Right: Iowa State University Professor Craig Anderson, who co-authored a study for the March 2010 issue of the Psychological Bulletin. The study found that exposure to violent video games increased aggressive thoughts and decreased empathy in youths regardless of age, sex or culture.Arguments against the introduction of an R18+ video game rating
1. Violent video games may lead to violent or other undesirable behaviourIt has been claimed that playing violent video games, especially over long periods, may lead to violent and other anti-social behaviours. Children, in particular, are seen as vulnerable to the effect of such games.
It has been claimed that part of the increase in aggressive behaviour among children and adolescents is linked to the amount of time children and teenagers are allowed to play video games.
In one study by Walsh (2000), a majority of teenagers admitted that their parents do not impose a time limit on the number of hours they are allowed to play video games. The study also showed that most parents are unaware of the content or rating classifications of the video games their children play.
In another study conducted by Gentile, Lynch, Linder & Walsh (2004) 'adolescent girls played video games for an average of 5 hours a week, whereas boys averaged 13 hours a week'. The authors also stated that teens who play violent video games for extended periods of time tend to be more aggressive; are more prone to confrontation with their teachers; may engage in fights with their peers and see a decline in school achievements. (Gentile et al, 2004).
A recent comparative analysis of studies of the effect on players of violent video games suggests that these games have adverse effects. The analysis 'yielded strong evidence that playing violent video games is a significant risk factor for both short-term and long-term increases in physically aggressive behaviour,' writes Iowa State University psychologist Craig Anderson, the paper's lead author. A connection between anti-social behaviour and violent video game playing was seen 'regardless of research design or conservativeness of analysis', and was true for both men and women, older and younger players, and those in Eastern and Western nations.
'Concerning public policy, we believe that debates can and should finally move beyond the simple question of whether violent video game play is a causal risk factor for aggressive behaviour; the scientific literature has effectively and clearly shown the answer is yes,' Anderson and his colleagues conclude. 'Instead, we believe the public policy debate should move to questions concerning how best to deal with this risk factor.'
2. Interactive games have a stronger impact than passive watching
It has been claimed that the participatory quality of video games gives them a greater capacity to affect the behaviour and attitudes of players.
Victims of Crime Commissioner Michael O'Connell has stated while R18+ violence in films was clearly entertainment, participating in make-believe violence in a game created less empathy for the 'victims' involved.
The Guardian for Children and Young People works within the South Australian Office of the Guardian for Children and Young People as an independent body that reports to the Minister for Families and Communities. Its head is Pat Simmons. Ms Simmons has stated, 'People will say, "What is the difference between the games and violent movies?", and it is the interaction, the getting involved, rather than just watching.
I am not advocating children watching it either, but they are not just seeing violence in these games, they are participating in it or watching an adult participating it, they are in there playing the game.
There was new evidence as recently as two weeks ago showing the link between the actual participation of violence in games and violent behaviour.'
The same point has been made by the Australian Christian Lobby, which states, '"The interactive nature of computer games causes their content to have a greater impact on players than the effects of similarly rated filmic depictions of violent or sexual conduct on viewers of movies.'
It has also been claimed that violent video games have a more negative effect of young people's psychological health than other forms of media. On September 9, 2009, it was reported that adolescents who used video games the most had the worst self-reported health, including problems with depression and anxiety.
Those using computers for other reasons described themselves as being slightly healthier on average - while using the telephone and watching television did not appear to correlate to worsened or improved health scores, according to the study of nearly 1000 Victorian teenagers. The leader of the research team, Melissa Wake, a pediatrician at Melbourne's Royal Children's Hospital and the Murdoch Children's Research Institute, said the results indicated that 'unsupervised, violent video games cannot be seen as a good thing'.
3. It would be difficult to prevent children accessing R18+ video games
It has been argued that were Australia to allow the importation and sale of R18+ video games it would be very difficult to keep them out of the hands of children.
Access to R18+ films is monitored by cinemas. Access to R18+ video games would have to be monitored within the home and this is far more difficult. It has also been argued that many children play video games with friends outside their own homes, so even parents who successfully managed to monitor their own children's game playing would not be able to control what games their children played at other venues.
The Australian Government's Discussion Paper on this issue includes the following, 'Computer games are played in the home, so once a game has been purchased, the responsibility for ensuring that it is not accessed by minors lies with parents and other adults. This effect of an R18+ classification for computer games is the same as for DVDs classified R 18+. Even with the availability of parental locks, international research indicates that parents may not be well positioned to enforce classification restrictions.
Research by the New Zealand Office of Film and Literature Classification found that: "Some underage gamers are attracted to restricted games and many are not likely to abide by an R18 classification. At least some stores and parents facilitate access to restricted games and break the law by doing so."
Research conducted for the British Board of Film Classification indicates that parents of children aged seven to 17 who play computer games, even when motivated to enforce restrictions, felt their children were able to obtain 'forbidden' games from other sources.'
The same Government Discussion Paper makes the further point, 'One of the principles in the National Classification System is that minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them. R 18+ games would, by definition, be unsuitable for minors.
However, permitting R 18+ level games would lead to more games at this level being available in Australia and consequently more minors being exposed to them...
The introduction of an R 18+ category may increase distributors' willingness to bring out games with higher level content. As a consequence, more material that is unsuitable for minors may be distributed and available in Australia, with more minors able to access it.'
4. Part of the pressure to increase the availability of violent video games is commercially motivated
It has been claimed that video game makers and sellers are primarily motivated by profit and produce violent and sexually explicit material because they believe these will sell well.
Legal Services India.Com is a legal advice Internet site which includes articles on many broadly based legal issues. In a discussion of censorship and video games, Piya Bose made the following comments, 'Children appear to like violent and high stress games. A study by Dr. Jeanne Funk, published in the Journal of India Paediatrics, found that among 7th and 8th grade students 35% preferred games involving violence, 29% preferred sports games (which also have some violent content), while only 2% preferred educational games.
For the past several years, video game manufacturers have chosen to amplify graphic and sadistic violence, while extraordinary technological advances have made the carnage ever more realistic. Some games also feature full motion video footage of real actors as opposed to artificial characters. BMX XXX, for instance, a game, released in Fall 2002, features footage of real women performing in a New York strip club.
In Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, a player can have sex with a prostitute and then get his money back by beating her to death with his fists or with a baseball bat, action that can be left n through the PlayStation controller, or she can be shot, complete with spurting blood and painful sound effects.
In Postal, the user gets to "go postal" and receive points for killing as many innocent victims as possible while they beg for money. Postal 2, scheduled for release in Spring 2003, is "so violent, so racist and homophobic, that four countries are already considering banning it because players can gruesomely kill African-Americans and gays."'
Critics of those who are calling for a R18+ video game classification have similarly claimed that the concern of some supporters of a new R18+ classification is not the civil liberties of game players but the profits of game makers and sellers.
5. The consultation process set up by the Attorney-General's Department was biased
The Attorney-General's Department has received tens of thousands of submissions from game designers and fans stating their frustration at being denied legal access to games available elsewhere.
However, the Australian Christian Lobby argues that the large number of submissions apparently supporting an R18+ video game classification is the result of an flawed process that involved a biased discussion paper and encouraged people to fill in a simple template form.
The Christian lobby groups have claimed that framing the consultation around the central question of whether the classification system should include an R18+ rating for computer games was problematic because the question is innocuous and without context, ignoring the content of R18+ games.
A similar point has been made by Barbara Biggins. Barbara Biggins is the Honorary CEO of the Australian Council on Children and the Media. The ACCM is a not-for-profit national community organisation whose mission is to support families, industry and decision makers in building and maintaining a media environment that fosters the health, safety and wellbeing of Australian children. Ms Biggins also served as the Convenor of the federal Classification Review Board 1994-2001.
Barbara Biggins has stated, ' if the survey question were framed as "There is a proposal to permit an R 18+ classification for computer games. This will mean that the sale and hire system will make available games with more extreme violence, more impactful depictions of sexual activity and drug taking than at present. Do you approve of this?", the responses might be considerably different.'
The Australian Christian Lobby has also warned against using the volume of responses on either side of the argument as a reflection of public attitudes, saying that more thorough submissions from community groups should be given greater weight.