Violent Digital Games: Are They Just a Game?

Summer 2012

Previous issues

E-mail

Facebook

RESEARCH
Getting Hotter All the Time
Israeli Cinema: Perverting the Image of Holocaust Survivors
Can We Split Our Attention?
Violent Digital Games: Are They Just a Game?
Video Screening for ADD
The Sun's Cycles

STUDENTS & GRADUATES
Blind Date with the Open University
"The Open University: A Superior Training Ground for Professional Success"
From Tractor Driver to Master's Degree
A Family Affair

TECHNOLOGY
Digital University: Mobile Digital Books Project
Is Technology Tromping the ABC's?

INITIATIVES - LANGUAGE
Arabic-Speaking Students Study in Arabic
Sao Paulo University Students Learn About Israeli Society in Spanish

EVENTS
Graduation Ceremonies
The 7th Chais Conference
Evening in Honor of Dov Lautman
Visit by NASA Astronaut, William S. McArthur, Jr.
Exhibition: "Fireworks Blossoming in the Winter"
"Psychic Numbing of Genocide"

INTERNATIONAL
Conference at Cambridge University
Cambridge in Ra'anana
American Friends: The Open University Foundation

HIGHLIGHTS
Dr. Milly Perry
Prof. Yoav Yair
Prof. Yoram Eshet
Aviel Atias
Laurence Berry
Edna Tal
SuperBrands Israel
Prof. Judith Gal-Ezer
Co-editors: Elissa Allerhand, Ilene Bloch-Levy Photographer: Gideon Markowitz Graphic Designer: Laura Grinberg Web Manager: Batsheva Engelberg-Behr Web Master: Sonia Pechersky

RESEARCH
Violent Digital Games: Are They Just a Game? ...continued from previous page. Four Different Situations Digital games are a multi-billion dollar business. But as Tami learned, many seemingly violent digital games also have a pedagogic element to them. Can we harness this? "Apply the same cooperative game playing strategy to the world of educators, policy makers and game developers. Have these professionals work in a more cooperative, as opposed to more competitive environment, and the results could lead to enriched learning experiences for children" Tami Dubi In conducting her research study, Tami assembled a group of 10-12 year-olds, all familiar with online digital games. She selected an equal number – 28 of each – of girls and boys. She created four separate situations, in which each game reflected two situations: violent game; cooperative playing (playing with another individual) non-violent game; cooperative playing violent game; competitive playing (playing against another individual) non-violent game; competitive playing To create an 'aggression baseline,' prior to playing, the children filled out a widely used questionnaire constructed by Arnold H. Buss and Mark Perry of the University of Texas at Austin. The 29 questions are designed to measure four different types of hostility: physical aggression, verbal aggression, anger and hostility. Children were asked to respond to situations such as: Given enough provocation, I may hit another person If somebody hits me, I hit back I flare up quickly, but get over it quickly When frustrated, I let my irritation show I am sometimes eaten up with jealously Other people seem to get the breaks I sometimes feel that people are laughing behind my back After explaining the purpose and goal of each game, all 56 children were given a few minutes of practice sessions. The children then played each game for ten minutes, and upon completion filled out a second, "Hostility Scale" questionnaire, this one developed by Craig Anderson of the University of Iowa, which measures the children's current state of mind. Tami supplemented the written answers with an open interview, speaking with each child individually and compared their written responses with their verbal ones. After a healthy break, the children played another game, of opposite type and strategy to what they had previously played. In each case, the order of the games changed, so that the children could not anticipate or plan for the next game. The results of Tami's study were not only eye-opening, but also contradict much commonly accepted knowledge in this vast field of study. One, no difference was found between boys and girls in terms of violence or aggressiveness. Two, the level of aggressiveness in an individual is impacted not by the violence of the game itself, but rather by the game's strategy. Tami discovered that games played competitively against another player tend to lead to greater hostility, as opposed to games that are played cooperatively. Specifically, competitive, non-violent games raised the level of hostility among the players after the game, while cooperative, violent games lowered the hostility level. Digital Games in Education For Tami Dubi, and Prof. Yoram Eshet-Alkalai, this study is the first in what they hope will be additional research projects which can contribute to understanding aggressive behavior and hostility. Tami also believes that the results from her study can have challenging applications in education. Digital games are a multi-billion dollar business. But as Tami learned, many seemingly violent digital games also have a pedagogic element to them. Can we harness this? Tami suggests, "Apply the same cooperative game playing strategy to the world of educators, policy makers and game developers. Have these professionals work in a more cooperative, as opposed to a more competitive environment, and the results could lead to enriched learning experiences for children." Page: 1 2

RESEARCH

Violent Digital Games: Are They Just a Game?

...continued from previous page.

Four Different Situations

Digital games are a multi-billion dollar business. But as Tami learned, many seemingly violent digital games also have a pedagogic element to them. Can we harness this? "Apply the same cooperative game playing strategy to the world of educators, policy makers and game developers. Have these professionals work in a more cooperative, as opposed to more competitive environment, and the results could lead to enriched learning experiences for children"

Tami Dubi

In conducting her research study, Tami assembled a group of 10-12 year-olds, all familiar with online digital games. She selected an equal number – 28 of each – of girls and boys.

She created four separate situations, in which each game reflected two situations:

violent game; cooperative playing (playing with another individual)
non-violent game; cooperative playing
violent game; competitive playing (playing against another individual)
non-violent game; competitive playing

To create an 'aggression baseline,' prior to playing, the children filled out a widely used questionnaire constructed by Arnold H. Buss and Mark Perry of the University of Texas at Austin. The 29 questions are designed to measure four different types of hostility: physical aggression, verbal aggression, anger and hostility. Children were asked to respond to situations such as:

Given enough provocation, I may hit another person
If somebody hits me, I hit back
I flare up quickly, but get over it quickly
When frustrated, I let my irritation show
I am sometimes eaten up with jealously
Other people seem to get the breaks
I sometimes feel that people are laughing behind my back

After explaining the purpose and goal of each game, all 56 children were given a few minutes of practice sessions. The children then played each game for ten minutes, and upon completion filled out a second, "Hostility Scale" questionnaire, this one developed by Craig Anderson of the University of Iowa, which measures the children's current state of mind. Tami supplemented the written answers with an open interview, speaking with each child individually and compared their written responses with their verbal ones.

After a healthy break, the children played another game, of opposite type and strategy to what they had previously played. In each case, the order of the games changed, so that the children could not anticipate or plan for the next game.

The results of Tami's study were not only eye-opening, but also contradict much commonly accepted knowledge in this vast field of study.

One, no difference was found between boys and girls in terms of violence or aggressiveness.

Two, the level of aggressiveness in an individual is impacted not by the violence of the game itself, but rather by the game's strategy. Tami discovered that games played competitively against another player tend to lead to greater hostility, as opposed to games that are played cooperatively. Specifically, competitive, non-violent games raised the level of hostility among the players after the game, while cooperative, violent games lowered the hostility level.

Digital Games in Education

For Tami Dubi, and Prof. Yoram Eshet-Alkalai, this study is the first in what they hope will be additional research projects which can contribute to understanding aggressive behavior and hostility.

Tami also believes that the results from her study can have challenging applications in education.

Digital games are a multi-billion dollar business. But as Tami learned, many seemingly violent digital games also have a pedagogic element to them. Can we harness this?

Tami suggests, "Apply the same cooperative game playing strategy to the world of educators, policy makers and game developers. Have these professionals work in a more cooperative, as opposed to a more competitive environment, and the results could lead to enriched learning experiences for children."

Page: 1 2