao 2 years ago
PaoPao
i don't like how cloudmayo do the plagiarism in this debate. Debate is a way of thinking, not a way to stating.
It's also Dapro7822 fault i said. Before you challenge cloudmayo, you should see the criteria, if you not agree, you don't need to participate this kind of debate, just find the other debate. Don't waste your ELO..
Posted by Malacoda 2 years ago
Malacoda
It's ok DaPro. But in this case, you certainly should of said something. I won't vote for either of you because Con plagiarized but you didn't even debate.
Posted by DefineRich 2 years ago
DefineRich
A kid makes up this debate that Games are bad for kids and starts copying and pasting information from the web. I found it really stupid and I think con should win the vote.
Posted by DaPro7822 2 years ago
DaPro7822
i mean points
Posted by DaPro7822 2 years ago
DaPro7822
Guys, right now, im sorry for not putting any comments down.
Posted by VelCrow 2 years ago
VelCrow
I would debate you if you change criteria and state your stand clearly.
Posted by LostintheEcho1498 2 years ago
LostintheEcho1498
I totally agree with you cloudmayo but you should make your own work. Citing sources and quoting is ok but not making a whole argument just copy-pasted from some website. Also, one round is usually only used for troll debates so I would suggest at least 3 if not more.
Posted by Geogeer 2 years ago
Geogeer
*Are* video games bad for kids?
Posted by Malacoda 2 years ago
Malacoda
couldmayo, please leave this site unless you are serious about actually debating and spreading your ideas. The last thing we need is another hack who only knows how to use copy and paste.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
cloudmayoDaPro7822Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro plagiarised. Lol @ providing only 5 minutes to respond.
Vote Placed by LDPOFODebATeR0328 2 years ago
LDPOFODebATeR0328
cloudmayoDaPro7822Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to Con because Pro plagiarized. I noticed that Con made more spelling errors, so S&G goes to Pro.
Vote Placed by QTAY21 2 years ago
QTAY21
cloudmayoDaPro7822Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: When participating in a debate, you must cite your sources and use them to support your arguments, not pawn them off as your own. When nothing about pro's arguments is their own, why do they deserve points for a convincing argument? I'd award the people who actually wrote and took the time to articulate the arguments and facts, not someone who just copies and pastes. However, con did not actually provide any argument for the debate, he just discredited pro's argument. It's a tie in that case. Tie in everything except conduct goes to con, since pro plagiarized their argument.
Vote Placed by Malacoda 2 years ago
Malacoda
cloudmayoDaPro7822Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I refuse to let cloudmayo win this with his plagiarizing. I'm going to leave it at a tie.
Vote Placed by Daltonian 2 years ago
Daltonian
cloudmayoDaPro7822Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Reasons for voting decision: The one sentence that Pro did bother to type - the resolution - was a living embodiment of poor grammar, I award S&G to Con. Conduct to Con for plagiarism. Arguments to pro for.. presenting arguments.
Vote Placed by F22Raptor 2 years ago
F22Raptor
cloudmayoDaPro7822Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: I (like others should) am voting NOT entirely based on the plagarism of a debator, but on the effectiveness of his/her argument. Although it is quite sad to know one plagarised, his side of the debate was more convincing. If I were the instagator, I would have at least prepared an argument against his opponent in order to counter it and use the round what it's meant to be used for; debating.
Vote Placed by Zanomi3 2 years ago
Zanomi3
cloudmayoDaPro7822Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Just going to give Con conduct because Pro clearly just copied and pasted, didn't give any arguments of their own.