correlation between video games and aggressive behavior

CORRELATION BETWEEN VIDEO GAMES AND AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR

A Qualitative exploration

by

William Adkins

for

Methods of Social Research II: Qualitative Research

SOC-322

Dr. Gregory Carman

Saint Leo University

June 28th

, 2015

2

ABSTRACT

The following qualitative research analysis focuses on the correlation between

simulated video game violence and its effect on real-life violence from the perspective of

the professionals who teach, administer and facilitate the school environment (grades K –

12). Research into media violence – generically speaking – has been conducted since the

1970s; yet, there exists limited research that investigates the realm of video games.

Given that video games and the gaming culture are relatively new, it is understandable

that this gap in research exists. Still, with our technologically driven society, it would

behoove us to determine if the recent bouts of mass-violence have roots in the simulated

world. Disappointingly, this researcher was unable to garner sufficient raw data to make

any realistic determinations of the current environment. Nevertheless, the need is still

viable – as shown in the review of research literature – and should be undertaken in

additional studies to affect meaningful change in our approach to deterring and hopefully

ceasing violence and aggression once and for all.

3

INTRODUCTION

On April 20th

, 1999, two students walked into their school in Littleton, Colorado

and began what the New York Times (1999) called, “the deadliest school massacre in the

nation's history” to that point (P.A16). Almost eight years to the day after that incident

(April 16, 2007), a young college student took to the halls of Virginia Tech killing 33;

again, approximately five years after that (December 14, 2012) a lone gunman murdered

27 (20 of whom were elementary students) at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton,

Connecticut. These headlines have been constantly and alternatingly plastered on

newspapers, websites and television media since 1999 to evoke fear and outrage

whenever the topic of guns and violence is discussed. What makes this worse is that

these are only three of 31 confirmed school shootings in the United States as reported by

ABC in a timeline from thinkprogress.org (2012). Violence is not new, yet the idea of

blaming violent outbursts on the media – for any number of reasons – only began

recently: for video games specifically, “[t]he debate…can be traced back to the 1976

release of the game Death Race” (ProCon.org 2014). Since our society has embraced

technology, the ability of anyone with an internet connection to access violence (through

video games, movies and other video related vessels, as well as social media violence in

the form of bullying) there has become a need to understand how it affects us and who

among our population is most at risk. This research seeks to find the correlation between

violence and aggressive behavior and simulated violence experienced while playing

violent video games. The data being collected comes from education professionals via

email questionnaires.

4

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Media Bias

While there does exist a vast library of research available regarding violence in video

games and its effects on the human condition, it seemed appropriate to begin with a word

of caution. Christopher Ferguson (2007) undertook a meta-analysis to determine if such

a bias exists. In his research, he raised two valuable questions: 1. Are the effects of video

game violence serious or trivial and 2. Is there a demonstrated bias among the media’s

portrayal of said research as an attempt to “misinform the scientific community and

public in regards to the strength of this association” (P.471)? Media publications rely on

statistically significant data (quantitative); however, they frequently neglect the actual

sample size by not considering if it illustrates a meaningful correlation. Ferguson (2007)

takes aim at a study by Anderson and Dill (2000) and their use of the Taylor Competitive

Reaction Time Test stating that “only one of the four measures of aggression (noise

duration after loss trials) was significantly associated with playing a violent video game”

(P.472). In his conclusion, he asserts that there is no link – to date – that demonstrates a

causal relationship between Anderson and Dill’s measures of aggression and actual

criminality.

Race & Socioeconomics

Certain issues are not often discussed in connection with video game violence like race,

socioeconomics, environment and gender (to be discussed later). Yet, in her contribution

to Contexts, Karen Strenheimer (2007) breaches the discussion by asserting that

scapegoating video games removes the culpability of the criminals. She continues to call

5

the media to the carpet by stating that “white, middle-class killers retain their status as

children easily influenced by a game, victims of an allegedly dangerous product. (While)

African-American boys, apparently, are simply dangerous” (P.17). She continues by

diving into the child’s environment claiming, “[t]he biggest problem with media-effects

research is that it attempts to decontextualize violence” because it overlooks any

meaningful correlation of poverty, instability, family violence, unemployment, and

mental illness (Strenheimer 2007:16).

Gender

In 2010, Scientific American published an article by Dara Greenwood centering on one

particular video game: Grand Theft Auto. In her article, Mrs. Greenwood (2010) reports

that 99% of boys and 94% of girls currently play video games of one type or another.

She continues with a more powerful statistic stating the 50% of boys and only 14% of

girls who actively play video games prefer ones with a rating of Mature Greenwood

2010). Evoking the idea of primary and secondary socialization and its importance in

gender roles and socialized expectations (e.g. – the ways in which men and women define

their “self” based on how they were socialized as children), she also found that some

games “facilitate self-expression, role play, creative problem-solving, cognitive mastery,

positive social interactions and leadership” as well as the ideal of “wishful identification”

of characters from these games (Greenwood 2010). Still, the article contends that natural

tendencies are magnified under exposure to violence: the “aggressive outcomes of violent

game play are magnified in people who already have aggressive tendencies” (Greenwood

2010).

6

Physical Effects

There are a multitude of studies regarding the physical effects of violence (experienced,

simulated and viewed); however, Miranda Hitti (2006) of CBS News reported findings

from a study by Nicholas Carnagey in which he utilized 257 college undergraduates. The

study split the students into two groups: before playing a video game, each student was

administered a pre-assessment survey, then they played either a violent or nonviolent

video game (Hitti 2006). Once the gaming was completed, they were administered a

post-assessment survey and asked to watch a 10 minute video of real-life violence (Hitti

2006). During this viewing researchers measured their galvanic skin response (this

“measures the skin’s electrical resistance…[which is an] indication of bodily arousal”)

(Hitti 2006). Once the data had been collected and analyzed, researchers found that

students who played the violent video games showed less physical response than students

who played nonviolent video games during the galvanic skin response. Possibilities for

further study suggested in this article – to be discussed further in a following section –

include the question of whether or not video games are more desensitizing than other

forms of media because they are interactive (Hitti 2006).

General Gun Research

Much like media bias, access to information has been an issue that every researcher

venturing into this topic has had to navigate. Footnotes offered a glimpse into this

concern with an article from its executive Sally Tillman (2013). In her article, Mrs.

Tillman (2013) highlighted the lack of research on gun violence saying, “Since 1996,

federal agencies…have been barred from supporting research on gun violence apart from

7

some that focuses on the criminal use of illegal firearms” (P.2). In a similar article in The

Journal of the American Medical Association, Arthur Kellerman and Frederick Rivara

(2013) inferred more directly that this had to do with the fact that funding from congress

to the CDC is politically motivated by the pro-gun lobby stating, “The House of

Representatives removed $2.6 million from the CDC's budget—precisely the amount the

agency had spent on firearm injury research.” One of the elements of power is the

control of information and it seems “To ensure that the CDC and its grantees got the

message, the following language was added to the final appropriation: ‘none of the funds

made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control’” (Kellerman and Frederick

2013). There are references in both to root cause interventions vice pump handle quick

fixes and more open availability to funding as a means “to promote greater public

understanding of human events” in an effort “to reduce the number of US residents who

die each year from firearms” (Tillman 2013, Kellerman and Frederick 2013).

Emotional & Behavioral Effects

“The debate over violent video games can be traced back to the 1976 release of the game

Death Race,” which, by today’s standards would be considered a child’s game

(ProCon.org 2014). Yet, the vast majority of modern video games contain some measure

of violence and, according to Christopher Kneifer (2014), “approximately half of video

games include serious violent actions” (P.1). In a research study by Brad Sheese and

William Graziano (2005), titled “Deciding to Defect: The Effects of Video-Game

Violence on Cooperative Behavior,” they tested the effects that violent video games had

8

on dyadic cooperation by analyzing data collected from surveying the participants

thought process and expectations of their partner after playing video games. Their

findings - suggest that “playing a violent video game may have an effect on cooperative

behavior independent of alterations in the perceptions of other people’s motives” (Sheese

and Graziano 2005:356). There is also the theory of systematic desensitization set forth

in Mr. Kneifer’s (2014) thesis which claims “Systematic desensitization is a set of

processes designed to reduce unwanted negative emotional reactions to stimuli that

initially produce fear or anxiety (e.g., spiders, snakes, and blood)…used as a form of

training for nurses, and medical doctors” as well as US military personnel (P.12). Taking

a step further toward an aspect of this study particular, Nicholas Carnagey, Craig

Anderson and Bruce Bartholow (2007) take an in-depth look at the qualitative nature of

video games compared to other media with respect to the fact that “video games are more

interactive and immersive” (P.179). Regarding this interactive nature of violent video

games they state, “The interactive and immersive nature of violent video games could

more strongly engage neural systems associated with activation of aggressive behavioral

scripts and could more strongly suppress executive structures that would normally inhibit

aggressive and violent actions.” This lends credence to the notion of desensitization as a

physiological event because of the decreased physical reactions to real-life violence after

experiencing simulated violence as discussed earlier. “On average, American children

now spend more than 5 hours a day consuming screen media,” and the vast majority of

existent research illustrates “that playing violent video games may have negative effects

on social behavior” (Carnagey, Anderson and Bartholow 2007:178, Sheese and Graziano

9

2005: 356). These conclusions support the need for additional studies on this issue and

the realization that although various forms of desensitization are not caused by violent

video games alone, they can be (and are) attributed to the simulated violence experience

therein.

10

METHODOLOGY

Research Strategy

According to Elliot Aronson (2000), studies have shown that American children,

on average, are spending more time each year playing video games. The violence

experienced in those games, he asserts, is having a strong, short-term negative impact on

their cognitive abilities. Of special concern to researchers is the impact of said violence

and the influence it has on adolescents as an agent of shifting primary socialization

through the introduction of friends as our intimate others and how it alters our reflection

of self (e.g. – Charles Horton Cooley’s looking-glass self theory) (Sandstrom et al. 2014).

Consequently, the purpose of this research is to determine if a correlation does exist

between the aggressive, violent behavior being exhibited among children and adolescents

(grades K – 12) within the school setting and the simulated violence they experience

while playing or watching violent video games. The method being employed in this

research is a semistructured, convenience sample interview (Berg and Lune 2012)

utilizing open-ended questions with experienced members of the local education

community. To be as thorough and inclusive as possible, the term “experienced” is

defined here as a minimum of three years of employment and currently teaching or acting

in an administrative capacity, while the term “education community” is defined as

currently employed by the public education system (primary or secondary). Thus, the

target samples are all current, tenured employees of the public education system.

Reflexivity

While this and a few of the following sections cannot be completed at this time

11

due to the ongoing collection of data, a discussion of existing biases and safeguards can

be made. There are at least three aspects of the research that are susceptible to researcher

bias: the research itself, the researcher’s personal beliefs and the socioeconomic positions

currently occupied by the researcher. As a former education major, this researcher has

experience participating in discussions on this topic: there is an existing foundation of

literature and research regarding the possible cause(s) of and techniques to mitigate

and/or eliminate violence and aggression from the classroom. There is a standing

recognition of the environment from the academic side of the research and the vernacular,

which allows for an immediate connection with the proposed subjects. Both of these

positions allow a basis for framing the operational definition of the study. They also

leave open the possibility of bias. One example of bias discovered during the refinement

process was that women were wrongly eliminated as perpetrators. The current research

seldom mentions the female population specifically. Since those instances are so rare and

so rarely discussed, researchers can make certain unconscious assumptions based on the

aforementioned training and information that could obstruct the attempts of this study to

be completely objective.

Personal beliefs and individual socialization can also impact research if left

unchecked. Therefore, the experiences and training mentioned above along with a

person’s personal view of video games (favorable, unfavorable or indifferent), the idea of

individual agency and a person’s perception of reality vs. fantasy could have positive and

negative effects their thought process. More toward the subconscious, socioeconomic

factors like gender, race-ethnicity, religion and income level could skew both the

12

researcher and the informant’s perspective. For example, being white definitely has

advantages in an institutionalized setting like a school, so the perspective of race and

violence could be slanted to the point that “white, middle-class killers retain their status

as children easily influenced by a game, victims of an allegedly dangerous product.

(While) African-American boys, apparently, are simply dangerous” (Strenheimer

2007:17).

To place this research in the optimum position of objectivity, it has been made

available for review by peers, professionals and academics. Further, the researcher has

undertaken and completed ethics based training courses, understands and demonstrates

ethical standards of qualitative research and has committed to upholding the University’s

core values of respect and integrity.

Confidentiality

To maintain ethical standards as discussed above and to safeguard the

confidentiality of each individual informant who decides to participate in the interview

portion of this study, they have been assured that personal information (i.e. - name,

address, phone number, email, et al.) have not been shared with anyone else regardless of

their involvement in the research. For each informant, contact information was limited to

basic communication needs; this information was collected using electronic format only

and maintained in only one location so as to limit the possibility of data leak through loss

and/or redundancy, it is kept in an encrypted file that is password protected, the

researcher is the only person in possession of said password and the data will only be

maintained until the research is completed whereupon it will be completely scrubbed

13

form the researchers computer hard drive. Confidentiality during interviews (read: in the

field) – especially when utilizing the snowball sampling method – can be somewhat more

difficult. Still, the standards of ethical behavior dictate that a researcher not disclose

personally identifiable information or make references to mutually known parties that

would indirectly identify a person or group that was guaranteed confidentiality. Yet, as

this section is affected by the ongoing nature of data collection, a final determination and

analysis of informant confidentiality cannot yet be determined.

Population and Sample

This section is still evolving, so a complete determination cannot be fully

expressed, but that does not eliminate the possibility of a discussion at this juncture.

Regarding the qualitative portion of this study: as was discussed in the research strategy

section above, the target population of this research is experienced public school teachers

and administration personnel. To be as inclusive ad possible this does include tenured

professionals in the public school environment who are currently employed in a teaching

or administrative position for grades K – 12. The main sampling strategy being

employed here is the convenience sample, however, there have been selected instances of

snowball sampling as well.

Regarding the quantitative portion of this study: basic demographic information is

being collected to determine if there are any statistically significant trends among the

sampled population that could be generalized to a larger population. Some of the

variables that are being considered are income, race-ethnicity, gender, education and

years of experience. Each of these variables, either by itself or in combination with

14

another, has an effect on a person’s socialization and thusly their outlook and responses

to the interview questions. While it is difficult to say how widely applicable the

correlation(s) may be – should any exist at all – the findings would be highlighted in the

Findings and Discussion section below.

Data Collection

The total experience has been very frustrating and slightly disappointing. As the

collection is now complete I can definitively express my personal affectation as vexing,

inadequate and anticlimactic. The main reason for this is that there has been a

remarkable shortage of interview volunteers and this, difficult as this might be, is more

likely than not a direct result of the design of the research, which makes the annoyance

all the more disappointing. The interviews require education professionals in order to

collect the data and being that this is the end of the school year, which is one of the

busiest times of the year for everyone in the profession, it should come as no surprise that

these professionals are reluctant to interrupt or delay their pending summer break. In

retrospect, this research – if left unaltered in all other aspects – should have been

attempted during the late fall or early spring to ensure maximum participation from the

target audience.

There have been two minor alterations to the original design submitted to the

University’s IRB in order to expedite the data collection process. The scope of possible

participants was expanded to include primary school professionals (grades K – 7) and the

expected interview timeframe was reduced from 30-60 minutes to 30-45 minutes in an

attempt to make the perspective interviewees less intimidated by the time commitment.

15

There was a sense of anticipation regarding having to make further amendments to the

original design for the reasons mentioned above in order to garner sufficient data as to

complete the Analysis, Findings and Discussion sections of the paper, but I was able to

collect some data without additional alteration.

Analytical Strategy

This section is difficult to complete due to the limited amount of data that was

collected. Unfortunately, only about a quarter of the desired data was successfully

collected which makes analyzing trends next to impossible without being simply written

off as coincidence. Still, as the content of this analysis will be populated with interview

data, the interpretive approach is still the logical choice of content analysis. As Berg and

Lune (2012) have stated, the interpretive approach “allows researchers to treat social

action and human activity as text” (P.350). The transcripts that are to be submitted along

with the final research paper will serve as the text and will be coded (as much as

possible) during analysis to facilitate the ideal response to the stated research question.

Whether or not conventional, directed or summative content analysis will be able to

emerge as the vessel(s) for coding said data remains to be seen for the reason mentioned

above. Than being said, the plan – as it is now – would presumable include both

manifest and latent analysis; however, in certain cases there is no need to “seek to

discern…(the) meaning” of the analysis as Berg and Lune (2012) state unless that

meaning holds bearing on the topic or subtopic being discussed and analyzed (P.354).

Further, it was the researcher’s intent to by utilize a mixture of qualitative and

quantitative data and analysis to explain or show causality among the frequency,

16

magnitude and structure of the coded data as explained in the Module 5 Audio Visual

Presentation. Again, the lack of raw data will more than likely make this attempt moot;

however, should any significant coincidence in the data exist, it will be presented in the

Findings and Discussion below.

Finally, as the original mode of collection had been one-on-one interviews, the

dramaturgical analytical approach was also being considered. Yet, since the actual

method of collection ended up being emailed correspondence, the symbolic interactionist

imperative regarding the role-taking (Berg and Lune 2012) that exists between

interviewer and interviewee was a nonissue. That said, the researcher still plans to utilize

the dramaturgical theory pioneered by the acumens of Erving Goffman – if the

opportunity presents itself – during the analysis of the text to gain a “better understanding

of how people play roles (or assume the way others perform roles) and construct social

structure” regarding the topic and subtopics relayed during the interview process

(Sandstrom et al. 2014:35).

Findings and Discussion

Quantitatively speaking: both respondents were middle-aged (mean age = 42),

non-Hispanic white males with a combined 29 years of professional experience in the

education profession. Informant #1 currently holds a bachelor’s degree and informant #2

has a master’s degree; however, neither informant has any current desire to further their

own education (at least not in the pursuit of an additional degree). Without a third

informant we are unable to substantiate a trend in the data. Yet, given the expected

socialization of the two informants, one can expect their perspectives would be slightly

17

(possibly significantly) divergent from those of a female, minority, less tenured

professional or – perhaps – someone with a combination of more than one of those

qualities. As it is, the perspective of the middle-aged white male will have to suffice for

this analysis.

Regarding the qualitative portion of this research: the schedule was divided into

four sections and the analysis will follow those same divisions. The first section,

Professional Observations, deals primarily with personal observation regarding violence

in the informant’s respective school(s) and whether or not they believe there has been an

increase in violence (specifically related to video gaming). The answers given by the two

respondents for this section were from both ends of the spectrum. According to

informant #1, “[v]iolent crime, just like violent behavior, has been trending downward

since the 1980's”; however, according to informant #2, although he admits to not

personally witnessing violence, he “would speculate that fights on campus have been

slightly increasing as of the past year or so.” Informant #1 sounds much more confident

and specific in his response – though he did not site his source – while informant #2 was

more speculative (more subjective given the disclaimer that he had not directly witnessed

violence). The split between the informants was also apparent in the question of the

school’s geographic location: informant #1 has taught at both urban and rural locations

and asserts the rural school where he previously taught “was far more violent than the

school where I teach now, which is an urban school” and informant #2 – again subjective

in his response – believes, “urban schools have a higher proclivity toward violence than

rural ones due to the more diverse student populations.” They both offered

18

socioeconomic reasons as explanations for their respective responses which acts an

excellent segue into the second section of the schedule, Demographics.

The second section of the schedule asks respondents to offer more subjective

perspective regarding societal roles regarding race-ethnicity, religion, gender et al. and

whether or not those roles (whether self-ascribed or not) have an effect on adolescents

and their behaviors. Both informants assert a belief in individual agency in their answers

to the gender related questions with one small deviation from informant #2. When asked

specifically if he believed there had been an increase in violent actions perpetrated by

females he stated, “I would speculate that violent behavior among female students has

increased…perhaps (due) to changing social views of gender differences as well as shifts

over time in how girls are brought up.” Yet, the two seemed more diametrically opposed

in their responses to cultural variables. Informant #1 stayed true to his belief in

individual agency stating that violence is taught and the current generation is being

enabled regardless of the presence or lack of a nuclear family or income disparities.

Further, informant #1 seems to think that racial inequalities do not exist in 2015 and, as

such, do not cause issue regarding the marketing or propensity of a specific race to trend

toward a specific type of game. This is evidence of a WASP perspective that would be

expected of someone with his socialization, however, and should be taken with a grain of

salt as it were. Where he does see an effect is from the religiosity of the household in

which the child is raised. Specifically, he stated that he believes “religious households

would tend to skew downwards in the ownership of video game consoles.” Concerning

that same line of questioning, informant #2 seemed to be heading in the exact opposite

19

direction as informant #1. In his view, cultural variables like economic stability, the

presence of a nuclear family as opposed to only single-parent households and the

attribution of violence regarding race-ethnicity do have an effect on adolescents.

Specifically, he expresses that he does not “believe that religion is much of an obstacle

towards children being attracted to violent video games,” which is at odds with informant

#1’s statement from above. Similarly, regarding family influence, informant #2 said,

“single parent vs. nuclear family dynamics can play a significant role in student behavior

overall (including a proclivity towards violence)” and that is also the opposite of

informant #1. Again, as stated earlier, there is no way to determine if a trend exists

among respondents as there were only two; however, if there were more raw data, this

would be an excellent opportunity to make said determination.

The third section of the schedule, Cognitive Effects, is an inferential section used

to establish if corollaries can be directly made between violence and video games in the

opinions and/or experiences of each informant. Unfortunately, this section was only

partially populated by both informants, so no real analysis can be performed save for the

lone claim by informant #1 that youth today, oversaturated by violent media as they are,

are still shocked my images of real violence. The last half of this section concerns the

informant’s ownership and restrictions over children (if applicable) of gaming systems

and games. Both informants claim they do own at least one system and they do allow

their children to operate them. Informant #1 claims ownership of a Nintendo Wii and

states that his child/children are regulated to “No more than 1 hour screen time per day.”

Informant #2 claims ownership of two different Xbox systems and admits that his stepson

20

is grown now, but his screen time was not regulated before he became an adult.

Informant #2 also mentions four younger stepdaughters and that they might like to own a

gaming system but do not “due to financial reasons.” It is interesting that he mentions

the use of social media by the older two and the use of apps on an iPad by the younger

two; however, he does not consider these to be in the same realm as an Xbox or a

PlayStation. One of the benefits of doing a one-on-one interview as opposed to an email

questionnaire would have been the ability to deploy a probing question here to determine

how both informants define what a “game system” is and what would constitute

“violence” in a video game. Sadly, as the raw data were collected only via email

correspondence, subjective inference will have to suffice.

The final section of the schedule, titled The Columbine Effect, covers media

sensationalized school violence and the informants’ reactions to their school districts’

responses and implementations of safety controls at their respective schools. Regrettably,

like the previous section, this was only partially answered in the responses (informant #2

did not provide data for any of the questions in this section). The answers provided by

informant #1 were sparse and might have been made more robust during a one-on-one

interview were probing questions would have been a possibility. For example, informant

#1’s use of certain profession specific terminology – “Safe Schools Procedures, School

Resource Officer, Table-top simulations and planning” – would have provided a perfect

opportunity for clarifying questions and possible subtopics (if the avenues presented

themselves and were appropriate).

21

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, it is clear from the literature review that a correlation between

media violence and violent actions exists: however, regarding this particular research

(video game violence) the question remains – regrettably – unanswered. Whether or not

the fault was in the design or scope of the methodology or the timing of its execution (or

some other combination therein) is uncertain. What is certain, nonetheless, is that this is

an issue that requires additional research to determine if a specific correlation between

simulated violence and real-life violence exists. In future research endeavors, it would be

interesting to see if this study could be completed in juxtaposition to a similar study

(same area and/or schools) with data collected from the student’s perspective as well to

compare and contrast. Be that as it may, it is clear that in our technology driven

environment, a meaningful answer to this question is one that should be sought as it just

may literally be a matter of life or death.

22

SCHEDULE QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

Correlation Between Video Games and Aggressive Behavior: A Qualitative

Exploration

Voluntary Demographic Information†

1. Age (in years): ________

2. Gender* (Circle one):

a. Male

b. Female

3. Race-ethnicity* (Circle one):

a. Non-Hispanic White

b. Non-Hispanic Black

c. Hispanic

d. Asian

e. Native American

f. Two or more

g. Other: _________________

4. Years experience teaching/administrating: ________

5. Highest level of education completed:

a. Bachelor’s Degree

b. Master’s Degree

c. Doctorate

d. Other: ________________________

23

6. Do you have plans to continue your education?

a. Yes

b. No

c. Undecided

*Self-identified

†Respondent’s desire not to provide this information will not affect participation in research study.

24

Schedule Questions

Violence in Schools – Professional Observations

1. What kinds of violence or violent behaviors have you witnessed in your career?

a. In your experience, how has the violence evolved over the years?

b. Have they been more prevalent in a specific school/classroom?

c. In your experience, do you find that urban or rural schools have a

proclivity toward violence? Can you elaborate on that?

2. In your opinion, would you describe in as much detail as you can any violent or

aggressive scenario that you believe may have been influenced by outside sources

– specifically video games?

3. In your opinion, has there been an increase in the violence you have witnessed?

(Yes/No)

a. Why do you think that is the case? What do you attribute to this

(correlation to #4)?

b. What behaviors do you believe are contributing to this increase in

violence?

Video Games and Demographics – Speculations

4. In your opinion, do you believe the lure of violence in video games more strongly

influences:

a. Gender?

i. Is it more sought out by males or females, in your experience?

25

Do you think violent behavior has increased or decreased among female students in

recent years? What do you attribute that increase/decrease to?

ii. Why do you believe that is?

iii. If I were to say, “Society’s gender definitions predetermine things

like this,” would you agree or are we affecting them with our

individual behaviors?

b. Is it cultural?

i. Does access (read: money) have any effect? Do you believe that

the “rich” have more access to these extras than the “poor” in

society?

ii. Do you feel that single parent vs. nuclear family dynamics play a

role in a child’s access to games and gaming equipment?

iii. How are religion; in your opinion, would you expect the religiosity

of an individual or their family to be an obstacle? How so?

c. A particular race-ethnicity?

i. Does privilege play a part in how violence is attributed and/or

reported based on race?

ii. Do societal stereotypes provide an accurate depiction of the video

games people assume are more often played by one race-ethnicity

over another?

5. Have you ever overheard a student talking about a game they were playing?

26

a. What are the attitudes of those students who discuss their gaming

exploits?

b. Are they excited about the mayhem they are able to cause during their

gaming or do they seem more detached in their discussions?

Cognitive Affects of Simulated Violence – Inferences

6. There have been quite a few studies to determine if violent video games – and

other media – can cause long-term effects on attitudes and violent tendencies, but

do you believe there is a stronger short-term affect?

7. Some critics claim that exposure to violent video game narratives desensitizes

children to violent actions. What are your feelings about this and why?

8. After hearing the following statement, tell me if you would you agree or disagree

and why or why not: “Video games promote violence and violent behavior, so it

is not surprising that teenagers are not shocked by real-life violence.”

9. Are there any comments you would like to make regarding video games and or

video game violence as it relates to this study?

10. Do your children/grandchildren have a gaming system?

a. If yes:

i. Which system and what games are most frequently played?

ii. What regulations/time limitations do you utilize?

b. If no: Why?

27

The Columbine Effect

11. Do you believe video game violence can alter or influence an adolescent to the

point that they “act out” or display more aggressive behaviors around their fellow

students?

12. What steps has your school or district taken to protect itself from school violence

on a large scale (i.e. – Columbine, Sandy Hook, et al.)?

a. Are there any training courses offered?

b. Does your school utilize the services of a resource officer, peer mediation

or any similar technique?

c. In your opinion, what safety services offered by your school or district

work and what could use improvements?

13. Is there anything else you would like to add?

28

Informant #1: Black = Original question Red = Respondent


1. Age (in years): 41


a. Male

b. Female




c. Hispanic

d. Asian

e. Native American

f. Two or more

g. Other: _________________

4. Years experience teaching/administrating: 18




c. Doctorate

d. Other: ________________________


a. Yes

29

b. No

c. Undecided

*Self-identified


Schedule Questions



In my career as a teacher the only violence I have seen in schools, with regards to

physical violence, is fighting.

a. In your experience, how has the violence evolved over the years?

In recent years, we have seen the development of cyber bullying via social media.

b. Have they been more prevalent in a specific school/classroom?

I do not have any baseline to say, but I don't think so.

c. In your experience, do you find that urban or rural schools have a


I will say that the school where I taught in Maryland, which was a rural school, was far

more violent than the school where I teach now, which is an urban school. I believe this

to be because of the population (under-educated) in the community at that school.




30

I have not seen any video-game violence in the schools where I taught. Literally none.

There are some gamers that use bad language when they game, but there has been no

physical altercation based on video games.


(Yes/No)

No

d. Why do you think that is the case? What do you attribute to this


Violent crime, just like violent behavior, has been trending downward since the 1980's. I

honestly believe it is because the lead has been reduced in the environment (gasoline,

paint, household products).

e. What behaviors do you believe are contributing to this increase in

violence?

I see no increase in violence.



influences:

f. Gender?


I believe it is marketed and primarily purchased by males, but I have no baseline data.

31



I believe violent behavior is down across the board, for the reasons I stated above.





No... I believe it is a person-by-person value system.

g. Is it cultural?



society?

I believe culture can breed violent or non-violent behavior, yes, but I don't think this

impacts American school children.



No... I feel this entire generation of kids has been entitled and enabled... whether by the

single parent or large nuclear families.



Yes, I believe religious households would tend to skew downwards in the ownership of

video game consoles.

32

h. A particular race-ethnicity?

No... all kids seem to enjoy video games.



No



over another?

Not in 2015, I don't think.


i. What are the attitudes of those students who discuss their gaming

exploits?

Not in 2015, I don't think.

j. Are they excited about the mayhem they are able to cause during their


They do not seem excited... rather just talking about a past-time.





Of course

33



I feel that any violent action, seen over and over, becomes a commonplace, non-shocking

event. Violence should scare and alarm people. They should not be desensitized to it.




I do not agree with this statement. I feel teenagers are indeed shocked by real-life

violence.



No.


Our family does, yes.

k. If yes:


We have a Nintendo Wii. The most commonly played game is Madden Football.


No more than 1 hour screen time per day.

l. If no: Why?

34




students?

I feel that if the student is isolated, bullied, and disenfranchised they could be susceptible

to violent proclivities.



Safe Schools Procedures, School Resource Officer, Table-top simulations and planning.

m. Are there any training courses offered?

Required training every year.

n. Does your school utilize the services of a resource officer, peer mediation


Yes

o. In your opinion, what safety services offered by your school or district


Rebuilding the school so there are less openings to the outside, with each opening having

a huge number painted over it.


No.

35

Informant #2: Black = Original question Red = Respondent


1. Age (in years): 43


a. Male

b. Female




c. Hispanic

d. Asian

e. Native American

f. Two or more

g. Other: _________________

4. Years experience teaching/administrating: 11




c. Doctorate

d. Other: ________________________


a. Yes

36

b. No

c. Undecided

*Self-identified


Schedule Questions



As a media specialist, I, fortunately, have not had to witness very many violent situations

in my career as an educator. While students do get into fights with each other on my

school campus, the fights have typically been broken up by school administrators by the

time I have arrived.

p. In your experience, how has the violence evolved over the years?

I do not have enough direct experience with violence in schools to be able to answer this

except to say that I would hazard a guess that girls are just as likely to get into fights

these days as boys (which I do not believe has always been the case).

q. Have they been more prevalent in a specific school/classroom?

I have taught in both rural and urban area schools and I would guess that fights are more

prevalent in the more urban based ones with more diverse school student populations.

r. In your experience, do you find that urban or rural schools have a


37

I would guess that urban schools have a higher proclivity toward violence than rural ones

due to the more diverse student populations in urban schools (ethnicity, economic level,

etc.).




I have not had any direct personal situations that I could link one way or the other as to if

they were influenced by outside sources like video games or not. I have seen national

stories on the news (school shootings, etc.) that have suggested that violent video games

were one influence on the perpetrator’s actions but in most cases there have seemingly

been multiple influences, not just video games.


(Yes/No)

s. Why do you think that is the case? What do you attribute to this


I have not personally witnessed an increase in violence at school but I would speculate

that fights on campus have been slightly increasing as of the past year or so.

t. What behaviors do you believe are contributing to this increase in

violence?

I would attribute this to several factors, such as upbringing, the popularity of texting and

social media, poor interpersonal communication skills, as well as things like video games

and other forms of entertainment students constantly watch.

38



influences:

u. Gender?


I would speculate that violent video games are more sought out by boys than by girls,

although I think the number of girls playing them has been on the increase.



I would speculate that violent behavior among female students has increased. I do not

know what to attribute the increase to other than perhaps to changing social views of

gender differences as well as shifts over time in how girls are brought up and parental

modeling at home.


See above answer.




I would speculate that society’s changing gender definitions is one determining factor.

v. Is it cultural?

39



society?

Yes, I believe that this is a factor.



I think the effect of single parent vs. nuclear family dynamics play a rather minimal role

in a child’s access to games and gaming equipment. Children tend to find access to these,

one way or another. However, I think that single parent vs. nuclear family dynamics can

play a significant role in student behavior overall (including a proclivity towards

violence).



I do not believe that religion is much of an obstacle towards children being attracted to

violent video games. I do believe that religion/religious upbringing can have an impact

on overall behavior (including a proclivity towards violence).

w. A particular race-ethnicity?



Perhaps, but it would purely be speculation on my part as to how violence is attributed

and/or reported based on race (and I would rather not speculate on that).

40



over another?

I do not know enough about the reality of video games to be able to reasonably speculate

on how accurately societal stereotypes depict them.


Occasionally.

x. What are the attitudes of those students who discuss their gaming

exploits?

The attitude is generally excitement (or disappointment) at the quality of game play,

graphics, etc.

y. Are they excited about the mayhem they are able to cause during their


They tend to be more excited than detached, recalling moves they made, etc.







41







Yes, my stepson (now grown, still in high school when he became my stepson) has had a

gaming system ever since I’ve known him.

z. If yes:


Xbox 360 and Xbox One. I’m not sure which games he frequently plays.


Alex is grown and on his own now. When he was in high school, we really didn’t

regulate his playing.

aa. If no: Why?

My four stepdaughters (two in high school, two in elementary school) do not have access

to any game systems right now. The older girls would enjoy having one but are into

other things right now, plus buying a new gaming system is not high on our list due to

financial reasons. The older girls do enjoy playing social media type games such as trivia

type games where they compete with their friends. The two younger girls are too young

for gaming systems that would have violent video games. (The games they tend to play

are iPad apps with cartoon characters, and the like.)

42




students?



bb. Are there any training courses offered?

cc. Does your school utilize the services of a resource officer, peer mediation


dd. In your opinion, what safety services offered by your school or district



43

REFERENCES

Aronson, Elliot. 2000. Nobody Left to Hate. New York: Holt.

Berg, Bruce L, and Howard Lune. 2012. Qualitative Research Methods for the

Social Sciences 8th

Ed. Boston: Pearson.

Brooke, James. 1999. “Terror in Littleton: The Overview; 2 Students in

Colorado School said to Gun Down as many as 23 and Kill Themselves in a

Siege.” The New York Times, April 21 pg. A16 Retrieved June 28th

, 2015

(http://www.nytimes.com/1999/04/21/us/terror-littleton-overview-2-students-

colorado-school-said-gun-down-many-23-kill.html).

Carnagey, Nicholas L., Craig A. Anderson and Bruce D. Bartholow. 2007.

“Media Violence and Social Neuroscience: New Questions and New

Opportunities.” Current Directions in Psychological Science 16(4):178-82.

“Do Violent Video Games Contribute to Youth Violence?” 2014. ProCon.org

Retrieved June 6th

, 2015 (http://videogames.procon.org/#Background).

Ferguson, Christopher J. 2007. “Evidence for publication bias in video game

violence effects literature: A meta-analytic review.” Aggression and Violent

Behavior: A Journal Review 12(4):471-81. Retrieved June 6th

, 2015

(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/13591789).

Greenwood, Dara. “Grand Theft Auto Is Good for You? Not So Fast…Most

evidence suggests ill effects from violent video games.” 2010. Scientific

American. Retrieved June 6th

, 2015.

(http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/grand-theft-auto-is-good/).

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/04/21/us/terror-littleton-overview-2-students-colorado-school-said-gun-down-many-23-kill.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/04/21/us/terror-littleton-overview-2-students-colorado-school-said-gun-down-many-23-kill.html

http://videogames.procon.org/#Background

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/13591789

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/grand-theft-auto-is-good/

44

Hillsman, Sally T. 2013. “Gun Violence: Lifting the Shackles on Federal

Firearms Research.” Footnotes 41(1):2, 4 (Retrieved from the American

Sociological Association on June 6th

, 2015).

Hitti, Miranda. 2006. Video Games Numb Players To Violence. CBS News

Retrieved June 6th

, 2015 (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/video-games-numb-

players-to-violence/).

Kellerman, Arthur L. MD, MPH and Frederick P. Rivara MD, MPH. 2013.

“Silencing the Science on Gun Research.” The Journal of the American Medical

Association 309(6):549-550. Retrieved June 6th

, 2015

(http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1487470#qundefined).

Kneifer, Christopher J. 2014. “A Comparison Study on Violent Video Games:

Explained by the Gamers Themselves.” Master’s Thesis, Department of Mass

Communications, University of South Florida, Tampa.

Sandstrom, Kent, Kathryn Lively, Daniel Martin and Gary Alan Fine. (2014.)

Symbols, Selves, and Social Reality: A Symbolic Interactionist Approach to Social

Psychology and Sociology. New York: Oxford.

Sheese, Brad E. and William G. Graziano. 2005. “Deciding to Defect: The

Effects of Video-Game Violence on Cooperative Behavior.” Psychological

Science 16(5): 354-7.

Shen, Aviva. 2012. “A Timeline of Mass Shootings In the US Since Columbine.”

Thinkprogress.org Retrieved June 28th

, 2015

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/video-games-numb-players-to-violence/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/video-games-numb-players-to-violence/

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1487470#qundefined

45

(http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/12/14/1337221/a-timeline-of-mass-

shootings-in-the-us-since-columbine/).

Strenheimer, Karen. 2007. “Do Video Games Kill.” Contexts 6(1):13-17

http://www.asanet.org/images/press/docs/pdf/Winter07ContextsFeature.pdf

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/12/14/1337221/a-timeline-of-mass-shootings-in-the-us-since-columbine/

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/12/14/1337221/a-timeline-of-mass-shootings-in-the-us-since-columbine/

http://www.asanet.org/images/press/docs/pdf/Winter07ContextsFeature.pdf