Sign In
Register
Help
There's been many a time that newspapers and news programs have reported on someone (normally an adolescent) assaulting or even killing someone apparently due to the 'influence' of a video-game or film; however, the way you see this all depends on your stance on behaviour.
I personally believe that the majority of behaviour is learned through modelling and conditioning through parents, peers and the media; however, I also think that some behaviour is innate and that certain people have vulnerabilities to maladaptive thought processes and behaviours.
For example, I play violent video games (IMO anything violent is anything that involves the killing, maiming or otherwise hurting of another person/animal, also things such as stalking, psychological games/torture, etc), but I for one know I am not a psychopath, nor do I have urges to go about smashing people in the face with a hammer. Psychological research has found that some people have what is called a 'hardy personality' and are therefore more resistant to stressors than other people who lack a 'hardy' personality; in leu of this, could we also go on to say that some people who lack a defence mechanism such as this are more likely to be influenced by violence in video games? Or could we go on to say that despite being at a particular disadvantage and lacking this 'protection', we could still hold a strong code of ethics and morals and therefore withstand any temptation to hurt another human being or animal?
To support this, it's been found that some people who were victims of abuse during their childhood go on to become an abuser themselves- however, many don't. Could it be that they did learn the maladaptive behaviour wrongly inflicted upon them, but chose not to adapt to that type of behaviour because they knew it was wrong? Or could it simply be that some people learn in significantly different ways than others and channel their behaviour differently?
I've always thought that the media is very quick to blow cases such as this well out of proportion, and as with most 'controversial' issues, they home in them, even though they don't happen very often at all; can anyone remember the 'Muslims want to ban christmas' fandango? Well, that turned out to be absolute bollocks, and the Muslim community was equally as bloody confused as us as to where that cack had come from.
It's also common knowledge that children are incredibly quick learners, and often pick up some bad things along the way (an example being me accidently saying 'dick head' infront of my best friend's neice who's only a toddler and she was VERY quick to start running around the house shouting dick head for about 2 hours); in spite of this, children do begin to develop morals at an early age with the help of their parents, and as a result not all children will pick up on bad behaviours as easily as other children. For example, a child who lives in a very stable home environment and who is regularly reinforced to be nice to others and generally friendly is less likely to go around hitting other children- as long as the good behaviour is reinforced and the bad behaviour is punished in some way. A child who is often left home alone and is not comforted when upset is more likely to either isolate themselves as a form of punishment to their parents and family (found in the 'Strange Situation' experient done by Ainsworth in the States and later by Takahashi in Japan) or become frusterated and violent.
I do believe that you could expose 100 children to a violent video game and the amount of factors which are involved in whether they replicate the behaviour or not is endless; age is one thing, as between the ages of 2 and 12 children are developing at an alarming rate and the younger ages often copy behaviour without understanding it. Could you blame a child for mimicing the action of smashing a dish, despite the fact they don't understand the repercussions on their behaviour?
The amount of parental involvement is also another factor, as is their behaviour towards their children; authoritarian and lax parents are often the worse types, whereas parents who can balance the amount of work and play, as well as loving and reprimanding, are often thought to rear the most suitably conditioned children.
Although there's much more I'd like to say, I can't bloody think of anymore, and I know what I've written must be incredibly jumbled so sorry for any ensuing comfusion whilst reading it.
To conclude, I believe a child's behaviour relies more of who they are influenced by, rather than WHAT; most children don't have the opportunity to play violent games until their older, normally when their moral and ethic beliefs are already somewhat formed, and I believe it is these beliefs that the parent's, friends and media instil that influence a child's behaviour and their learned actions later on in life.What do you lot think about video games n violence then eh?
MultiQuote
