Dean Serritella

Journal Summary #2 – First Person Shooter Video Games and Aggression During Video Game Play

Word Count: 907

What is the purpose of the research?

The purpose of this research is to find the effects of violent video games on children

and see how aggression correlates with a violent video game such as a first person

shooter game.

What are the hypotheses of the study?

In this research there were two hypotheses, the first one was “H1: There will be an

increase in the aggression and physiological arousal levels of the participants,

compared to baseline, due to the continuation of playing a violent first person

shooter video game” (Bartlett, Harris, and Baldassaro 490). The second hypothesis

stated that “H2: There will be a stronger increase in aggression, from baseline, after

participants play a violent FPSG with an interactive light gun compared with playing

the same video game with a standard controller” (Bartlett, Harris, and Baldassaro

490).

Who are the research participants?

In this study the participants included 85 males and 14 females that were

undergraduates at Midwestern University. The average age of the participants were

19. The reasoning for the age being 19 is because most video games played is

around this age group therefore you don’t see many older adults playing violent

video games.

What materials did the authors use?

The materials used in this examination was a video game called Time Crisis 3, a Play

Station 2, and 2 different kind of controllers-interactive light gun, and a standard

controller. The video game is very violent and consists of the main character that is

on a peaceful island and try to shoot enemies that invaded the area while trying to

avoid being killed.

What procedures were used in the study?

That the procedures that were taken in the research was heart rate monitors were

hooked up to the participants finger and measured 3 times. The researchers then

gave the participant a packet full of questions to see where the baseline was for

aggression. The participants then got a quick tutorial on how to play then game then

proceeded to play the game for 15 minutes. After the 15 minutes was up the heart

rate monitor was then measured again 3 times. This process occurred another time

after the first game play but with a different controller.

What did the authors measure?

The author’s measured frustration, physiological arousal, state aggression, and

hostility. Frustration was conducted by seeing if there were any significant

differences in frustration during game play. Physiological arousal information was

gathered by “was dependent upon the amount of pressure, the temperature of the

participant’s index finger and if there was a physical cut on the index finger”

(Bartlett, Harris, and Baldassaro 492). The state aggression “was conducted on the

summation of the two story stem categories to test for the main effect and for

interactions” (Bartlett, Harris, and Baldassaro 492). The last part, hostility was

measured by “asking participants to rate how hostile they are feeling right now,

using a single item” (Bartlett, Harris, and Baldassaro 493).

What did the authors find?

The author’s found that when the participants used the interactive light gun, their

hostility scores went up compared to the standard controller. How they found this

was by asking the participants how they felt before and after playing the game. In

addition they found in their study of state aggression that from baseline it went up

over time. Meaning that by then they were more aggressive because of playing the

game. Psychological arousal also increased from baseline. The way they measured

arousal was from heart rate monitors and the heart rate went up. On the other hand

in their research of frustration they found out there was not a significant difference

in the participant’s frustration.

Were the findings consistent?

The author’s findings were consistent in the experiment. The data that was collected

showed that when a participant is playing a violent video game there aggression and

hostility rise dramatically from the baseline. Other findings that were consistent

were the participant’s aggression, hostility, and heart all went up when using a

certain type of controller. However, the researchers did find a few limitations to

their methods such as not having reliable heart rate monitors, and also the people

them selves being how aggressive they are generally. The researchers didn’t know if

the participants have played the game or not coming into the study. Although there

were limitations to the study that would cause doubt but their findings were still

consistent with previous research on video games and aggression.

What is the overall message to the reader?

The main message to the reader should be that when a teenager is playing a violent

video game, their aggression does rise up and show significant increase. Not only

does their aggression increase but also their hostility and arousal. Statistics do show

that violent video games do put teen-agers into a more hostile state of mind and also

into an aggressive state. In my opinion the message is that violent video games could

make people more aggressive but it might not. However with all the limitations that

the author listed off shows that there are still holes in the research.

Citation Page:

Bartlett, Christopher, Richard Harris, and Ross Baldassaro. "Aggressive Behavior."

Longer You Play, the More Hostile You Feel: Examination of First Person Shooter Video

Games and Aggression During Video Game Play. Vol. 33. 2007. 486-497. Print.