Sunday, February 22, 2015


Studies show that television and video games affect their users in different ways, with video games’ having the more profound effects. 

       Television and video games affect their users differently. Television informs and entertains and, through that, can influence peoples’ preferences and opinions. In contrast, video games provide an interactive experience that is more engaging and intense. These differences stem from the repetitive and active nature of gaming compared to the more passive experience of watching television.
         Studies show that television affects viewers’ opinions and preferences. Following World War I, Harold Lasswel created the hypodermic needle model, based on his analysis of propaganda efforts during the war. This model was supported by research conducted by George Gerbner, which argued that media messages have a deep impact on individuals’ views. Gerbner’s research found that people who saw repeated murders on television became strong supporters of a powerful law enforcement system. The hypodermic needle model was also supported by a 1992 study by the American Psychological Association titled, “Big World Small Screen: The Role of Television in American Society.” This study showed a correlation between watching violence on television and aggressive behavior based on child test subjects who viewed television violence and then held ”attitudes and values that favor violence.”
           Other studies challenge the hypodermic needle model’s conclusions, suggesting that television has less of an impact on its viewers. A 1928 study by the Payne Fund showed that it was hard to assess the effects of television on children because of the many different influences at play. Additionally, a 1969 study focused on the unrealistic nature of most television violence and that “good guys” almost always prevail. This study suggested that television serves as entertainment that has less of a profound impact on its viewers. On the other hand, the prevalence of television advertising, including political advertisements, indicates that television can affect peoples’ preferences and opinions.
          Video games have gained popularity in recent years, taking away some of television's audience. Many video games have a "story mode," where the user goes through a progression of missions in order to reach a goal. This step-by-step advancement creates a deep connection between the user and the game. There are thousands of video games on the market, varying from interactive simulated sports to children's games to first-person shooter games. Video games are most commonly used for recreation, but they are also used for fitness and for learning. Sesame Street and other educational groups have developed interactive teaching games for video consoles.

            A study conducted by Torben Grodal at the University of Copenhagen titled “Media Entertainment: The Psychology of its Appeal” investigated the effects that video games have on their users. Grodal studied users’ active experiences during video games, observing that they make repeated cognitive decisions with a high sense of realism. Video gamers actively relate and coordinate visual attention with motor activities. Because a video game can yield many different results, it creates a learning process. Users then form a connection with the game and become invested it. For some users, this deep impact can blur the line between gaming and reality and even affect their actions. For others, the intensity of video games provides a valuable tool for learning. The connection between children and educational games can in some ways be compared to the connection between a student and a teacher.
            The intensity of the video game experience is the principal difference that sets it apart from television. Because television shows are generally watched only once, television’s effects are normally short-lived. In the 1950’s the Bobo Doll studies found that children who watched television shows where the violent actor was rewarded were more likely to punch a doll than children who watched shows where the violent actor was unsuccessful. However, these studies also found that these effects on the children’s thinking and behavior diminished over time. If this study were conducted today on video gamers, the repeated use and long-term relationship with the games could indicate a different and more long-term effect. This would be due to the deeper connection that video game users have to their game as compared to television viewers.
            Years ago, television was criticized as having a “pied piper” effect on its viewers. People were worried about television’s influence on its viewers and the negative effects on society. Video games are more intense than television and, as a result, can have a greater influence on their users. From this perspective, video game can be criticized as having an even greater pied piper effect. However, this new technology should not be seen as all bad. Video games give players an outlet to act out their desires, and to have new and different experiences. Children use video games to learn. Athletes and others can use video games to stay fit. Like television, video games provide opportunities that, if properly used, can be helpful and entertaining. However, because of the intensity of video games, they should be used carefully and in age-appropriate ways.

1 comment:

  1. Hi Alex,

    I wanted to start by saying that your photos are placed well throughout the article. I like that you started with the photo of children staring intently at the television. I wish that you could see some type of violence or action on the television. The next photo of the boy holding a gun playing a video game is a very powerful picture because the instrument to play the game is a gun, which shows how children learn at a very young age how to handle guns. This is not a safe situation. Your headline is well written and I like that it addresses that there are different affects with video games and television shows. I would say that to make it even more detailed and explanatory you could have added in what ways they differ or an example of the profound effects video games may have. I know Dr. Yaros stresses that the reader should learn something from the headline. I think you do this because I learn that television and video games affect users differently but it would’ve been more powerful if you added how they are different or even why TV is different from video games. An example may be something like, “Video games, over television shows, show more profound effects on users because of their repetitive and active nature.” I also think then in your article you could stress these differences in greater detail.

    Throughout your article you have a lot of references intertwined into the text, which is very good. However, these all link directly to the textbook. I was thinking that if you linked Wikipedia pages of these specific studies it might be better so the person reading can click to get a quick glimpse of what the study/model was comprised of and then be able to continue reading shortly after. I also would like to hear more about your opinion and ideas. So after saying a study backs up your argument maybe include why it does or why you picked that specific study. You do a good job of explaining the links but maybe add in your own words to make your argument stronger. Also, another thing that could make your references even greater is to link them on the specific name of the study and not just the word “study”. The first link you used was under “hypodermic needle model” which I thought was great because I can quickly see exactly what I am going to. I was thinking a link to the wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypodermic_needle_model) would be even better to get a quick, concise and clear definition. The other links farther down have “study” or “1928 study” with the link, which I think, would be even better if where you talked about the title of the study including the link there instead. The “Bobo Doll studies” link is a great example of being descriptive when linking so the reader can see where they are being transferred.

    Overall, I think you did a very good job. The last paragraph is very strong and I like that you used a lot of your own words and ideas that you understood through researching the topic. I think you could have even included these ideas early on in order to state your opinions and arguments and then back it up with links and specific research.

    Your article was well written and I can tell you have a good understanding of the topic. I enjoyed reading and analyzing your article!

    Simone Jensen

    ReplyDelete