Video Games are a primary source of violence

I accept. Thanks dishoungh, Since I'm pro, I should be the first. Let's beginViolence and Aggression are Closely AkinIt is important however, not to be confused between these 2 terms. As Dishoungh did not establish any definitions whatsoever, we are left with standard definitions.When a person commits an act of violence which is defined as "...an exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse" (1. http://www.merriam-webster.com...), it is an act of aggression. Aggression is defined simply as an "intent" to harm or to commit an act of violence(2. http://www.goodtherapy.org...#). However, aggression is merely an intention rather than an action. Violence is the action of aggression.An aggression may not be literal but in most case scenarios, Aggression will inevitably leads to Violence. The cognitive process makes them both interchangeable as both revolves across the same aspect. The intention to harm an individual will always translate into an action as the word "intention" applies. Further, to satisfy one's craving aggressive intention is to act on it literally, hence translating into violence. It is self explanatory between the two terms. Thus, any concept to prove aggression is a compelling case for violence.Further elaboration are given below. Effects of video games on violence are psychologically proven Surprisingly, Gamers have a huge preference for violent games, with 73% for boys and 59% for girls (Bunchman & Funk,1996) (3. http://ecap.crc.illinois.edu... ). Most of them preferred to play games that are subsequently filled with gore thereby exposing themselves to violent trends under a virtual screen. Opponents would argue that virtual screen exert no influence, but I would beg to differ. Ignoring such variables is a reductionist argument. Assessing the mind on violence requires a wide elaboration, not one that isolates variables just to justify an ideology. An empirical study was carried out by Calvert and Tan(4. http://serendip.brynmawr.edu...) of which set out to assess the influence of a virtual screen on gamers' arousal levels & their cognitive thoughts. Results shown were shocking. College students showed high levels of aggressiveness, a level of hostility and overall exhibited a hostile posture. In order to solidify this argument, they made EEG scans. As such, Empirical methods were carried out to make sure that there is no interpretive bias. EEG scans were used on the students, and results have shown that their heart rate increased drastically the moment they inhibit that hostile stance. Similarly, they also reported having dizziness and experience some form of nausea after prolonged periods of playing.Based on this study, the experiment had 2 aspects that is Psycho-metric tests and Qualitative analysis, of which are on the same boat as both proves that by playing games, Gamers inhibit a hostile stance. A case for violence nonetheless. No moral human being is going to deny these psychological studies, except those sleazy gaming journalist who are filled with nothing but bias. To assess something such as violence, one has to dig deep into Psychology. Furthermore It is logical to adopt this approach, violence is a social construct, we define what violence is according to our values, as such in order to assess this social construct made by our minds, we have to retreat back to Psychology. Besides, it is only way for the research process to be "value-free" away from gaming journalists' multiple layers of bias.An Overwhelming majority. This serves as both direct and indirect primary source for violence.The General Aggression Model have expounded the case for violenceThe GAM (Anderson & Bushman, in press, University of Missouri) [5. http://web.clark.edu...], along with its 3,033 participants along with the high concurrent validity supported by both Bunchman & Funk's experiment & Calvert and Tan's experiment, have altogether proved that video games as a primary source for violence beyond reasonable doubt.The model was intended to provide a causal correlation between violence and gaming. It assessed participants' perspectives based on their interpretation of virtual screensA simple demonstration of the GAM is given below [6. http://www.soc.iastate.edu...] The enactment or act of committing violence through video games can be determined by the cognitive processes within the participants' mind, and their interpretation of specific situations. This is known as a situational variable, because they primarily rest their judgment on a virtual screen(the environment affects their thought process). That environment is gaming.Research by Anderson & Bushman based on the GAM model shows that violent games increases aggressiveness because the environment, since it is a variable that affects participants' thought processes, teaches the observers to be aggressive by increasing arousals that effectively prime aggressive cognitions. This is evident through the scripts that observers or gamers went through a game such as racial slurs at the beginning of GTA 5, as if it was entirely acceptable in a civilised society. Once they hear this sort of slurs, they will likely follow as this case is similar to that of the GAM model.As seen above, the intention to harm,in other words, violence have a strong link. It all begins with the fact that each variable indirectly constitute aggression, therefore acting on violence as the end product. The craving intention of aggression has to be quelled somehow, and for 'somehow' to end, it has to be satisfied through violence. The evidence behind this fairly simple, yet compelling. Various studies(33 independent tests to be specific) collected over 3,033 participants as samples to ensure representativeness. 17 more tests are conducted on 1,151 participants to assess this claim, and here is the results(For relevance please see highlighted) [7. http://www.soc.iastate.edu...] The overall results shows positive correlation and the results were significant enough to prove violence to be primarily associated with gaming. For example, the correlation coefficient(r) for aggressive effect was 18 and the aggressive behavior was 19. This is a staggering high correlation. Weller puts it rather elegantly "Indeed, this effect of violent video games on aggression is as strong as the effect of condom use on risk of HIV infection".This model proffers a strong case for violence caused by video games. It has been empirically proven by more than 1 test. In practice, only 1 test is needed to prove that theory is true but in this case, there were immeasurable tests that justify this model. Proving this model proves that games are a primary source of violence. What, with most gamers having a large preference for violent type games, this even furthers the case 10 fold. It is beyond reasonable doubt. There is no denying this evidence presented.Children inevitably imitates aggression, resorting to violence without supervisionEven Children are prone to violence. They imitate their peers, especially those high up the ladder whether it be games or their parents. Firstly, opponents would argue that imitation does not occur most of the time, that it does not serve as a necessity. Critics argue that by looking at a virtual screen playing Dead Space 3's cliffhanger ending, it is not necessarily for everyone to follow what was observed. This claim is however not true at all considering several emperical studies. Bandura,Ross and Ross conducted a study based on imitating behaviors [8. http://www.sp.uconn.edu...]. The study used a bobo doll with the use of a model as a stooge and children as participants. Around 36 boys and 36 girls were taken to see if they were to imitate aggression simply by observing the stooge. The experiment may be accused of bias, but this is needlessly unwarranted criticism, as the experiment used the participants under 2 conditions, aggressive & non-aggressive[9. http://www.holah.karoo.net...]. The participants were observing both conditions, the experiment was entirely objective. If both conditions were followed and imitated by the participants, either non-aggressive or aggressive, the results would still endorse my premise, even if 1 of the condition is not met. Results shown were not conflicting, however , as it proves that children imitated both conditions. They followed exactly what the adults(stooges) did in that experiment, in both aggressive and non-aggressive thereby endorsing the theory of imitating aggression. For example, the adults used to hit the bobo doll as the experiment commence while one of the children was observing under the 3 stages. This also included verbal aggression to stimulate that of a virtual screen, with all its prepared scripts.As it were, the children followed the aggressiveness displayed by adults. This gives even more reasons to believe that by watching a virtual screen characterized by all sorts of plots will likely be followed by our youth. Bear in mind, this includes violence as well as the children displayed the same behaviour that of the stooges(I.E hitting the bobo doll)Finally, any story projected by our video games on a screen will likely be followed by children as they imitate behaviors according to this study. They will use the script to their own interpretation and use the environment to act upon aggression, thereby constituting violence. Imitation shown by the study to be 100%, that is all the participants followed the behaviors made by the stooges. Similarly they would follow what was projected by video games.===Case closed. I will provide more arguments in the next round. Rebuttals won't be here as per our agreement.Thank you Dishoungh for instigating a fun topic.