Final Manuscript with Color Figures[1]

EFFECTS OF VIOLENT AND NONVIOLENT VIDEO GAME PLAY ON LEVELS OF

AGGRESSIVE THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS IN SENSATION SEEKING ADULTS

By

STEVEN JOHN BISCH

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment ofthe requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS IN COMMUNICATION

WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITYSchool of Communication

MAY 2008

To the Faculty of Washington State University:

The members of the Committee appointed to examine the thesis of Steven John Bisch find it satisfactory and recommend it be accepted.

__________________________________________Chair

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledge the following people for their assistance on my thesis

project: Tiffany Whitelatch, who unknowingly gave me the idea to begin researching the effects

of video game playing; Richard Bisch for his technical support and gift of laptop computers with

which I completed this project; David Sonnenfeld for his recommendation to get into graduate

school, for assistance in completing this thesis, and for agreeing to be a committee member;

Moon Lee for her assistance in getting an extension and help in completing this project; Bruce

Pinkleton for his assistance in getting an extension and help in completing this thesis; and

Elizabeth Blanks Hindman for agreeing to be a committee member on very short notice and

involvement with the final examination. I especially want to thank Stacey Hust for agreeing to

be the chair of the committee, for assistance with completing this thesis, and for her help in

getting the final extension I needed to obtain before the final examination could take place.

Thank you.

iii

EFFECTS OF VIOLENT AND NONVIOLENT VIDEO GAME PLAY ON LEVELS OF

AGGRESSIVE THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS IN SENSATION SEEKING ADULTS

Abstract

By Steven John Bisch, M.A.Washington State University

May 2008

Chair: Stacey Hust

This study investigated the effects of violent video game play on aggressive thoughts in

sensation seeking adults based on an understanding of their feelings, as well as their attitudes

toward guns and violence after playing these games. Further, this study considered whether the

effects of violent video game play differed among high and low sensation seekers. The study’s

experiment utilized a randomized posttest only group design in which sixty participants played

either a violent or nonviolent video game and then reported their feelings while actively involved

in game play. Results showed that high sensation seeking video game players displayed higher

levels of aggressive thoughts and feelings than low sensation seeking players, regardless of

whether they played violent or nonviolent video games. Results also showed that high sensation

seeking players who were exposed to the violent video game had higher aggressive thoughts and

feelings than those exposed to the nonviolent game. Additionally, high sensation players’ mean

scores for attitudes toward guns and violence exceeded low sensation players’ scores, and there

were significant effects between sensation seeking tendencies and excitement levels in players.

Furthermore, sensation seeking players of both game types reported the game playing experience

as being enjoyable and challenging. Practical and theoretical implications, as well as direction of

future research, are discussed.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..............................................................................................................iii

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................vLIST OF TABLES..........................................................................................................................vi

LIST OF FIGURES.......................................................................................................................vii

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1

LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES............................................................................3

Media Violence Research...................................................................................................3 Individual Characteristics of Effects of Video Game Use .................................................6

METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................................11

Design...............................................................................................................................11 Definitions.........................................................................................................................11 Participants........................................................................................................................13 Instruments........................................................................................................................14 Procedures.........................................................................................................................15 Categorization of Sensation Seeking Tendencies.............................................................17 Categorization of Aggressive Thoughts and Feelings During Game Play.......................19 Four Components of Attitudes Toward Guns and Violence (ATGV)..............................19 Manipulation Check..........................................................................................................20

RESULTS......................................................................................................................................22

DISCUSSION................................................................................................................................30

Limitations........................................................................................................................33REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................35

APPENDIX A: COVER LETTER................................................................................................41

APPENDIX B: CONSENT FORM...............................................................................................42

APPENDIX C: MODIFIED SENSATION SEEKING SCALE...................................................43

APPENDIX D: MODIFIED ATTITUDES TOWARD GUNS & VIOLENCE SCALE..............46

APPENDIX E: DEMOGRAPHIC/SOCIOECONOMIC SURVEY.............................................50

v

APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE.......................................................................52

LIST OF TABLES

Page

1. High versus Low Sensation Seeking (SS) Mean Scores from Sensation Seeking Scale

Questionnaire categorized below 3.999 and above 4.00 …….…………….…………….18

2. High versus Low Sensation Seeking (SS) Overall Mean Scores for Components of

Aggressive Thoughts and Feelings Surveys Based on an Individual Mean Score

Categorized Below 3.9999 and Above 4.00 …………………....…………...…………..23

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Page1. Comparison of the appeal of nonviolent versus violent game content to test the

manipulation of perception of violence ………………………………………..………..21

2. Comparison of estimated marginal means of “How Are You Feeling Currently” responses

between high sensation seeking and low sensation seeking players of nonviolent

versus violent video game …………………...….…………………...…………………..24

3. Comparison of estimated marginal means of the average scores on the first eight items

on the ATGV for aggressive responses to shame between high sensation seeking

vii

and low sensation seeking players of nonviolent versus violent video game………...….25

4. Comparison of estimated marginal means of the average scores of items 9-14 of the

ATGV for comfort with aggression between high sensation seeking and low

sensation seeking players of nonviolent versus violent video game……………......……26


ATGV for excitement between high sensation seeking and low sensation seeking

players of nonviolent versus violent video game ..………………..…….…………….....27


ATGV for power/safety between high sensation seeking and low sensation seeking

players of nonviolent versus violent video game ……………………..…………………28

7. Comparison of low versus high sensation seeking mean scores for aggressive thoughts

and feelings during and immediately following game play …………..…………………

29

DEDICATION

viii

This thesis is dedicated to my wife, Tammi Jo, who provided both emotional and

financial support throughout graduate school. She encouraged me to apply to the Edward R.

Murrow School of Communication and pursue the effects of video games as an area of study.

Without her love and support, I could not have accomplished the work involved in completing

this project.

ix

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Video game sales in the United States totaled $6 billion in 2005, and violent video

games, fighting and shooter game genres specifically, made up 13.7 percent of all video games

sold that year, earning a total of $822 million (Entertainment Software Association, 2006).

These numbers show that violent video games are an enormously popular form of entertainment,

however, the numbers also show that these video games are cause for concern. Leading scholars

studying the effects of violent media content worry that violent video games have a greater

potential for negative influences on their audience, than television or movie viewing, because

they require user input for game action to occur and provide immediate positive feedback for

aggressive responses to conflict (Anderson & Dill, 2000). Additionally, each new generation of

computer game system increases concerns about the influence of violent video games because

increased processing power expands audio and visual effects and gives players increasingly

realistic experiences (Shapiro, Pena-Herborn, & Hancock, 2006). Given the concerns about this

form of entertainment, a closer examination of its influence is warranted.

Evidence exists that violent media content may have significant short-term effects on

some players, particularly sensation seeking players, who are by definition risk takers who enjoy

trying new and interesting things (Zuckerman, 2006), but to date, very few studies have

examined the relationship between sensation seeking and violent video game use (Slater, 2003).

In fact, no studies, to the author’s knowledge, have looked specifically at sensation seeking

players’ responses to preferences for specific genres or sensation seeking players’ attitudes

toward guns and violence after playing violent video games. Other studies have looked at

sensation seeking as a predictor of video game use (Slater, 2003); the impact of video games on

1

physiological arousal and aggressive thought (Calvert & Tan, 1996); and receiver interpretations

of violence during television and movie viewing (Potter & Tomasello, 2003). However,

comparisons between nonviolent and violent video game play have not been studied in great

detail and there have been no comparisons of levels of aggressive thoughts and feelings in

sensation seeking adults during game play.

This study attempted to identify a link between violent video game content, aggressive

behavior, and sensation seeking tendencies, during and immediately following game play to

determine if violent video game content affects levels of aggressive thoughts and feelings in

sensation seeking adults. According to the literature, sensation seekers who choose to play

violent video games will have an increased chance of behaving aggressively afterward because

choosing these games increases the likelihood of aggressive thoughts and feelings (Carnagey,

Anderson, & Bushman, 2006; Anderson, Berkowitz, Donnerstein, Huesmann, Johnson, Linz,

Malamuth, & Wartella, 2003), and these players are more likely to play violent video games

because they prefer the action and excitement of these games over less stimulating nonviolent

video games (Slater, 2003).

Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of violent video game

play, in comparison to nonviolent video game play, on aggressive thoughts and feelings and

attitudes toward guns and violence. It used responses from questionnaires about players’

feelings during game play, and attitudes toward guns and violence immediately following game

play, to determine if effects differ between sensation seeking and non-sensation seeking players

because research indicates that individual differences in biological systems may influence

sensation seeking players who are predisposed to have aggressive thoughts and behaviors

(Grodal, 2000) and are more susceptible to the effects of violent media (Slater, 2003).

2

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES

Media Violence Research

The relationship between violent content in mass media and real-life violence has been

the subject of scholarly debate since the 1950s because of the public’s concern about whether

viewing a lot of violent acts, either real or depicted, produces negative psychological and

sociological effects on individuals and society, namely, desensitization and the reduction or

elimination of emotional reactions to violent acts by viewers (Carnagey, Anderson, & Bushman,

2006; Bushman & Anderson, 2001). Scholars, and society at large, are concerned that violent

media exposure early in life, and with regular frequency, can lead to aggression later in life

(Anderson, et al., 2003).

These concerns arise because, early in life, observation and imitation are essential means

of acquiring the motor and social skills needed to develop social norms and behaviors

(Anderson, et al., 2003). Observational learning is perhaps the most critical means for acquiring

social behaviors throughout childhood and into adulthood because it shows how things were

done before, and as behaviors and circumstances become more difficult to interpret, learning

takes place without awareness (Bandura, 1977). Accordingly, the likelihood an observed

behavior will be acquired by an individual increases when the viewer finds the modeled behavior

to be attractive, realistic, or identifiable, and is somehow rewarded for viewing it (Bandura,

1977).

Concerns about the effects of violent media on individuals center around the influence

mass media has on its audience; they include social and psychological as well as short- and long-

term effects. Although there is insufficient evidence to show a direct correlation between

3

exposure to media violence and long-term violent behavior in adolescents and adults, it has been

shown that exposure to media violence increases verbal and physical aggressive behavior in the

short-term (U. S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2001).

Individual consumption of media can also be influenced by psychological factors

including sensation seeking and neuroticism, and these factors are often used to predict

motivations for use as well as for an explanation of problem behaviors that arise from

consumption (Greene & Krcmar, 2005). Although many cognitive processes are related to video

game play, the exact pathways and influencing factors on cognitive functions are still being

debated and researched.

This study used the theoretical framework of media priming theory, as developed by

Berkowitz (1984), to investigate the relationship between violent video game play and cognitive

functions because of media priming theory’s emphasis on short-term influences of mass media

on cognitive structures. Media priming theory states that violent images activate cognitive

structures called nodes, which hold memories, feelings and thoughts, along a pathway called the

neoassociative network in the brain (Berkowitz, 1984); and these structures make recall of

violent responses readily accessible because violent images and sounds temporarily evoke other

similarly related thoughts, feelings and memories (Jo & Berkowitz, 1994). Moreover, research

has shown that violent images can be linked to the activation of emotion-related ideas in viewers

and tends to arouse feelings and action tendencies associated with them (Jo & Berkowitz, 1994).

These results suggest that if conditions are right, and then at least momentarily, “there is an

increased chance that the viewers will (a) have hostile thoughts that can color their interpretation

of other [events], (b) believe other forms of aggressive conduct are justified and/or will bring

them benefits, and (c) be aggressively inclined” (Jo & Berkowitz, 1994, p. 46).

4

Additionally, since violent images can activate emotion-related ideas and action

tendencies associated with them, and the use of weapons, particularly handguns and rifles are

prevalent in violent video games, a review of the literature regarding attitudes toward guns and

violence is needed to see if players’ perceptions can be affected by violent media content. One

scale is specifically designed to test for aggressive responses to shame, comfort with aggression,

excitement, and power/safety issues in relation to the use of handguns. The Attitudes Toward

Guns and Violence Questionnaire was developed to measure a person’s violence proneness and

their ability to “value violent versus nonviolent responses to conflict and disrespect” (Shapiro,

Dorman, Burkey, Welker, & Clough, 1997, p. 312). It has been used to assess violence-related

attitudes to determine if these attitudes are related to behavior (Shapiro et al., 1997).

Media priming theory, in relation to a sensation seeking player’s predisposition, was used

to show that sensation seeking players’ attitudes and beliefs affect their perceptions of video

game play by means of a cognitive analysis of the situation (Grodal, 2000). In other words,

violent video game players can be temporarily influenced, or primed, to have aggressive

thoughts and behavior toward others, if they are motivated to do so because anything that

triggers the memory primes a corresponding response to that trigger.

Panee and Ballard (2002) examined the influence of priming effects on video game play

on 36 undergraduate students. High and low aggressive priming was manipulated to determine

its influence on violence during game play. Players were exposed to a high aggressive or low

aggressive stimulus, and then the amount and type of violence subjects used to progress through

the game was measured as was their cardiovascular reactivity. Panee & Ballad (2002) found that

aggressive priming during violent video game play is positively correlated to the use of violent

action in game play and increased feelings of hostility but not to cardiovascular reactivity.

5

Additionally, high aggressive priming condition participants reported significantly higher

feelings of hostility than low aggressive priming condition participants. Their results indicate

that individual characteristics may influence effects of video game use because of differences in

biological systems like emotions (Panee & Ballard, 2002).

Individual Characteristics of Effects of Video Game Use

Effects of Violent Video Games. Violent video games have been shown to have

numerous harmful consequences that include both short- and long-term effects (Bartholow,

Sestir, & Davis, 2005), and this specific genre of games has been the focus of media violence

studies since the 1980s (Anderson & Bushman, 2001). Many studies have investigated the

relationship between violent video games and aggressive thoughts, with respect to antisocial

behaviors they may cause (Gentile, Lynch, Linder, & Walsh, 2004; Anderson & Dill, 2000;

Calvert & Tan, 1996) and gratifications that are derived from their use (Sherry, Lucas,

Greenberg, & Lachlin, 2006). However, only a few have examined the propensity of sensation

seekers to prefer violent video games as a source of entertainment (Slater, 2003) and the

understanding of meanings audience members attach to violence within media presentations

(Potter & Tomasello, 2003).

Calvert and Tan (1996) examined the impact of virtual reality on the physiological

arousal and aggressive thoughts of 36 college students who had never played a game before to

compare the difference between observing and interacting with violence. Their study showed

that players of violent video games experienced not only higher levels of aggressive thoughts but

also an increase in their heart rate. It also suggested that these games are detrimental to a

person’s ability to control his or her behavior and thought processes (Calvert & Tan, 1996). The

Calvert and Tan (1996) study is useful in pointing out that playing violent video games has a

6

greater effect on an audience than observation alone; however, it does not address sensation

seeking.

Anderson and Dill (2000) and Dill and Dill (1998) confirmed the results of the Calvert

and Tan (1996) study. The Anderson and Dill (2000) study found that exposure to violent video

games, even in a laboratory setting, increased the levels of aggressive thoughts as well as

aggressive behaviors; and a prior study by Dill and Dill (1998) found that exposure to media

violence may create additional negative effects for viewers, such as desensitization, because it

weakens an individual’s inhibitions against engaging in aggressive behavior and may change that

person’s perception of what is acceptable behavior.

Sensation Seeking. Sensation seeking is a predisposition to sensory arousal, a strong

feeling often displayed as some form of physiological change such as an increased heart rate, that

is biologically based (Zuckerman, 1990). Sensation seeking is defined as: “…the seeking of

varied, novel, complex and intense sensations and experiences, and the willingness to take risks

for the sake of such experiences” (Zuckerman, 1994, p. 27). The strength of a person’s sensation

seeking tendencies is determined through the use of three psychophysiological measures, namely

arousal, interest, and fear. It is measured by a person’s willingness to take risks (Zuckerman,

2006).

Slater (2003) examined adolescent sensation seeking as a predictor of violent video game

use. The study involved 3,127 eighth grade students who were asked how often they did

dangerous activities for the fun of it, and if they would participate in dangerous activities

knowing that they were dangerous. It then compared their responses to the choice and amount of

violence media they consumed (Slater, 2003). The Slater (2003) study used a sensation seeking

index developed by Zuckerman (1994) to predict the use of violent media content. The

7

independent variables were gender, alienation, aggression, and sensation seeking; the dependent

variables were type and length of violent media use. The results showed that gender, alienation

from peers, sensation seeking and aggressive tendencies were all positively related to use of

violent video games, but this may not be typical because violent media exposure may have

cumulative effects (Slater, 2003); and other confounding factors could also explain the results,

such as a predisposition among male adolescents toward violent acts (Slater, 2003). The study is

useful for showing the propensity of adolescent sensation seekers to seek out violent video

games for enjoyment, but it does not address the propensities of adult sensation seekers.

Orienting reflex, a strong indicator of sensation seeking, measures arousal and interest in

a stimulus and is defined as focus or attention on something. “It can be triggered by any novel

object appearing in [the subject’s] perceptual field” (Zuckerman, 2006, p. 368). High sensation

seekers have a high orienting reflex and are positively related to varying action-adventure

stimuli; whereas, low sensation seekers have a low orienting reflex and are positively related to

sedentary, less active stimuli (Zuckerman, 2006). In either case, the orienting reflex to the

stimulus diminishes over time through habituation causing a disinhibiting effect toward the

stimulus by the high sensation seeker (Zuckerman, 2006). Therefore, sensation seeking

tendencies are important to study because they occur in an instant and are an emotional reaction

trait as well as a strong indicator of video game selection (Slater, 2003). This is because high

sensation seeking players prefer the variety and intensity of action-adventure media genres

(Zuckerman, 2006). Furthermore, the greater the amount of violent media content that is

consumed the greater likelihood it will desensitize its audience to violence through the repeated

exposure and this makes the audience less sensitive to acts of violence (Carnagey, Anderson, &

Bushman, 2006). This study focused on sensation seeking to show that high sensation seeking

8

players’ perceptions of the violent video game play experience would be more violent oriented

than low sensation seeking players’ perceptions of these games because of their differing

orienting reflexes to stimuli: low sensation seeking players seek avoidance of the negative

emotional reactions that are common in violent media while high sensation seeking players are

attracted to violent media for stimulation because of the intensity of action (Zuckerman, 2006).

Potter and Tomasello (2003) examined the correlation between interpretation variables in

experimental design and the understanding of meanings audience members attach to violence

within media presentations. Their results showed that the reactions to the degree of violence

portrayed were significant and positively related to the participant’s perception of the violence

witnessed (Potter & Tomasello, 2003). While this study did not address video game play

specifically, it was useful in showing that receiver interpretations are linked to perceptions and

attitudes.

The thesis research question for this study followed the line of questioning used by Potter

and Tomasello (2003) and Slater (2003) in their studies on media violence; namely, what level of

aggressive thoughts and feelings are displayed by sensation seeking adult players of violent and

nonviolent video games? It tried to determine if a relationship exists between sensation seeking

tendencies, aggressive thoughts and feelings, and attitudes toward guns and violence during and

immediately following video game play. The independent variables being manipulated were

video game content, violent versus nonviolent, and sensation seeking tendencies, high versus

low. The dependent variable being measured was the levels of aggressive thoughts and feelings

in players during and immediately following game play. This study predicted that high sensation

seeking violent video game players would tend to seek high sensation stimulus, and their

thoughts and feelings would tend to be more violent oriented than responses given by players of

9

nonviolent video games. According to the literature, high sensation seeking players of violent

video games will have higher levels of aggressive thoughts and feelings, bigger effects, than low

sensation seeking players of the same games. So, the first concern of this study was to ascertain

whether there would be any effect based on content alone because the literature states there will

be a relationship. By comparing high and low sensation seeking groups, a determination can be

made about what, if any, influence violent video game content has on aggressive thoughts and

feelings in sensation seeking adults.

H1: Players of the violent game will have higher aggressive thoughts and feelings during

game play than players of the nonviolent game.

H2a: High sensation seeking players will have higher aggressive thoughts and feelings

than low sensation seeking players during game play, regardless of the game type played.

H2b: High sensation seeking players exposed to violent game play will have higher

aggressive thoughts and feelings than those in nonviolent game.

H2c: Low sensation seeking players exposed to violent game play will have higher

aggressive thoughts and feelings than those in the nonviolent game.

H3: High sensation seeking players who play the violent game, more than those who did

not, will have higher scores on the four components of the modified Attitudes Toward

Guns and Violence Questionnaire for aggressive responses to shame, comfort with

aggression, excitement, and power/safety, than low sensation players.

10

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

Design

This experimental study utilized a randomized posttest-only group design. The

experiment was a 2 x 2 (Violent vs. Nonviolent Video Game x High vs. Low Sensation Seeking)

between groups design. This design allowed for sensation seeking individuals to be randomly

assigned to either treatment group, playing the violent video game or the nonviolent video game.

Once treatment was complete, participants were then given a questionnaire to measure their level

of aggressive thoughts. The self-reported data were then analyzed for comparisons using the

general linear model analysis of variance to measure the effects of violent video game play on

participants’ aggressive thoughts and feelings.

Definitions

Sensation seeking: risk takers who enjoy trying new and interesting experiences

(Zuckerman, 1994). This variable was measured using a modified Sensation Seeking Scale as

developed by Zuckerman (1994).

Video games: The electronic machine, desktop personal computer in this study, used for

playing video games. It featured a standard keyboard and handheld controller, a mouse, which

plugged into the machine. Personal computer and online computer games, accessible from the

Internet, were used as game play instruments in this study. To make the game-controlling user

interfaces similar in methodology, only games designed for use with a keyboard and mouse were

chosen.

Violent video games: Games in which a player must kill characters and/or destroy

objects, by any means possible, in order to move onto the level or win the game. The violent

11

game used for this study was Halo: Combat Evolved – a first-person shooter game in which

players must defeat aliens to advance and win. Halo: Combat Evolved was rated a “9.0” -

“Superb,” by Gamespot (www.gamespot.com), a game review website set up and run by gaming

experts. Due to its graphic nature, Halo: Combat Evolved is rated “M” (Mature) by the

Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) (Kasavin, 2003), the board that assigns content

ratings for the computer and video game industries, and this limits the use of the game to persons

17 years of age and older and advises that only adult players be exposed to its contents

(Entertainment Software Rating Board, n.d.). Despite its rating, this game continues to be

popular, is listed on the website’s best games list (Gamespot, 2007a), and was included in this

study because of its use in other studies on video games effects (Consalvo & Dutton, 2006).

Nonviolent video games: Games in which no killing or acts of violence are needed to

move onto the next level or win the game. The nonviolent game used for this study was Myst

III: Exile – a first-person action-puzzle adventure game in which players travel through a fantasy

world and attempt to solve very challenging puzzles. Myst III: Exile was rated an “8.7” –

“Great,” on Gamespot and is rated “E” (Everyone) by the ESRB (Osborne, 2001). This game

continues to be a popular game as well, is listed on the website’s best game list (Gamespot,

2007b), and was also included in this study because of its predecessor’s use in another study on

video games effects (Anderson & Dill, 2000).

Aggressive thoughts and feelings: This is the amount of anger and frustration a player

exhibits toward objects around himself or herself or others. It was measured using a modified

Attitudes Toward Guns and Violence questionnaire as developed by Shapiro, Dorman, Burkey,

Welker, & Clough (1997). To eliminate frustration as a cause of aggressive thoughts, both

violent and nonviolent games are compatible as far as difficulty level, “Variable,” according to

12

Gamespot; and both games have approximately the same learning curve, about fifteen minutes

(Kasavin, 2003; Osborne, 2001).

Participants

The target population for this study was adults, over the age of 18, currently living in the

Tri-Cities, Washington. Crime statistics for the Tri-Cities, the cities consisting of Richland,

Pasco and Kennewick, Washington, show that its citizens are nonviolent in nature and that the

city is well below the national averages for violent crime rates: 284.7 per 100,000 people as

compared to 554.4 per 100,000 people nationally (Area Connect, 2007a; 2007b; 2007c). To

obtain the sample, posters were placed on bulletin boards throughout the campus of Washington

State University Tri-Cities asking for volunteers from the student body who met the criteria of

age and had previous experience playing video games of any kind, to participate in the study.

Furthermore, the local newspaper ran a story about the study and solicited for volunteers to

participate. Sixty participants agreed to take part in the study and were randomly assigned to one

of two conditions, the violent video game or the nonviolent video game, prior to treatment.

Seventy-two percent of participants were between the ages of 18 and 29 and played video

games an average of 1 to 3 hours per day, a total of 1 to 3 days per week. Sixty-seven percent of

participants were male and 33% were female. Ninety percent of participants were of Caucasian

descent and most were current college students or college graduates who grew up in household

in which one or both parents were college graduates and had earnings of between 25 and 75

thousand dollars per year. Additionally, most participants (85%) did not consider their family to

be well-off financially, and most (60%) had never received financial assistance. To determine

their predisposition to violent acts, participants were asked if they had ever been in the military

13

or the victim of a violent crime. Ninety percent of participants did not have previous military

experience, and 82% had never been the victim of a violent crime.

Instruments

Sensation seeking scale. The modified Sensation Seeking Scale consisted of nineteen

questions that assessed a respondent’s likelihood of thrill and adventure seeking, experience

seeking, disinhibition, and susceptibility to boredom (Zuckerman, 1994). These responses were

measured using a seven-point Likert scale in which respondents chose a statement with which

they strongly disagreed or strongly agreed (Zuckerman, 1994). The answers were scored on a

scale of 1 to 7 as follows: strongly disagree = 1 to strongly agree = 7.

The modified Sensation Seeking Scale was used because it is a self-report questionnaire

that measures a person’s tendencies to seek out new and interesting experiences; it was based on

the test developed by Zuckerman (1994). Greene & Krcmar (2005) found this scale to be a

reliable and valid instrument for assessing sensation seeking tendencies because the

questionnaire had an internal reliability of .78 using the Cronbach Alpha method of analysis.

Additionally, it has been used widely as a measure of risk-taking behavior; and it should be

noted that the greater the score on the scale, the greater the “need for stimulation or greater

‘sensation seeking’” (Greene & Krcmar, 2005, p. 79), so the results are not difficult to discern.

Attitudes Toward Guns and Violence scale. The modified Attitudes Toward Guns and

Violence questionnaire consisted of twenty-one questions that assessed a respondent’s response

to shame, comfort with aggression, excitement, and power/safety (Shapiro et al., 1997). These

responses were measured using a seven-point Likert scale in which respondents chose a

statement with which they strongly agreed or strongly disagreed (Shapiro et al., 1997). These

answers were scored on a scale of 1 to 7 as follows: strongly disagree = 1 to strongly agree = 7.

14

Shapiro et al. (1997) found the Attitudes Toward Guns and Violence Questionnaire to be

a reliable and valid instrument for assessing aggressive behavior because the questionnaire had

an internal reliability of .88 using the Cronbach Alpha method of analysis. Their results also

showed that the questionnaire met the criterion for validity because of its consistent results

across a wide age-range from diverse demographic backgrounds (Shapiro et al., 1997). This

questionnaire was used because it is a self-report questionnaire that measures a person’s attitude

toward violence and aggressive behavior by assessing his or her willingness to use guns to

resolve conflicts. This questionnaire was an appropriate one to use, since most violent video

games involve gun/weapon use, because it assesses attitudes that favor violent behavior and

measures the individual components of a person’s willingness to use violence versus nonviolence

in response to conflict and disrespect (Shapiro et al., 1997).

Procedures

This study was conducted in a utility room on the campus of Washington State University

Tri-Cities over a 9-day period, from April 2nd to 10th, 2007. The room was configured with four

stand-alone, defined as computers that are not connected to a network or the Internet, personal

computers, which were equipped with a standard monitor, keyboard, mouse and headphones.

This configuration accommodated four participants at a time, who, upon arrival, were randomly

assigned their treatment game type, Halo: Combat Evolved, or Myst III: Exile, violent or

nonviolent, respectively. Both of these games are manufactured for personal computers and

were chosen because of their availability and continued popularity (Gamespot, 2007a; 2007b).

Upon entry into the room used in the experiment, participants were asked to sit behind a

personal computer and fill out a demographic/socioeconomic questionnaire. Random

assignment was accomplished by dividing the room into two separate playing areas, violent and

15

nonviolent, and having the screen saving mode engaged so that when participants entered the

room, they would not know which game they were sitting behind prior to treatment. Participants

then deactivated the screen saver, started the game program, and played their assigned game for

a period of thirty minutes. During that period participants were interviewed one time, after about

fifteen minutes of play, about their feelings and the overall game experience. After the

treatment, participants filled out the Sensation Seeking and Attitudes Toward Guns and Violence

questionnaires. Data for the Sensation Seeking and Attitudes Toward Guns and Violence scales

were scored using the one-to-seven number scale previously described, and the mean and

standard deviation for each game type (nonviolent and violent) were calculated. Results for

high- and low sensation seeking players were compared for significance.

Prior to participation, each participant signed a consent form stating that he or she was

participating in a study on the effects of video game playing, and full disclosure of the purpose of

the study was given to each participant at the conclusion of their participation. Participants were

informed that some games were violent in content and that others were nonviolent in content.

Administering and tabulating the demographic/socioeconomic survey took fifteen minutes per

participant to complete. Thirty minutes were required for their treatment, playing a video game.

Finally, fifteen minutes were required per participant to complete the Sensation Seeking Scale

and Attitudes Toward Guns and Violence Questionnaires. In total, sixty minutes were required

to complete the entire study. Participants received extra course credit, free pizza and pop, and

were entered into a drawing for a chance to win a $25.00, $50.00 or $75.00 cash prize.

Potential harm to participants was limited. However, each participant was told that the

study could cause him or her temporary stress and some possible physical discomfort from a

condition called “Nintendo thumb.” Participants were informed that they might experience some

16

psychological discomfort because the questionnaires asked personal questions about their

emotional stability and well being.

Numbering the questionnaires and not asking for the participant’s name ensured

confidentiality for each participant. There was no need for deception in this study because the

behavior of participants was not affected by prior knowledge of study.

Threats to internal validity included the subject characteristics of manual dexterity, age

and history of aggressive thoughts. To control for these characteristics, participants were

required to have played at a video game at least once prior to the study. To control for the

subject characteristics of age and history of aggressive thoughts, only adult participants over the

age of 18 were chosen for the study.

Categorization of Sensation Seeking Tendencies

To determine high and low sensation seeking players, self-reported data of individual

sensation seeking tendencies were obtained from 60 participants, and the distribution of the mean

scores were analyzed using univariate analysis of variance for between-subjects factors. Each

participant’s individual scores for the Sensation Seeking Scale were added and then divided by

19, the total number of questions on the scale, to come up with the individual’s mean score for

sensation seeking. Mean scores below 3.999 were categorized as low sensation seekers; mean

scores above 4.00 were categorized as high sensation seekers. Then, the total score of each

individual’s Sensation Seeking Scale was added and then divided by 30, the total number of

participants in each game playing category, violent and nonviolent, to come up with the overall

mean scores for high and low sensation seekers in each category. Twenty-four participants

(40%) were categorized as low sensation seekers, M = 66.00, SD = 9.37, and 36 participants

(60%) were categorized as high sensation seekers, M = 89.36, SD = 13.27. The results showed

17

that 19 high sensation seeking players played the nonviolent game (M = 86.37, SD = 12.77)

while 17 high sensation seeking players played the violent game (M = 92.71, SD = 13.46).

Eleven low sensation seeking players played the nonviolent game (M = 67.18, SD = 9.77)

while 13 low sensation seeking players played the violent game (M = 65.00, SD 9.30). See

Table 1.

Table 1.

High versus Low Sensation Seeking (SS) Overall Mean Scores from Sensation Seeking Scale

Questionnaire Based on an Individual Mean Score Categorized Below 3.9999 and Above 4.00 _____________________________________________________________________________

_

Game Group M SD N______________________________________________________________________________

Myst III: Exile Low SS 67.18 9.77 11

High SS 86.37 12.68 19

Total 79.33 14.87 30

Halo: Combat Evolved Low SS 65.00 9.30 13

High SS 92.71 13.46 17

Total 80.70 18.19 30

Overall Totals Low SS 66.00 9.37 24

High SS 89.36 13.26 36

Total 80.02 16.48 60

18

Categorization of Aggressive Thoughts and Feelings During Game Play

To determine the levels of aggressive thoughts and feelings in players during video game

play, self-reported data from the 60 individuals were analyzed. Participants were asked, “How

are you feeling currently?” and given the choice of “good,” “happy,” “fair,” “angry,” and

“other.” The responses were scored as follows: “good/happy” = 1, “fair” = 2, “angry” = 3.

Responses marked “other” were disregarded.

Four Components of Attitudes Toward Guns and Violence (ATGV)

Exploratory factor analysis of the modified Attitudes Toward Guns and Violence

(ATGV) scale using a rotated component matrix showed four different components within the

ATGV scale. The first component consisted of the first eight questions on the ATGV Scale and

concerned a participant’s aggressive responses to shame (Shapiro et al., 1997). This component

was shown to have a reliability of .91 using Cronbach’s alpha based on standardized items, had

an eigenvalue of 4.95, and 61.88% of the variance was explained. The second component

consisted of questions 9 – 14 on the ATGV Scale and concerned a participant’s comfort with

aggression (Shapiro et al., 1997). This component was shown to have a reliability of .88 using

Cronbach’s alpha based on standardized items, had an eigenvalue of 3.79, and 63.20 of the

variance was explained. The third component consisted of questions 15 – 19 on the ATGV Scale

and concerned a participant’s excitement level and fascination with holding a handgun (Shapiro

et al., 1997). This component was shown to have a reliability of .90 using Cronbach’s alpha

based on standardized items, had an eigenvalue of 3.61, and 72.24 of the variance was explained.

The last component consisted of the last two questions on the ATGV Scale and concerned a

participant’s feelings of personal safety and power. This component was shown to have a

19

reliability of .78 using Cronbach’s alpha based on standardized items, had an eigenvalue of 1.63,

and 81.63 of the variance was explained.

Manipulation Check

To test the success of the manipulation of violent games being perceived as more violent

than nonviolent games, the participant’s were asked, “What about this game appeals to you most

right now” and given the choice of “action,” “violence,” “graphics,” “sound,” “pace,” and

“other.” These responses were scored as follows: “action/violence” = 1,

“graphics/sound/pace/other” = 0. Results of a Chi-Squared test showed that players of the

nonviolent game preferred graphics, sound and pace to action and violence, and players of the

violent game preferred the action and violence to the graphics, sound, and pace. The

manipulation of violence was significant and successful χ2 (1) = 20.99, p < .001. See Figure 1.

20

Nonviolent vs. Violent Video Game

Halo: Combat Evolved Myst III: Exile

Pe

rcen

t 100

80

60

40

20

0

What Appeals to You Most Right Now?

Action/Violence

Other (graphic, sound

pace, other)

26

74

88

13

Figure 1. Comparison of the appeal of content of nonviolent versus violent game to test the

manipulation of perception of violence

In addition, to measure the difficulty of the game, each participant was asked, “How is

the game’s playability” and given a choice between “easy,” “hard,” and “just right.” These

responses were scored as follows: “easy” = 1, “just right” = 2, “hard” = 3. Results from the

violent game, (M = 2.10, SD = .885, n = 30), were not significantly different from the results of

the nonviolent game, (M = 2.20, SD = .805, n = 30), t(58) = -.288, p = .774, indicating that the

difficulty of the game was not different.

21

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

Hypothesis 1 predicted that players of the violent video game would exhibit higher levels

of aggressive thoughts and feelings during violent video game play than players of the

nonviolent video game. Results showed that players of the violent video game did not score

higher (M = 2.61, SD = .69, n = 28) for feelings of aggression than players of the nonviolent

video game (M = 2.68, SD = .61, n = 28). Moreover, the type of game played was not associated

with the feelings of aggression players felt during game play, t(53.32) = .41, p > .05.

Hypothesis 1 was not supported.

Hypothesis 2a predicted that high sensation seeking players would have higher

aggressive thoughts and feelings than low sensation seeking players, regardless of game played.

Results showed that high sensation seeking players’ scores for aggressive thoughts and feelings

were higher than low sensation seeking players regardless of the type of game they played.

Results of tests of between-subjects effects showed that aggressive thoughts and feelings with

regard to high versus low sensation seeking tendencies were significant and positively related

F(1) = 5.04, p < .05. See Table 2. Hypothesis 2a was supported.

22

Table 2.

High versus Low Sensation Seeking (SS) Overall Mean Scores for Components of Aggressive

Thoughts and Feelings Surveys Based on an Individual Mean Score Categorized Below 3.9999

and Above 4.00_____________________________________________________________________________

_

Components of Surveys Group M SD N______________________________________________________________________________

Anger During Game Play Low SS 2.41 0.79 22

High SS 2.79 0.48 34

Aggressive Response to Shame Low SS 2.03 1.05 24

High SS 2.52 1.12 36

Comfort with Aggression Low SS 4.13 1.75 24

High SS 3.46 1.43 36

Excitement Low SS 1.91 1.37 24

High SS 3.02 1.36 36

Power/Safety Low SS 3.67 1.89 24

High SS 4.21 1.53 36

Hypothesis 2b predicted that high sensation seeking players exposed to violent game play

(M = 2.82, SD = .53, n = 17) would have higher aggressive thoughts and feelings than those in

the nonviolent game (M = 2.77, SD = .44, n = 17). See Figure 2. Hypothesis 2b was supported

in the fact that high sensation seeking players who were exposed to violent game content

23

expressed more aggressive thoughts and feelings than low sensation seeking players but the

difference between the two groups was minimal.

Figure 2. Comparison of estimated marginal means of “How Are You Feeling Currently”

responses between high sensation seeking and low sensation seeking players of nonviolent

versus violent video game

Hypothesis 2c predicted that low sensation seeking players exposed to violent game play

(M = 2.27, SD = .79, n = 11) would have higher aggressive thoughts and feelings than those in

the nonviolent game (M = 2.55, SD = .082, n = 11). See Figure 2. Hypothesis 2c was not

supported.

24

Hypothesis 3 predicted that high sensation seeking players who played the violent game,

more than those who did not, would have higher scores on the four components of the modified

Attitudes Toward Guns and Violence Questionnaire for aggressive responses to shame, comfort

with aggression, excitement, and power/safety, than low sensation players. Results showed that

there were insignificant effects between sensation seeking tendencies and aggressive responses

to shame (Low Sensation Seekers: M = 2.03, SD = 1.05, n = 24; High Sensation Seekers: M =

2.52, SD = 1.12, n = 36), F(1) = 3.40, p > .05. See Figure 3.

Figure 3. Comparison of estimated marginal means of the average scores on the first eight items

on the ATGV for aggressive responses to shame between high sensation seeking and low

sensation seeking players of nonviolent versus violent video game

25

Results showed that there were insignificant effects between sensation seeking tendencies and

comfort with aggression (Low Sensation Seekers: M = 4.13, SD = 1.76, n = 24; High Sensation

Seekers: M = 3.46, SD = 1.43, n = 36), F(1) = 2.70, p > .05. See Figure 4.

Figure 4. Comparison of estimated marginal means of the average scores of items 9-14 of the

ATGV for comfort with aggression between high sensation seeking and low sensation seeking

players of nonviolent versus violent video game

However, results showed that there were significant effects between sensation seeking tendencies

and excitement (Low Sensation Seekers: M = 1.91, SD = 1.37, n = 24; High Sensation Seekers:

M = 3.02, SD = 1.36, n = 36), F(1) = 11.71, p < .01, see Figure 5.

26


ATGV for excitement between high sensation seeking and low sensation seeking players of

nonviolent versus violent video game

Results showed that there were insignificant effects between sensation seeking tendencies and

power/safety (Low Sensation Seekers: M = 3.67, SD = 1.89, n = 24; High Sensation Seekers:

M = 4.21, SD = 1.53, n = 36), F(1) = 1.93, p > .05. See Figure 6.

27


ATGV for power/safety between high sensation seeking and low sensation seeking players of

nonviolent versus violent video game

Hypothesis three was supported for the third component, excitement, of the Attitudes

Toward Guns and Violence Questionnaire but not the other three components: aggressive

responses to shame, comfort with aggression, and power/safety. Overall, the results showed a

striking correlation between sensation seeking tendencies, aggressive thoughts and feelings, and

attitudes toward guns and violence. See Figure 7.

28

Sensation Seeking (SS) Mean Scores for Aggressive Thoughts and Feelings

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Anger DuringGame Play

AggressiveResponses to

Shame

Comfort withAggression

Excitement Power/Safety

Components of Surveys

Mea

n S

core

s

Low SS

High SS

Figure 7. Comparison of low versus high sensation seeking mean scores for aggressive thoughts

and feelings during and immediately following video game play

29

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION

The main finding of this study showed that regardless of the game played, high sensation

seeking players had higher levels of aggressive thoughts and feelings than low sensation seeking

players, and high sensation seeking players that were exposed to the violent game content

expressed more aggressive thoughts and feelings than low sensation seeking players of the

violent game, but the difference was minimal. These results were consistent with the theoretical

framework of media priming theory which states that the violent images viewed by both groups

made the recall of violent responses readily accessible because these images brought to mind

similarly related thoughts, feelings and memories (Jo & Berkowitz, 1994).

The findings also showed that sensation seeking players of the violent game, more than

those who did not, had higher scores on three of the four components of the ATGV questionnaire

than low sensation seeking players. This was also consistent with media priming theory. For

effects between sensation seeking tendencies and aggressive responses to shame as well as

power/safety, the results were insignificant; high sensation seekers scores were only minimally

higher than low sensation seekers for these components. For effects between sensation seeking

tendencies and comfort with aggression, the results were also insignificant; however, low

sensation seekers actually scored higher on this component than high sensation seekers. For

effects between sensation seeking and excitement, the results were significant; high sensation

seekers scores were one and a half times higher than low sensation seekers for this component.

This is also consistent with media priming theory which further states that a player’s

30

predisposition, their attitudes and beliefs, affect their perception of violence by means of a

cognitive analysis of the situation (Grodal, 2000).

Additionally, high sensation seeking players of video games displayed higher levels of

aggressive thoughts and feelings than low sensation seeking players of video games during and

immediately following game play for all components of the surveys, except comfort with

aggression. This exception could be explained by the frustration low sensation seeking players

felt when playing the very challenging, action/puzzle nonviolent game. In this study, low

sensation seeking players felt agitated during the nonviolent game play probably because the

action/puzzle game was not intuitive and challenged players to not only figure out how to

maneuver within the game environment but also how to go about gathering clues to the puzzle.

Many participants, high and low sensation seekers alike, complained about these difficulties. In

addition, many participants explained that they were used to playing the console versions of

these games and not the computer versions which were used in this study. The console versions

of Halo: Combat Evolved and Myst III: Exile control movement through the use of a single

handheld game controller, where the computer version of the games uses a keyboard and mouse

for controlling movement. The unfamiliarity of the keyboard and mouse combination confused

many players who were not experienced with playing the computer version.

It was interesting that players of the violent game, overall, did not exhibit higher

aggressive thoughts and feelings than players of the nonviolent game, and low sensation seeking

players of the violent game had lower levels of aggressive thoughts and feelings than players of

the nonviolent game. This is inconsistent with the theoretical framework of media priming

theory and may also be explained by the frustration that players of the nonviolent game felt

during game play probably because their level of excitability was piqued, whereas in high

31

sensation seekers it was not. The violent game challenged players to figure out fire and

maneuver sequences but gave easily detected clues about navigating the maze of ship decks.

The present study is also consistent with findings of Zuckerman (2006) and shows that

violent video games increase levels of aggression in high sensation seeking players. This study

may appear to replicate the findings of Slater (2003), who found that gender, alienation from

peers, sensation seeking and aggressive tendencies were all positively related to use of violent

media, however, the focus of that study used adolescent alienation from school and family to

explain the use and effects of violent media, violent Internet content, and aggression; but it did

not investigate video game content specifically. In contrast to that study, the focus of this study

specifically concerned the effects of violent video game content on sensation seeking adults to

determine whether the games are as detrimental to cognitive processes as other violent media.

In their study, Panee and Ballard (2002) found that aggressive priming in violent video

game play was correlated to its violent action, however, this study found that, overall, violent

video game play did not prime participants’ aggressive cognitions or increase aggression-related

behaviors (Panee & Ballard, 2002) more than nonviolent video game play. The present study

indicates that additional factors are involved in the cognitive and behavioral effects of video

game play on increased feelings of aggression and hostility.

The findings of this study add to the growing body of literature that shows a pattern

between video game use and increased levels of aggressive behavior (Panee & Ballard, 2002;

Anderson & Dill, 2000). They also show that video game use affects priming of aggressive

scripts and may have detrimental effects on users’ cognitive functions as well as society at large.

Repeated exposure can lead to conditioned reflexes and desensitization to acts of aggression

(Grossman, 1999). Because the potential negative impact on society is enormous, and possibly

32

much worse than the effects of television viewing, society must determine if the benefits of this

form of entertainment outweigh any detrimental effects that may occur through its use.

Limitations

Although the present study has demonstrated that violent video games increase the levels

of aggressive thoughts and feelings in sensation seeking players, there are several limitations.

The study’s population consisted of adults living in the metropolitan area of three medium sized

cities in Washington State, and therefore, may not be applicable to other demographics. Only

adult participants were included because of the graphic nature of Halo: Combat Evolved and its

ESRB rating which restricts its use to people 17 years of age and older, plus the fact that

obtaining younger participants would have probably been denied because of required parental

permission as well as acceptance by Washington State University’s Institutional Review Board.

So, the results of this study could be confounded by age because although most of the

participants were in their early- to mid-20s, some of the participants were over 40, and this may

have affected the results because the older participants may not have been as sensation seeking

as younger participants. Moreover, emotional responses to aggressive acts certainly involve

many more factors than sensation seeking alone.

The posttest only group design used in this study is prone to time effects because it does

not allow for a baseline with which to measure the strength of any possible effect (Field & Hole,

2003), moreover, it does not allow for a comparison of equivalency before treatment to ensure

the two groups were comparable (Field & Hole, 2003). Additionally, single correlational studies

provide no information on causality (Weber, Ritterfield, & Kostygina, 2006), and media violence

is one of many contributing factors involved in increases in societal violence (Anderson, 2004).

33

This study asked the question, “What about this game appeals to you most right now?” to

assess the manipulation of violence within the game instead of asking, “How violent is this

game?” because of each of the participants’ prior experience with playing video games. Both of

the games used in this study, Myst III: Exile and Halo: Combat Evolved, were well known to

participants, and the level of violence in these games was well documented on the website

Gamespot. As a result, this study used a different approach to assess the violent content of each

game and asked about the appeal of the game instead of the level of violence within the game.

Myst III: Exile was used in this study, instead of another more user-friendly nonviolent game,

because of its compatibility with many aspects of Halo: Combat Evolved. Both are first-person

adventure games, use similar controls for maneuvering, and are very close in their user ratings

Aggression shown to players will not necessarily activate aggressive thoughts, if the

viewer does not consider those scenes too aggressive to begin with (Jo & Berkowitz, 1994). For

some people with high sensation seeking interests, the violent images and acts in a video game

may have a soothing effect, defined as catharsis (Sherry, 2001). Nonviolent video games may, in

fact, meet the needs for some high sensation seekers because of the difficulty in overcoming

challenging puzzles. This was evidenced by the results of hypothesis 2c in which the low

sensation seeking players had higher scores for aggressive thoughts and feelings during

nonviolent game play than violent game play, whereas the high sensation players’ scores for

aggressive thoughts and feeling during game play were only marginally different between game

types.

This study suggests that other effects may be more influential in determining the increase

in levels of aggressive behavior experienced by many players. Frustration with the game could

account for many of the problems associated with increased aggressive behavior in some players.

34

Several participants in this study showed signs of frustration during game play, often breathing

heavily, sighing, and complaining about the game. This is an area that needs to be developed

further to see if frustration tolerance is an indicator of video game play duration.

REFERENCES

Anderson, C. A. (2004). An update on the effects of playing violent video games. Journal of

Adolescence, 27, 113-122.

Anderson, C. A., Berkowitz, L., Donnerstein, E., Huesmann, L. R., Johnson, J. D., Linz, D., &

Malamuth, N. M., & Wartella, E. (2003). The influence of media violence on youth.

Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4, 81-110.

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive

behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological behavior: A meta

analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12, 353-359.

Anderson, C. A., & Dill, K. E. (2000). Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and

behavior in the laboratory and in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78,

772-790.

Area Connect, (2007a). Kennewick crime statistics and crime data. Retrieved February 8, 2007,

from http://kennewick.areaconnect.com/crime1.htm

Area Connect, (2007b). Pasco crime statistics and crime data. Retrieved February 8, 2007, from

http://pasco.areaconnect.com/crime1.htm

Area Connect, (2007c). Richland crime statistics and crime data. Retrieved February 8, 2007,

from http://richland.areaconnect.com/crime1.htm

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall

Bartholow, B. D., Sestir, M. A., & Davis, E. B. (2005). Correlates and consequences of exposure

35

http://pullman.areaconnect.com/crime1.htm

to video game violence: Hostile personality, empathy, and aggressive behavior.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1573-1586.

Berkowitz, L. (1984). Some effects of thoughts on anti-and prosocial influences of media events:

A cognitive neoassociative analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 410-427.

Bushman, B. J., & Anderson, C. A. (2001). Media violence and the American public: Scientific

facts versus media misinformation. American Psychologist, 56, 477-489.

Carnagey, N. L., Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2006). The effect of video game violence

on physiological desensitization to real-life violence. Journal of Experimental Social

Psychology, 43, 489-496.

Calvert, S. L., & Tan, S. L. (1996). Impact of virtual reality on young adults’ physiological

arousal and aggressive thoughts: Interaction versus observation. In P. M. Greenfield & R.

R. Cocking (Eds.) Advances in Applied Developmental Psychology: Vol. 11. Interacting

with video. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Consalvo, M., & Dutton, N. (December, 2006). Game analysis: Developing a methodological

toolkit for the qualitative study of games. Game Studies: The International Journal of

Computer Game Research, 6(1). Retrieved March 25, 2007, from http://gamestudies.org/

0601/articles/consalvo_dutton

Dill, K. E., & Dill, J. C. (1998). Video game violence: A review of the empirical literature.

Aggression and Violent Behavior, 3, 407-428.

Entertainment Software Association (2006). Essential facts about the computer and video game

industry: 2006 sales, demographic and usage data. Retrieved October 20, 2006, from

http://www.theesa.com/archives/2006/05/2006_essential.php

Entertainment Software Rating Board, (n.d.). Frequently asked questions about the ESRB.

36

http://www.theesa.com/archives/2006/05/2006_essential.php

http://gamestudies.org/

Retrieved April 15, 2008, from http://www.esrb.org/ratings/faq.jsp#1

Field, A., & Hole, G. (2003). How to Design and Report Experiments. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Gamespot (2007a). Top rated PC games of all time: PC first-person shooters. Retrieved March

25, 2007, from http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?type=top_rated&category=First

Person+Shooters&platform=5&mode=all&sort=score&dlx_type=all&date_filter=all

&sotdir=asc&page=0

Gamespot (2007b). Top rated PC games of all time: PC adventure games. Retrieved March 25,

2007, from http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?platform=5&category=Adventure

+Games&date_filter=all&type=top_rated&mode=all&sort=score&sortdir=asc

Gentile, D. A., Lynch, P. J., Linder, J. R., & Walsh, D. A. (2004). The effects of violent video

game habits on adolescent hostility, aggressive behaviors, and school performance.

Journal of Adolescence, 27, 5-22.

Greene, K., & Krcmar, M. (2005). Predicting exposure to and liking of media violence: A uses

and gratifications approach. Communication Studies, 56, 71-93.

Grodal, T. (2000). Video games and the pleasure of control. In P. Vorderer (Ed.) Media

Entertainment: The Psychology of Its Appeal (pp. 197-213). Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Grossman, D. (1999, July/August). Are we training our kids to kill? The Saturday Evening Post,

64-72.

Jo, E., & Berkowitz, L. (1994). A priming effect analysis of media influences: An update. In J.

Bryant & D. Zillman (Eds.) Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research (pp. 43

60). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

37

http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?platform=5&category=Adventure%0D+Games&date_

http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?platform=5&category=Adventure%0D+Games&date_

Kasavin, G. (September 29, 2003). Halo: Combat evolved review [Review of the video game

Halo: Combat Evolved]. Retrieved March 25, 2007, from http://www.gamespot.com/

pc/action/halo/review.html?sid=6076140

Osborne, S. (May 4, 2001). Myst III: Exile Review [Review of the video game Myst III: Exile].

Retrieved March 25, 2007, from http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/myst3exile/

review.html

Panee, C. D., & Ballard, M. E. (2002). High versus low aggressive priming during video-game

training: Effects on violent action during game play, hostility, heart rate, and blood

pressure. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 2458-2474.

Potter, W. J., & Tomasello, T. K. (2003). Building upon the experimental design in media

violence research: The importance of including receiver interpretations. Journal of

Communication, 53, 315–329.

Shapiro, J. P., Dorman, R. L., Burkey, W. M., Welker, C. J., & Clough, J. B. (1997).

Development and factor analysis of a measure of youth attitudes toward guns and

violence. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 26, 311-320.

Shapiro, M. A., Pena-Herborn, J., & Hancock, J. T. (2006). Realism, imagination, and narrative

video games. In P. Vorderer & J. Bryant (Eds.) Playing Video Games: Motives,

Responses, and Consequences (pp. 101-113). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Sherry, J. L. (2001). The effects of violent video games on aggression: A meta-analysis. Human

Communication Research, 27, 409-431.

Sherry, J. L., Lucas, K., Greenberg, B. S., & Lachlin, K. (2006). Video game uses and

gratifications as predictors of use and game preference. In P. Vorderer & J. Bryant (Eds.)

Playing Video Games: Motives, Responses, and Consequences (pp. 213-224). Mahwah,

38

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/myst3exile/

http://www.gamespot.com/%20pc/action/halo/review.html?sid=6076140

http://www.gamespot.com/%20pc/action/halo/review.html?sid=6076140

NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Slater, M. D. (2003). Alienation, aggression, and sensation seeking as predictors of adolescent

use of violent film, computer, and website content. Journal of Communication, 53, 1,

105-121.

U. S. Department of Health & Human Services (2001). Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon

General (with Executive Summary) (SG-YV). Rockville, MD: U. S. Department of Health

& Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center

for Mental Health Services.

Weber, R., Ritterfield, U., & Kostygina, A. (2006). Aggression and violence as effects of playing

violent video games. In P. Vorderer & J. Bryant (Eds.) Playing Video Games: Motives,

Responses, and Consequences (pp. 347-361). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Zuckerman, M. (1990). The psychophysiology of sensation seeking. Journal of Personality, 58,

313-345.

Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioral Expressions and Biosocial Bases of Sensation seeking. New

York: Cambridge University Press.

Zuckerman, M. (2006). Sensation seeking in entertainment. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.)

Psychology of Entertainment (pp. 367-387). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

39

http://mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/youthviolence/surgeongeneral/SG_Site/toc.asp

http://mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/youthviolence/surgeongeneral/SG_Site/toc.asp

APPENDIX

40

APPENDIX A: COVER LETTER

My name is Steven Bisch, and I am a graduate student at Washington State University.

You are being asked to take part in a study to determine the effects of video game playing on

adults. Your participation is very important to the understanding of the influence of video game

use on adults. This study has three goals:

• First, to examine whether or not there is a difference between violent and

nonviolent video game playing on individual players;

• Second, to look at the impact of violent and nonviolent game playing on

aggressive thoughts so that a better understanding of how these games influence

players’ behavior will be gained; and

• Third, to answer the questions: (1) Do high sensation-seeking players of violent

video games display higher levels of aggressive thoughts and feelings than low

sensation-seeking players of violent video games while playing these games; (2)

are high sensation-seeking players’ interpretations of the game play experience

more violent oriented than high sensation-seeking players of nonviolent video

games; and (3) what factors are involved in a sensation-seeking player’s

motivation for seeking out specific game genres?

This is a request for completely voluntary participation, and your responses will remain

totally anonymous. You are free to not answer any questions you may find objectionable. This

study is being conducted for partial fulfillment of a Master’s degree from Washington State

University by Steven Bisch. Your participation in this study is should take about sixty minutes

to complete. You will play a video game and answer interview questions, and then take another

survey. This study has been reviewed and approved by the WSU Institutional Review Board

41

(IRB). If you have questions or concerns regarding this study, you may call the WSU-IRB at

(509) 335-9661 or Steven Bisch, P.O. Box 3971, Pasco, WA 99302-3971, (509) 547-4740.

APPENDIX B: CONSENT FORM

My name is Steven Bisch, and I am a graduate student at Washington State University. I am conducting a study to determine the Effects of Video Game Playing on Levels of Aggressive Behavior in Young Adults. The information in this consent form is provided so that you can decide whether you wish to participate in this study. It is important that you understand that your participation is completely voluntary. This means that even if you agree to participate you are free to withdraw from the experiment at any time, or decline to participate in any portion of the study, without penalty.

You will be asked to take a survey questionnaire designed to measure your temperament. You will then be asked to play a video game to determine your ability to play video games so that a match with a likely opponent may be made. You will then play another video game for high score, after which time you will take another survey questionnaire to use to compare with data on the first questionnaire. During game play, you will be asked several questions about your game experience. The survey questionnaires and other research materials used in this project will be placed in a locked file cabinet in my house until December 31, 2010, when they will be destroyed. During this period only Steven Bisch will have access to the research materials.

This experiment poses little known risks to your health and your name will not be associated with the findings. Possible risks include stress, the discomfort of being frustrated, and sore fingers from playing video games. Your participation will take approximately 120 minutes. You will receive extra credit at the end of the session for your participation in this research project. Also, upon completion of your participation in this study, you will be provided with a brief explanation of the question this study addresses. This will be done at the completion of the study so as to not bias participant responses on final survey. If you have questions not addressed by this consent form, please do not hesitate to ask. You will receive a copy of this form, which you should keep for your records.

Thank you for your time.

Steven Bisch, P.O. Box 3971, Pasco, WA 99302-3971, (509) 547-4740

CONSENT STATEMENT:I have read the above comments and agree to participate in this experiment. I understand

that if I have any questions or concerns regarding this project I can contact the investigator at the above location or the WSU Institutional Review Board at (509) 335-9661.

42

_____________________________________________ __________________(participant’s signature) (date)

APPENDIX C: MODIFIED SENSATION SEEKING SCALE

Instructions: The group of items below inquires about the types of feelings you have. Each of the 19 items has seven options for you to choose from on a scale from one to seven. For example, ITEM 99....I drive fast just for the thrill of it.

Strongly Disagree-------------------------------Not Sure----------------------------------Strongly Agree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

For each question, read and identify the number below the statement that best reflects how you feel. For example, you might choose (1) in the above example (e.g., you strongly disagree that you drive fast just for the thrill of it). If so, then you would circle the number one (1) below the item number associated with that statement. In this example, that item number would have been “99".

Now go ahead and answer the questions below. Be sure to answer every question, even if you’re not sure. Make sure you circle only one number for each of the 19 questions.

PLEASE BE HONEST IN RESPONDING TO THE STATEMENTS

1. Even if they are frightening, I like to experience new sensations.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

2. I like doing things just for the fun of it.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

3. I sometimes do wild stunts just for fun.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4. I sometimes do things that are a little scary.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

43

5. I enjoy getting into situations where the outcome is unknown.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6. I’ll try anything once.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7. I prefer the excitement of friends who are unpredictable.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8. I like uncontrolled wild parties.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

9. I like lots of change and excitement in my life.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

10. I am an unpredictable, spontaneous person.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

11. I like exploring strange new places even if means getting lost.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

12. I like trips that have no preplanned routes or timetables.


44

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

13. I make careful plans before beginning a complicated job.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

14. I often spend little time on planning ahead.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

15. I will begin a new job without thinking much about how I will do it.


1 2 3 4 5 6 716. I usually give much thought to what I’m going to do before doing it.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

17. I often do things spontaneously.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

18. I get so carried away by exciting new ideas that I don’t consider complications that might arise.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

19. I change interests frequently.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

45

APPENDIX D: MODIFIED ATTITUDES TOWARD GUNS & VIOLENCE SCALE

Instructions: The group of items below inquires about the types of feelings you have. Each of the 21 items has seven options for you to choose from on a scale from one to seven. For example, ITEM 99....Carrying a handgun makes me feel important.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

For each question, read and identify the number below the statement that best reflects how you feel. For example, you might choose (1) in the above example (e.g., you strongly disagree that carrying handguns makes you feel important). If so, then you would circle the number one (1) below the item number associated with that statement. In this example, that item number would have been “99".

Now go ahead and answer the questions below. Be sure to answer every question, even if you’re not sure. Make sure you circle only one number for each of the 21 questions.

PLEASE BE HONEST IN RESPONDING TO THE STATEMENTS

1. If somebody insults you, and you don’t want to be a dolt (e.g., a blockhead; a dull, stupid person) you have to fight.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

2. If somebody insults me or my family, it really bothers me, but if I beat them up, that makes me feel better.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

3. You’ve got to fight to show people you’re not a wimp.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4. If someone disrespects me, I have to fight them to get my respect back.


46

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

5. A kid who doesn’t get even with someone who makes fun of them is a fool.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6. If people are nice to me, I’ll be nice to them; but if someone stops me from getting what I want, they’ll pay for it bad.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7. I’d feel awful inside if someone laughed at me, and I didn’t fight them.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8. If I acted the way the teachers think I should out outside of school, people would think I was weak, and I’d get pushed around.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

9. I don’t like being around people with handguns because someone could end up hurt.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

10. I don’t like people who have handguns because they might kill someone.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

11. I wish there weren’t any handguns in my neighborhood.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

47

12. I wish everyone would get rid of their handguns.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

13. Most people feel nervous around someone with a handgun and they want to get away from that person.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

14. The people I respect would never go around a handgun because they’re against hurting people.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

15. It would be exciting to hold a handgun in my hand.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

16. It would make me feel really powerful to hold a loaded handgun in my hand.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

17. I bet it would feel real cool to walk down the street with a handgun in my pocket.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

18. I think it would be fun to play around with a handgun.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

48

19. I’d like to have a handgun so that people would look up to me.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

20. Carrying a handgun makes people feel powerful and strong.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

21. Carrying a handgun makes people feel safe.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

49

APPENDIX E: DEMOGRAPHIC/SOCIOECONOMIC SURVEY

1. Gender: Male Female

Age: 18-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 >40

2. How do you describe yourself?

Caucasian/White Asian-American African American/Black

Native American Hispanic/Latino/a Other: _______________

3. Current Grade Level: High School High School Graduate

College Freshman College Sophomore College Junior

College Senior Graduate Student Professional Degree Candidate

4. Parents’ Highest Achieved Grade Level:

Elementary School Middle School

Some High School High School Graduate

Some College College Graduate

Some Graduate School Graduate School Graduate

5. How many residences have you lived in over your lifespan?

1-2 3-4 5-6 6-7 8-9 10-20 More than 20

6. You would consider your family well off financially.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7. Has your family ever received financial assistance? Yes __ No __

8. Do you have prior military experience? Yes __ No __

9. Have you ever been the victim of a violent crime? Yes __ No __

50

10. What type of community did you grow up in?

Rural (sparsely settled area)

Urban (a city of 50,000 or more citizens)

Suburban (a town just outside of a city’s limits)

11. What was your family’s annual income level growing up?

$0-$15,000 $15,001-$25,000 $25,001-$35,000

$35,001-$50,000 $50,001-$75,000 Over $75,000

12. How long do you play video games on any given day? ________

13. How many days a week do you play video games? _____________

14. What are some video game titles you enjoy playing?

_____________________________________________________________________________

_

15. How familiar are you with newly released video games?

Unfamiliar---------------------------------------Not Sure-------------------------------------Very Familiar

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

16. How important is video game playing to you?

Unimportant-------------------------------------Not Sure-----------------------------------Very Important

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

17. What factors influence your decision to use one type of game over another?

Time Familiarity with Game Genre Preference

Availability of Game Your Ability Other__________________

18. I have used a video game to manage my mood (e.g., make me calm or get me excited)?


51

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

The following questions were asked 15 minutes into game play.

1. How are you feeling at this moment in the game?

Angry Fair Good Happy Other______________

2. What about this game appeals to you most right now?

Action Violence Graphics Sound Pace Other______________

3. How is the game’s playability at this moment in the game?

Easy Hard Just Right

4. What aspect of the game takes the most thought right now?

Fighting Sequences Navigating Maze

Remembering Clues Other________________

5. What ideas or impressions of this game play experience will you take with you if thegame ended right now?

_____________________________________________________________________________

_

_____________________________________________________________________________

_

52

Final Manuscript with Color Figures[1]

Documents

Transcript of Final Manuscript with Color Figures[1]