Violent Video Games -- 1 Running Head: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES Popular Video Games: Assessing the Amount and Context of Violence Ken Lachlan Stacy L. Smith & Ron Tamborini Michigan State University Department of Communication East Lansing, MI 48824 Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association in Seattle, Washington. Author Note: Ken Lachlan (M. A. Bowling Green State University) is a doctoral student in the Department of Communication at Michigan State University where Stacy L. Smith (Ph.D., University of California, Santa Barbara) is an Assistant Professor and Ron Tamborini (Ph.D., University of Indiana) is an Associate Professor.
Violent Video Games -- 2 Abstract Americans are growing increasingly concerned about children s exposure to video games, presumably due to the amount and graphicness of violence in them. To date, however, very little research has actually examined the amount of violence in popular interactive media. As such, the purpose of this study was to content analyze 60 of the most popular video games from three gaming systems: Nintendo 64, Sega DreamCast, and Sony PlayStation. Games were played for 10-minutes and videotaped for later analyses. Adapting the coding scheme from the National Television Violence Study (Wilson et al., 1997), the amount as well as the context of violence in games rated for general (e.g., E or K-A ) or mature audiences (e.g., T or M ) was assessed. The results show that mature games are more likely to feature violence than those rated for general audiences. Differences also emerged in the context of violence. When compared to general audience games, mature games are not only more likely to feature child perpetrators but also justified acts of repeated gun violence that are graphic in nature. The findings are discussed in terms of the risks interactive violence may be posing to youth.
Violent Video Games -- 3 Popular Video Games: Assessing the Amount and Context of Violence Parents, teachers, and policy makers are growing increasingly concerned about children s exposure to video games, presumably due to the amount and graphicness of violence in them (Elmer-Dewitt, 1993). These concerned voices are arguing that playing violent video games is contributing to antisocial behavior in society. In fact, exposure to violent video games was implicated as a possible contributory factor in the recent schoolyard massacres at Columbine High and Westside Middle School (Gegax, Adler, & Pedersen, 1998; Flatin, 2000). Given this concern, the first question to ask is how much time do children and adolescents spend playing videos games? A recent report released by the Kaiser Family Foundation (1999) reveals that a majority of 2- to 18-year-old children in this country have access to video game technology in their home. Nearly three fourths of all families surveyed have at least one video game player such as a Sega system or Nintendo. Furthermore, a third of all children in this age group have a video game system in their own room. The data from this study also shows that 8- to 18-year-old boys spend 41 minutes per day playing video games whereas girls in this age group spend only 12 minutes. These findings suggest that many children not only have access to home gaming systems but also spend at least some time every day playing interactive games. Because youngsters are spending time with video game technology, several surveys have been conducted to examine the relationship between game playing and aggressive tendencies (Dominick, 1984). For example, Wiegman and Van Shie (1998) asked 10- to 14-year-olds to self-report how much time they spent playing video games
Violent Video Games -- 4 as well as their specific game preferences. In addition, peer nominations of aggression were obtained on all of the adolescents in the sample. The results showed a positive relationship between preferring violent games and aggressive behavior. That is, those children who favored violent game content were more likely to be nominated as an aggressor by their peers. Other studies have documented a positive relationship between exposure to violent games and aggression with other child (Dominick, 1984; Lin & Lepper, 1987) and adult samples (Anderson & Dill, 2000). Although these findings are informative, they are based on self-report data. As such, we have no way of knowing if playing violent video games is actually causing aggressive behavior. Several recent experiments have examined the causal linkages between playing violent video games and aggressive reactions. Much of this research has been conducted with college students, however. For example, Anderson and Ford (1986) randomly assigned undergraduates to one of three conditions: playing a highly aggressive game, playing a mildly aggressive game, or to a no play control condition. Immediately after, the participants listed their aggressive thoughts and feelings using an adjective checklist procedure. The results showed that players in both aggressive game conditions listed significantly more hostile thoughts than did those in the control condition. Experiments have also examined the impact of violent video games on aggressive behavior. For example, Anderson and Dill (2000) had undergraduates play either a violent or nonviolent video game and then engage in a series of competitive time tasks. As a measure of aggression, the participants delivered noxious noises to their opponents after winning each timed task. Participants received a noxious blast of noise if they lost a trial. The results revealed that immediately after losing, participants who played the
Violent Video Games -- 5 violent video game gave significantly longer blasts of noise than did those who played the non violent video game. Similar findings have been documented by Ballard and Lineberger (1999). Thus, aggressive video games are capable of increasing aggressive behavior. At least one study has examined the impact of playing violent video games on children s aggressive behavior. Shutte, Malouf, Post-Gordon, and Rodasta (1987) had 5- to 7-year-olds play either violent or nonviolent games in pairs. Subsequently, the two children were given 5 minutes of free playtime in another room with a Bobo doll. The results showed that children who played the violent game were significantly more likely to attack the doll or each other than were those who played the nonviolent game. Together, the survey and experimental research reveals that exposure to violent video games increases aggressive behavior in both children and adults. Such findings are consistent with over 40 years of social science research documenting that exposure to TV violence increases the probability of aggression (see Paik & Comstock, 1994; also Smith & Donnerstein, 1998). Further, the findings outlined above suggest that many of the concerns noted earlier about the negative effects of playing violent video games may be warranted. As a result, it becomes important to examine the amount of physical aggression in home gaming systems that are available to and popular with children. Previous Content Analyses How much violence is featured in video games? To date, only two published studies could be found that have attempted to answer this question. Braun and Giroux (1989) examined the amount of violence in arcade games. To this end, 21 of the most popular video arcade games among adolescents were selected and coded for the presence
Violent Video Games -- 6 vs. absence of aggression. Violence was defined as the act of destroying individuals or objects or the ingestion of individuals (p. 95). The results revealed that 71% of all video arcade games featured violence. Further, violence was most likely to be found in games featuring themes such as war, sports, ingestion, and crime. Although these findings are informative, they do not reveal the amount of violence in home gaming systems. As noted earlier, roughly three fourths of the families with 2- to 18-year-olds in this country own a video gaming system (Kaiser Family Foundation, 1999). Thus, it becomes important to assess the amount of video violence children may be accessing in their own home. To fill this void, Dietz (1998) assessed recently the amount of violence in 33 popular Nintendo and Sega Genesis video games. Again, the presence or absence of violence was assessed. The findings show that 79% of all the home video games featured aggression. Further, 21% of the games featured some type of violence against women. This last study suggests that popular home video games routinely feature violence. Yet this last study is plagued by at least two major limitations. First, the sample is not very representative of popular video games available today. That is, the three most popular gaming systems on the market today are Nintendo, Sony PlayStation, and Sega DreamCast. Thus, Dietz (1998) sample not only left out the Sony system but Sega introduced an newer game console in July of 1999. Therefore, any complete assessment of violence in popular home video games should sample from these three gaming outlets. Second, the previous study primarily focused on the presence of violence in popular home video games. Yet research in the television violence arena suggests that
Violent Video Games -- 7 the context or way in which violence is presented influences how the audience interprets and responds to acts of aggression (see Gunter, 1985; Wilson et al., 1997; 1998; Smith et al., 1998). For example, playing a video game with repeated acts of graphic violence involving humans may be interpreted very differently by the player than a video game that features only minimal violence enacted by anthropomorphized robots. Clearly, a content analysis is needed that examines the relative presence of all the different contextual features that increase or decrease the risk of psychological harm. Therefore, the purpose of the present study is to content analyze popular home video games for violence. To overcome the limitations of previous research, 60 of the most attractive games will be selected from sales figures for the 1999 season across three of the most popular gaming systems: Sony PlayStation, Nintendo (N64), and Sega DreamCast. In addition, the framework of the National Television Violence Study (NTVS) will be employed (Wilson et al., 1997; 1998; Smith et al., 1998). The NTVS has been heralded as the most comprehensive content analysis of the amount as well as the context of violence on American television (American Medical Association, 1998). By adapting the NTVS coding scheme from television programming to video games, this study will attempt to explore in detail not only the amount but also the context of violence in some of the most popular interactive home video games in today s market. Contextual Variables The NTVS scholars (Wilson et al., 1997, 1998; Smith et al., 1998) identified several contextual variables that influence learning aggression, fear, and desensitization. The first is the nature of the character involved with violence. Social cognitive theory suggests and research supports that viewers are more likely to attend to and identify with
Violent Video Games -- 8 models that are perceived as attractive (Bandura, 1986). Thus, attractive aggressors are potent role models for learning aggression. There are a few qualities that may increase character attractiveness. Studies reveal that viewers assign more positive ratings to characters that act prosocially than to those that are cruel or antisocial (Hoffner & Cantor, 1985; Zillmann & Cantor, 1977). However, research reveals that attraction may also be a function of any shared demographic characteristics (i.e., age, sex, ethnicity) between the perpetrator and viewer (Jose & Brewer, 1984). Thus, the demographic and attributive qualities of perpetrators are important to assess. The second is whether the violence is justified. How we interpret an act of violence is dependent to a great extent on the character s motives or reasons for aggression. Acts that are presented as socially sanctioned communicate to the viewer that violence, under some conditions, is morally correct or an acceptable means for solving interpersonal conflict (Bandura, 1990). Such depictions may fail to activate or even reduce viewers inhibitions to aggress. Consistent with this theorizing, studies show that viewing justified violence increases aggressive behavior, especially among angered subjects (Berkowitz & Powers, 1979; Geen & Stonner, 1973; 1974; Meyer, 1972). The third factor is the presence of weapons. From a cognitive neoassociationistic perspective, Berkowitz (Berkowitz & Rogers, 1986; Jo & Berkowitz, 1994) has argued that exposure to guns and other conventional weapons may serve as cues that prime aggressive thoughts and action tendencies. Indeed, several studies show that angered subjects exposed to guns are more aggressive than are those angered subjects exposed to neutral objects (Berkowitz & LePage, 1967; Leyens & Parke, 1974). Further, a recent meta analysis of 56 published studies revealed that the presence of weapons (i.e.,
Violent Video Games -- 9 pictorially or in natural environment) significantly increases aggression among angered and nonangered subjects (Carlson, Marcus-Newhall & Miller, 1990). The fourth variable is the extensiveness of violence. From an informationprocessing perspective (see Huesmann, 1986), repeatedly viewing TV violence may function as a form of cognitive rehearsal thereby strengthening and reinforcing aggressive scripts stored in memory. Studies show that heavy viewing of television violence is positively correlated with aggressive behavior (Dominick & Greenberg, 1972; McIntyre & Teeven, 1972; McLeod, Atkin, & Chaffee, 1972). There is also longitudinal evidence of the long-term effects of repeated viewing of television violence. Huesmann (1986) and his colleagues have found that the more TV violence children watch during a given year, the more likely they are to behave violently in subsequent years (Lefkowitz, Eron, Walder, & Huesmann, 1972; Huesmann, Eron, Lefkowitz, & Walder, 1984; Huesmann, Moise, Podolski, & Eron, 1998). The fifth variable is the consequences of violence. Consequences refer to the pain, harm, and suffering shown as a result of violence. Theoretically, it has been argued that pain and harm cues inform the viewer that there are serious consequences associated with violence (Bandura, 1990). These types of depictions should also activate inhibitory mechanisms (i.e., empathy, sympathy) thereby decreasing the risk of aggression. The absence of physical harm and/or emotional suffering in a violent scene may fail to activate such inhibitory mechanisms and thus increase the likelihood of viewer aggression. In fact, research reveals that the presence of victim pain can significantly reduce aggressive responding (Baron, 1971a; 1971b; Schmutte & Taylor, 1980). These findings suggest that the consequences of violence are important to assess.
Violent Video Games -- 10 The sixth variable is the explicitness and/or graphicness of violence. It has been argued by Linz and his colleagues (Linz, Donnerstein, & Penrod, 1984; 1988) that massive exposure to explicit (i.e., up-close) and graphic (i.e., blood, gore, viscera) violence can desensitize viewers or make them emotionally numb to aggression and its real-world consequences. Research supports this rationale. When compared to their first day evaluations, men exposed to a steady diet of five slasher films rated the last and final movie as less violent and experienced less negative affect after viewing (Linz et al., 1984). Explicit and graphic portrayals may also affect learning. Depicting blood and gore may be provocative cues that attract viewers attention and thus facilitate retention of the material. Furthermore, up-close or explicit depictions of violence may be easily encoded and stored in memory. The seventh variable is rewards and punishments. According to a social learning perspective, incentives inform the viewer of the likely outcomes of modeled behaviors. Studies show that violence that is rewarded or not punished increases the probability of aggression (Bandura, 1965; Bandura et al., 1961, Lando & Donnerstein, 1978), whereas punishing violence actually decreases such a risk. In fact, Paik and Comstock s (1994) meta analysis reveals that rewarded violence increases the probability of aggression among both children and adults. The eighth variable is humor. The presence of humor in a violent scene may trivialize the seriousness of violence thereby short circuiting any norms against aggression that may have been activated (Bandura, 1990). Research reveals that the juxtaposition of humor and violence increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior (Baron, 1978; Berkowitz, 1970).
Violent Video Games -- 11 In total, the research outlined above reveals that eight contextual variables of television violence influence the probability of negative effects. We are interested in the distribution of these contextual features in violent video games popular with children. However, we suspected that the nature of violence could vary significantly by a violent video game s rating. That is, video games that are rated T for teen audiences or M for mature or adult game players may contain more graphic or extensive violence than those general audience games rated E or K-A. Yet a recent report released by the Federal Trade Commission (2000) reveals that 70% of the games rated M for mature violent content are being targeted at children. Indeed, the report also revealed that 24% of 11- to 16-year olds indicate that M rated games are among their top three favorites (CITE). Because younger children may be seeking out more mature games that involve excessive aggression, it becomes important to assess the amount and types of violence they may be witnessing. Thus, the two following research questions are posed: RQ1: Does the prevalence of violence in popular video games vary by rating? RQ2: Does the context of violence in popular video games vary by rating? Method To answer the two research questions, the framework of the National Television Violence Study was used. As a result, the definition of violence, units of analysis, measures, and training/reliability will only be briefly explicated below. For a full explication of the NTVS methods, see Wilson et al. (1997, 1998) or Smith et al. (1998). Sample Video games were sampled from three major gaming systems: Sony PlayStation, Nintendo (N64), and Sega DreamCast. Within each system, the 20 most popular games
Violent Video Games -- 12 based on available sales figures (see www.pcdata.com) for the 1999 calendar year were included in the sample (see Table 1 for a list of all games). 1 Although the entire game was sampled, only the first 10-minute portion of the game was coded for violence. 2 Thus, the sample includes 10 hours or 600 minutes of the most frequently played video games of 1999. Definition of Violence Violence is defined as any overt depiction of a credible threat of physical force or the actual use of such force intended to physically harm an animate being or group of being. Violence also includes certain depictions of physically harmful consequences against an animate being/s that results from unseen violent means (Smith et al., 1998, p. 30). Units of Analysis Violence is measured at two distinct units or levels of analysis. The first level is the violent interaction. A violent interaction is defined as an aggressive exchange that occurs between a unique perpetrator (P) engaging in a particular type of act (A) against a unique target (T). Anytime the perpetrator, act type, or target changes, a new interaction is created. The second unit is the 10-minute segment. Contextual variables are assessed at the level most sensitive to capturing the nature and context of violence in home gaming systems. Measures Three variables capture the amount of violence in popular video games. The first is prevalence. Prevalence refers to the proportion of video game segments that feature at least one instance of violence. The second is range. Range refers to the number of
Violent Video Games -- 13 violent interactions per 10-minute video segment. The third is rate of violent interactions per minute of game play. Rate per minute is calculated by dividing the number of violent interactions by the total amount of playtime (n = 600 minutes) in the sample. In addition to these amount measures, 28 variables assess the context of violence in video games. Each of the contextual variables is defined at the level or unit or analysis with which it is measured. PAT-level variables. Three types of variables are assessed at the PAT level: character related, violence related, and player related. In terms of character variables, demographics of the perpetrators and targets involved with violence are coded. The first is type. Characters involved with violence are coded as human, animal, supernatural, anthropomorphized animal, and anthropomorphized supernatural creature. Because a few of these categories captured most of the characters in the sample, this variable was collapsed into four categories: human, anthropomorphized entity, robot, or other. The second is age. Each character is coded as child, teen, adult, elderly, or undefined. Since so few characters were at the tails of this measures distribution, this variable was collapsed into two levels: kids (child + teen) vs. adults (adult + elderly). The third is gender. Characters are coded as males, females, or undefined (i.e., a robot that does not possess female or male characteristics). The last demographic variable is apparent ethnicity. For humans only, apparent ethnicity is coded as white, black, Hispanic, Native American, Asian/Pacific Islander, Middle Easterner, or can t tell. Most of the characters were from one ethnic grouping and thus the variable was collapsed into two categories: white vs. nonwhite.
Violent Video Games -- 14 Attributes of the characters involved with violence are also evaluated. In specific, a character s orientation towards others is assessed. Good characters are those that act benevolently, help others, and/or are motivated to consider the needs of others before themselves. Bad characters, on the other hand, are those that act out of self-interest, accommodate their own needs, and have little regard for others. Neutral characters are those that possessed both good and bad characteristics or those that did not appear long enough in the game for their orientation towards others to be assessed. Because prosocial or good characters are attractive role models (Jose & Brewer, 1984), this variable was collapsed into two categories: attractive (good) vs. not attractive (bad + neutral). Several violence related variables are also assessed at the PAT level. The first is reason. Because aggression is a complex behavior that may be motivated by multiple goals, coders examined the presence or absence of five specific reasons for each interaction: protection of life, protection of property, anger, retaliation, personal gain, mental instability, and other/unknown. At the analysis level, any violent interaction that was motivated by protection of life, protection of property, or retaliation was recoded as justified. Violent interactions motivated by other reasons (i.e., personal gain, mental instability, other) were recoded at the analysis level as not justified. The second variable is means used. Means are defined as the weapons used in a violent exchange to threaten or physically harm an animate being. Means are coded as natural (i.e., punch, kick), unconventional weapon (i.e., baseball bat, frying pan), conventional weapon, non-firearm (i.e., knife, police baton), firearm (i.e., pistol, shotgun), heavy weaponry (i.e., tanks, missiles), or bombs. Because so few interactions
Violent Video Games -- 15 featured heavy weapons or bombs, these last two categories were collapsed at the analysis level. The third is the extent of means used. For behavioral acts only, extent is coded as one (i.e., one example of act), some (i.e., 2-9 examples of act), many (10-19 examples of act), or extreme (20+ examples of act). At the analysis level, the extent variable was collapsed into two categories: one act of violence vs. repeated acts of violence (some, many, extreme). The consequences of each violent interaction are also evaluated. First, the amount of depicted harm is assessed. Depicted harm refers to physical injury or incapacitation of the victim. Depicted harm was coded as none, mild, moderate, or extreme. In addition to depicted harm, the amount of likely harm that the violence would cause against an average sized human in the real world is evaluated. Again, likely harm is coded as none, mild, moderate, or extreme. Using the likely harm variable, the amount of lethal violence in video games is assessed. Lethal violence refers to those interactions that would result in moderate or extreme likely harm in the real world. All other interactions are non lethal. Finally, the amount of unrealistic harm in video games is assessed. This variable is calculated at the analysis level by subtracting the values of depicted harm from the values of likely harm. The last type of variable assessed at the interaction level is a player-related measure. In particular, we examined an individual s visual perspective while playing a violent video game. Visual perspective refers to whether the player sees him/her self as an aggressive character on screen or not. In some 1 st person games, the player actually acts as the perpetrator of aggression. As a result, the only characters that are seen on
Violent Video Games -- 16 screen are the targets of aggression. Such games may be more involving or arousing because the player is the violent stalker (see Tamborini et al., 2000) These interactions are coded as perpetrator off screen. Other games, however, feature the perpetrator as a character on screen that the game player manipulates or controls to win the game. In such interactions, the perpetrator is coded as on screen. Segment-level variables. Several variables are evaluated at the end of each 10- minute violent segment. First, rewards are assessed. Rewards are defined as any verbal or nonverbal reinforcement that is delivered to the perpetrator for acting violently. Each segment was coded as either featuring: none, self praise, praise from other, or material praise. If more than one of these rewards is present, the coder was asked to choose the most salient reward in the segment. At the analysis level, this variable was collapsed into two categories: rewards absent vs. rewards present. Second, punishments are assessed. Punishments are defined as those verbal or nonverbal signs of disapproval or disappointment that are expressed toward a perpetrator for acting violently. Each segment was coded as no punishments, condemnation from self, condemnation from other, nonviolent action, or violent action. If more than one of these punishments is present, then the coder was asked to choose the most salient punishment in the segment. This variable was collapsed in two categories at the analysis level: punishment absent vs. punishment present. Third, the explicitness of the violence is assessed. Explicitness of the violent act refers to the amount of distance with which the physical aggression itself (i.e., gun firing, fist swinging) is shown. Violence is featured as up close, long shot, or not shown on screen. Fourth, the graphicness of the violent segment is measured. Graphicness refers
Violent Video Games -- 17 to the amount of blood, gore, or dismemberment shown. Graphicness is coded as none, mild, moderate, or extreme. Later this variable was collapsed into two categories: blood/gore absent vs. blood/gore present. Fifth, the inclusion of humor in the video segment is coded. Humor is defined as words, actions, or behaviors that are intended to amuse the self, another character, or the person playing the game. Humor is coded as either present or absent. In addition to these variables, coders made several judgments about the over all video game. First, the game s rating is evaluated. All of the games in the sample were rated by the Entertainment Software Review Board (ESRB). Games were coded as E for everyone, K-A for kids through adults, T for teens and above, or M for mature game players. Second, the type of game is assessed. Games are coded into one of the following genres: adventure, flight simulator, fighting, music, role-playing, racing, shooter, sports, or strategy/puzzle. Training & Reliability A total of 3 undergraduates from Michigan State University coded all of the video game segments in the sample for violence. Prior to coding, the research assistants underwent 4 weeks of intensive training to master all of the definitions and coding procedures used in this study. During this training, the coders participated in a series of reliability tests (n = 3) designed to assess the consistency of their coding judgments. Using Potter and Levine-Donnerstein s (1999) reliability formula for multiple coders, the coefficients for each of the variables on the last test are as follows: 3 type of act (.94), perpetrator type (.86), perpetrator age (.96), perpetrator sex (.92), perpetrator ethnicity (.96), perpetrator motive (.79), target type (.96), target age (.96), target sex (.94), target
Violent Video Games -- 18 ethnicity (.96), target motive (.74), visual perspective (.89), protect life (.79), protect property (.95), retaliation (.84), anger (.95), personal gain (.95), mental instability (.95), unknown (.92), means (.85), extent (.89), depicted harm (.87), likely harm (.81), rewards (1.00), punishments (1.00), explicitness (1.00), graphicness (1.00), humor (1.00). Results The significance of any finding was determined in two steps. First, a chi-square analysis was executed to examine the distribution of violence in video game segments. Only those analyses that are significant at the p <.05 level are reported below. If this criterion was met, we then assessed the magnitude of difference between percentages. Only those analyses that differed by 10% or more are reported below. By employing this conservative approach, one can be assured that the findings presented below are not trivial (4-5%) but reflect meaningful differences in the presentation of violence in video games. Amount of Violence The first research question asked, Does the prevalence of violence in popular video games vary by rating? To answer this question, the original four level rating variable was collapsed into two categories: all children ( E + K-A ) vs. older children and adults ( T + M ). This dichotomization was due to the fact that too few video games in the sample were rated K-A (n = 3) or M (n = ). A chi-square analysis on the amount of violence in video game segments by rating was significant, X 2 (1, N = 60) = 6.51, p <.05, φ =.329. Video games rated for older children and adults (90% b ) are significantly more likely to feature violence than are those rated for all age groups (57% a ).
Violent Video Games -- 19 Next, the range of violent interactions by rating was examined. The number of interactions in violent video games ranged from 2 to 124 in a 10-minute. Segments were collapsed into three categories based on the total number of violent interactions in the 10- minute playing period: 2-12 interactions, 13-36 interactions, or 37-124 interactions. No significant differences emerged in the number of violent interactions by rating. Almost a third of all segments (32%) feature 2-12 interactions, 34% contain 13-36, and 34% feature 37-124. Finally, the rate of violent interactions per minute was calculated. Video games rated for older children and adults (4.59) feature nearly four times as many violent interactions per minute than do those games rated for general audiences (1.17). These findings suggest that games rated for older children and adults feature roughly 46 violent interactions per 10-minute playing period. General audience games, on the other hand, contain approximately 11.7 violent incidents per 10-minute segment. Context of Violence The second research question asked, Does the context of violence vary by rating? To answer this query, the distribution of the contextual variables by rating will be delineated below. Nature of the perpetrator. Several demographic and attributive qualities of the perpetrator were assessed. The first is type. A significant difference was found in perpetrator type by rating, X 2 (3, N = 1,389) = 362.81, p <.00, φ =.51. Mature video games (87% b ) are more likely to feature human perpetrators than are those game designed for general audiences (40% a ). The proportion of robots also varied by rating.
Violent Video Games -- 20 Games designed for all audiences (39% b) are more likely to contain perpetrators that are robots than are those designed for mature audiences (7% a ). See Table 2. The second is age. A chi-square analysis revealed a significant difference in age by rating, X 2 (1, N = 998) = 23.92, p <.00, φ =.15 Video game segments rated for older children and adults (17% b) are more likely to feature child perpetrators of violence than are those rated for children (3% a ). Differences also emerged in the distribution of adult perpetrators. Games rated for mature audiences (83% a ) are less likely to feature adults than are those rated for all audiences (97% b). The third perpetrator variable is sex. We found a significant difference in perpetrator sex, X 2 (1, N = 1,075) = 25.68, p <.00, φ =.15. Males are more likely to be perpetrators of violence in general audience games (90% b ) than in more mature games (75% a ). Females, on the other hand, are more likely to be instigators of violence in mature games (25% b ) than in general audience games (10% a ). The fourth measure is ethnicity. No significant difference was found in perpetrator ethnicity. A full 71% of all violent human perpetrators in the first 10 minutes of video games are white. The fifth measure is attractiveness. The analysis revealed a difference in attractiveness by rating, X 2 (1, N = 1,389) = 94.59, p <.00, φ =.26. General audience games (21% b ) are more likely to feature violent interactions with attractive perpetrators than are those games rated for more mature audiences (4% a ). See Table 2. Nature of the Target. The same demographic and attributive qualities were assessed for the victims. In terms of type, a chi-square analysis revealed a significant difference by rating, X 2 (3, N = 1,389) = 287.21, p <.00, φ =.45. Video games rated for
Violent Video Games -- 21 mature audiences (78% b ) are more likely to feature violent interactions targeting humans than are those in game rated for general audiences (37% a ). Differences also emerged in the distribution of robots. General audience games (38% b ) are more likely to feature violent interactions targeting robots than are those interactions in mature audience games (7% a ). No differences emerged in the distribution of anthropomorphized perpetrators by rating, however. We also found a significant difference in the victim sex by rating, X 2 (1, N = 929) = 46.77, p <.00, φ =.22. As shown in Table 2, males are more likely to be targets of violence in general audience games (94% b ) than in games for older children and adults (72% a ). Differences were also observed for female victims of violence. Females are more likely to be the targets of violence in adult games (28% b ) than in games designed for all audiences (6% a ). In contrast, no differences were found in victim age. A full 96% of victims in violent interactions are adult. A chi-square analysis showed a significant difference in ethnicity by rating, X 2 (1, N = 661) = 9.98, p <.00, φ =.12. Whites are more likely to be a target of violence in general audience games (78% b ) than in games for older audiences (63% a ). Finally, the attractiveness of the victims of violence was examined. No differences emerged in victim attractiveness by rating. Only 6% of all violent interactions feature victims that are attractive. Justification. As noted above, any violent interaction that is motivated by retaliation, protection of life, or protection of property was coded as justified. Each interaction motivated by some other reason was coded as unjustified. A chi-square
Violent Video Games -- 22 analysis revealed a significant difference in justification by rating, X 2 (1, N = 1,389) = 66.78, p <.00, φ =.22. Justified violent interactions are more likely to be found in video games rated for older children and adults (77% b ) than in those games rated for general audiences (56% a ). See Table 3. Weapons. A chi-square analysis showed a significant difference in weapon use by rating, X 2 (4, N = 1,389) = 197.44, p <.00, φ =.38. As shown in Table 3, violent interactions featuring natural means are more likely to be featured in games rated for all audiences (79% b ) than in games rated for mature audiences (42% a ). Differences were also observed in the distribution of unconventional weapons. Mature games (20% b ) are more likely to feature violent interactions with unconventional weapons than are those general audience games (6% a ). Finally, violent interactions featuring guns are more likely to be shown in video games for older children and adults (13% b ) than in those for general audiences (0% a ). Extent. We also found a statistical difference in the extensiveness of behavioral acts of violence by rating, X 2 (1, N = 1,370) = 133.59, p <.00, φ =.31. Violent interactions in video games rated for mature audiences (60% b ) are more likely to involve repeated acts of violence than are those in games rated for all audiences (27% a ). In addition to extent, we examined the lethality or seriousness of violence in video game segments. Here, no significant difference emerged. A full 78% of all violent interactions in the first 10-minutes of game play feature lethal violence. Consequences. Two variables assessed the amount of harm in video game violence. The first is depicted harm. No differences emerged in the amount of depicted harm in video games. Almost two thirds of the violent interactions (61%) featured mild
Violent Video Games -- 23 harm, 26% moderate harm, and 9% extreme harm. Only 4% of interactions showed no harm to the victim. Similarly, no differences were observed in the amount of unrealistic harm in video games by ratings. Over half (53%) of the violent interactions feature unrealistic harm to the victim. Explicitness/Graphicness. No differences were found in the explicitness of the video game violence. A full 78% of the violent action is shown up-close. Put another way, only 22% is shown from a long shot. In contrast, a chi-square analysis revealed a significant difference in the presence of blood and gore by rating, X 2 (1, N = 41) = 13.48, p <.00, φ =.57. Games rated for mature audiences (56% b ) are more likely to feature some blood and gore than are those rated for all audiences (4% a ). See Table 3. Rewards/Punishments. In terms of rewards, no significant differences were observed. Over half (56%) of all violent video segments featured perpetrators being rewarded for their aggressive actions. Similarly, no differences emerged for punishment. Only 2% of all video game segments feature perpetrators being punished for their violent actions. Humor. No significant differences were found on this variable. Almost half (41%) of all violent video segments feature the presence of humor. Visual Perspective. We also found a significant difference in visual perspective by rating, X 2 (1, N = 1,389) = 119.10, p <.00, φ =.29. Video games rated for mature viewers are more likely to feature violent interactions with the perpetrator off screen (21% b ) than are those in game rated for general audiences (0% a ). See Table 3.
Violent Video Games -- 24 Discussion The aim of this study was to examine the amount and context of violence in video games popular with children. The results show that violence varies significantly in video games by rating. Simply put, interactive games rated for older children and adults not only feature more violence, but present physical aggression in such a way that increases the risk of learning and emotional desensitization. In terms of research question one, the results showed that the sheer amount of violence varied by rating type on two out of the three prevalence measures. First, the proportion of games rated for teens and adults were more likely to feature violence (90%) than were those games rated for all audiences (57%). Second, the rate of violent interactions per minute differed significantly by rating. Games rated for teens or older audiences featured four times as many violent interactions per minute (4.59) than did those rated for younger audiences (1.17). Stated differently, playing games rated T or M exposes individuals to roughly 46 violent interactions in a 10-minute period. Given the fact that an average boy in this country spends 40 minutes a day playing interactive media (Kaiser Family Foundation, 1999), those who select games rated T or M in this country may witness over 180 incidents of aggression per day or 5,400 incidents per month. One of the prevalence measures did not vary by rating, however. That is, rating did not influence the range of violent interactions in interactive games. The results showed that the number of interactions in a 10-minute segment of violent video games could range from 2 to 124. More precisely, a third of all 10-minute segments featured 2
Violent Video Games -- 25 to 12 violent interactions, 34% featured 13 to 36 violent interactions, and 34% featured 37 to 124 violent interactions. In total, the prevalence findings suggest that violence is a key ingredient in many interactive games. Indeed, a full 68% of the games in the sample featured at least one or more instances of violence. It must be noted that these findings are a bit lower than those found in previous research, however. Dietz (1998) found that 79% of the games in her sample featured violence. There are at least two possible explanations for the disparity between these findings. First, we used a conservative definition of violence that placed emphasis on intentional harm. As a result, Dietz (1998) may have counted many professional acts of aggression in sports that were not counted in our study. Second, we incorporated three popular gaming systems into our sample. As noted earlier, Dietz s sample (1998) featured video games from only two interactive systems (Nintendo & Sega Genesis). Perhaps video games in particular systems are more or less likely to feature violence. As such, future research is needed to content analyze how the amount and context of violence may differ by game manufacturer. The second research question asked if the context of violence varied by rating. The answer to this question is yes. In terms of character portrayals, the perpetrators involved in games targeting older children and adults are more likely to be human, children, and female. Because children are often portrayed as instigators of aggression, these games may pose serious risk for learning to younger audiences. In explanation, younger players may be particularly attentive to depictions that involve characters that look and act like themselves (see Hicks, 1968; Hoffner, 1996). Further, video games rated T or M are more likely to feature human instigators of violence which may
Violent Video Games -- 26 increase the realism of the game. Although not discussed above, realistic portrayals of violence have been found to increase the probability of aggression (Atkin, 1983; Feshbach, 1972). Because these mature games are being targeted at youth (FTC Report, 2000), child players may be particularly susceptible to the negative effects associated with playing such interactive media. A different picture of characters involved with violence emerges for general audience games, however. These perpetrators are more likely to be attractive, robotic, adult in age, and male. Given the fact that robots account for almost 40% of the characters involved in violent interactions, the aggression in E and K-A games may be more fantastic in nature. Yet studies show that children below the age of 8 have difficulty understanding the difference between fantasy and reality (Morison & Gardner, 1987). Thus, violence engaged in by attractive robots may heighten the risk of learning among young game players. A few other character trends are worth noting. For one thing, the majority of the characters involved with violence are male and white. Thus, the demographic make up of violent characters in video games is very similar to those on television (see Wilson et al., 1997; Smith et al., 1998). For another thing, the proportion of attractive characters involved with violence in video games is quite low. Overall, only 10% of all perpetrators in violent video games possess good or prosocial qualities. As noted above, attractive characters can heighten the risk of imitation. Thus, this seems to be one risk factor that is less frequent in interactive games than it is on television. Several differences also emerged on the violence-related variables by rating. First, the types of weapons used varied by rating. Guns and other unconventional
Violent Video Games -- 27 weapons are more likely to be featured in games rated for mature audiences than in those games rated for all audiences. As noted earlier, conventional weapons can prime aggressive thoughts and heighten the likelihood of aggressive behavior (Berkowitz & Le Page, 1967; Carlson et al., 1990). However, video games rated for all audiences are more likely to feature violent interactions involving characters natural means. When compared to mature games, perpetrators are more likely to use their own bodies to inflict pain and suffering in general audience games. This weapon choice has implications for the child audiences. In explanation, violence committed by natural means may be easier for children to imitate because the weapons are at their disposal. As a result, younger children may be more likely to practice this type of violence and then perform it. Thus, general audiences games also pose risk for younger players. Second, the extensiveness and graphicness of violence varied by game rating. Mature games are more likely to feature repeated acts of violence than are games rated for all audiences. Indeed, a full 60% of all violent interactions in mature games involved repeated instances of aggression. Thus, repeated exposure to acts of aggression in video games may function as a form of cognitive rehearsal that strengthens and reinforces aggressive scripts for social problem solving stored in memory. The violence in mature video games is also contextualized by blood and gore. A full 56% of the 10-minute violent segments featured blood and gore in mature games whereas only 4% of the segments in general audience games did. Yet the impact of blood and gore in interactive media is unclear. It may be the case that consequences of violence function as cue that informs the player that aggression is dangerous and results in painful outcomes. In this sense, blood and gore may actually decrease the risk of
Violent Video Games -- 28 learning. It may also be the case that blood is a cue that informs players that they won the aggressive bout. In this sense, the presence of blood may actually function as a positive reinforcement for violence thereby heightening the risk of aggression. Future research is needed to understand the impact that the presence or absence of carnage in video games has on players aggressive reactions. Third, the reason or motive for violence differs by ratings. Mature games are more likely to feature violent interactions that are justified or socially sanctioned than are those games rated for general audiences. As noted above, justified violence increases the risk of learning aggression (Meyer, 1972). Fourth, the visual perspective of the violence varies by rating. Mature games are more likely to feature the player as the aggressive character than are games rated for general audiences. Almost a quarter of the violent interactions (21%) in mature games do not feature the perpetrator anywhere on screen. Rather, the player perceives him/her self as the aggressive stalker in the game. These types of games may be the most lethal to players because the violence may be significantly more arousing and involving than when the player sees an aggressive character on screen. Given the frequency of these 1 st person interactions, more research is needed to assess what impact such games have on children s learning and enactment of aggression. Overall, the distribution of a few contextual variables did not differ by rating. For example, most of the violence in video games is lethal in nature. That is, a full 78% of all violent interactions featured aggression that would result in moderate or extreme harm in the real world to an average sized human. Also, a great deal of the violence in video games is presented explicitly. In explanation, over three fourths of the segments feature
Violent Video Games -- 29 violence up close or near the viewer which may facilitate attending to and encoding the violent acts. Very little violence is presented in contexts where aggression is punished. That is, 98% of the segments feature no punishment for aggression. Finally, almost half (41%) of the segments present the juxtaposition of humor and violence. As noted above, such depictions may increase the learning and enactment of aggression. Clearly, the findings suggest that much of the violence presented in video games rated T or M poses risk for negative effects. The basic prototype or template for aggression in mature video games is human perpetrators engaging in repeated acts of justified violence involving weapons that results in some blood shed to the victim. General audience games also features elements of risk, especially for younger audiences. The template of violence in these games is that attractive robots engage in violence using their own natural means. Although this is one of the first studies to ever assess the amount and context of violence in video games, it is not without its limitations. First, we only assessed violence in popular video games. As such, the data may already be antiquated with the release of new games and interactive software. Second, we only assessed the first 10-minutes of game playing. As game time increases, video games tend to become more difficult, and this is often accomplished through increasing the number of hostile characters or acts a game player must contend with. As such, the frequency of violent behavior may increase as the game goes on. Finally, our sample was drawn from taped recordings of games played by individuals with approximately equal experience with home gaming systems. It is possible that individuals with different levels of experience and skill may be able to experience different amounts of violent content, depending on the parameters of the game