Does the media reduce crime?

Some people will also say that watching violence and playing violent games (GTA, for one) will make you more likely to commit crimes and acts of violence.

My theory is this that first it depends on what age you start being exposed to this kind of material. If you are too young you don’t know to differentiate between the right and wrong and probably will not know how to process this material. You don’t already have a concept of what you think is right or wrong so it could affect you very badly.

Secondly it also depends on other forms of emotional reinforcement and grooming. You could play these games but there will always be your parent or guardian or older sibling to tell you that you did something wrong when you do it. You will then differentiate between the game/film and real life.

For older people though it is a form of catharsis. For me personally I love to play Need for Speed, it really does fulfill my need to drive recklessly and crash into thing.

The psychological literature suggests that violent games desensitise players to movie violence, but this is not a demonstration of a causal relationship between playing violent games and displaying violent behaviour.

The study I linked to (or rather the pop-sci report of the study I linked to) was performed on 124 college-age men and 133 college-age women.

You appear to be the exception to the rule.

People who play video games become desensitized to violence, and that has effects in real life.

“But when one combines all relevant empirical studies using meta-analytic techniques, five separate effects emerge with considerable consistency. Violent video games are significantly associated with: increased aggressive behavior, thoughts, and affect; increased physiological arousal; and decreased prosocial (helping) behavior. ” Source

Viewing smoking increases smoking behavior in real life:

“There is evidence that movies can impact smoking rates, especially in adolescents. Viewing high levels of smoking in movies almost triples the risk that adolescents will start smoking.” Pfizer

I’m not asking you to bring up a study that shows that there is a correlation between media and crime. I’m referring to a causation. The biggest flaw in these “correlation” studies is that it may be a correlation because children who like smoking (or have family members/peers that smoke) are more likely to prefer media that shows smoking. There are people like me who like the look of smoking, but not the health problems that can occur in the process. That is why I prefer watching it than the real thing. Also, if I were to smoke myself, I wouldn’t see all the smoke than if someone else were watching me. Stop bringing up these studies. It makes you look like a follower. If a young child were to be exposed to this, it would be beneficial for the parent to explain what smoking is and the possible health risks, and talking to them about the difference between media and reality. Children see smoking on the street every day, and that’s more of an influence than characters portrayed in art. A study is a study, not a fact.

I’ve gamed on computers since I was 4–5 I’m now 26 and still not a murderer. But the outcome depends on the individual. Similar to your case, all my madness was quenched by Carmageddon and GTA, no need to run people over now…

The only thing it has affected is a weird sense of humor. (aka, 10 points for the grandma, hit her!). But everyone laughs, so it’s all good ;)

As per @the100thmonkey ‘s study – yes it increases desensitization but not necessarily bad behavior. Your question though is specifically about virtual reality. Because media is a different story (TV/Movies etc). In short, the number of times you see a behavior – the more normal you consider it, or even ‘ideal’ Ex of how smoking was idealized through the movies etc.

In most instances, the media contributes to crime. There are people that just sit around looking for a way to illegaly make or take money. I believe that the news media has always been like prison…......a learning procedure.

Case in point: criminals were attempting to steal ATM machines from drive-in markets. The main problem for them, was dislodging the ATM machines and because of their weight,,,,how to transport the machine in a vehicle.

All along, I thought that the perfect way to commit this crime was with a tow truck. Place the heavy-duty wire around the ATM, jerk it from its bolted down location and haul it on the back of the tow truck, just like hauling an automobile. Sure enough, photos came out in the paper with an ATM machine attached to the rear of a tow truck. Where did the thieves learn this manuever? Either from prison or from the news media.

And, lets not forget the movies. Someone’s idea from a movie is transformed into a real life criminal act.

@Experty no need to get hostile to people trying to give you answers. Studies are how we try to reduce uncertainty – how does that make one a follower? What does that even mean?

There are way too many variables here to establish clear causation. You could design an experiment controlling for many of them, but to be relatable (high external validity) it’d likely have to be a longitudinal study: tracking the effects over a large period of time.

If a study – as in looking at what gathered data points to, what is a fact? There’s nothing more of a fact than data, and not the interpretation. But the pure data, especially of replicated studies by independent research groups/teams.

@sarahhhhh also yes very greed. Debriefing is the most important thing, and for it to work age/comprehension is an important factor. Also who is doing it, and how.

@Experty The studies that I have cited were corrected for that. They do show causation.

@marinelife factor analysis is not a directional conclusion, they are still correlational studies. There’s the 3rd variable ‘problem’ in both, if there’s something else affecting the dependent variable(s).

@Experty – you might ask anyone not to bring up facts that make your worldview untenable.

I don’t care to confirm your prejudice. If you don’t wish to accept that your prejudice is actually over-ruled by people who know what they are talking about – and have data to support their conclusions – you can go ahead and sellotape the word “ignorant” to your own forehead.

You might have particular concerns, but from what I understand of your perspective, they are not reflected in the world at large.

“Experty” indeed.