It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

This is your brain on violent media

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bushwacked
reply to post by johnsky
 


Oh im sorry the recent head of the russian armies comments such as

"The United States has gone evil and is headed for world domination"

And tearing up the cold war peace treaty.over south eastern europe's missle silo's usa is building isn't a reason to believe russia is going to call for war.

what planet do you live on and stop smoking the pixy dust.

Ps don't ask for aLink use Google i'm not the internet im human.

Heres a tip Russian Army Head+USA statements.

And google works for other things as well.

[edit on 6-12-2007 by Bushwacked]


Aside from much of that which was completely incomprehensible, one man, stating that the US is after world domination is a pretty far cry from declaring war.

Many nations politicians have stated the exact same thing, but you don't see a whole slew of countries at war with the US.

I'm not sure what planet you come from either, but theres a HUGE difference between words and actions.

Go look that up on google.




posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Okay... back on topic...


Originally posted by ANOK
What it does do is over a period of years slowly effect the way you perceive violence.


Not really perception -- that suggests a 'desensitisation' process. What this particular study suggests is that repeated exposure to violent media inhibits one's ability to suppress inappropriate and disproportional reactive aggression. In other words, your fuse gets shorter.

Now if you combine that with what most people already know about desensitisation, you can see how this can manifest itself today in a more violent society. Not only can you be indifferent to violence, you can also potentially be part of the violence (over a non-issue).

If you have the time, please read the full lab report that melatonin has so kindly linked for us on page 1.

Edit: fixed something

[edit on 7-12-2007 by Beachcoma]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:42 AM
link   
I must agree, but I think many of us see violence in the media and wish to respond by putting a stop to it, even though we cannot. And I wouldn't doubt that repeated exposure to violence would desensitize people to violent scenarios. Still...I really think it affects people in different ways. Not to say I don't enjoy watching movies and video games that include violence, although I'm able to realize that it's all fake. The media however is different, because it's presenting you things that happen in reality. Again, I take the two as apples and oranges. They cannot be compared. The people that are incapable of making a distinction between fact and fiction are the ones that need their heads checked.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma
So much for the argument that violent programs and games will not affect people's judgement. It does. It rewires your brain so that you are less appalled by it likely to put a lid on aggression.


So much?

I'd say this is similar to those articles about people committing acts of violence due to playing games (then claiming that violent games make everyone violent), it's different for each person.

I have been exposed to ''violence'' since I was 2.

And guess what? Since quite a few years ago I cannot even get ''angry'' anymore unless I'm in specific circumstances that require me to become angry.

And when I'm not angry, I'm not aggressive at all, even though I've most likely seen more people get their head shot off than the amount of people that died in World war 2.

In my case, I went from aggressive to less aggressive.


Desensitized to violence? Probably.
But more aggressive? Not at all, at least not for everyone.

But do note that desensitized in my context does not mean that one does not ''care'' about violence any more.

It merely means that I am not shocked when someone's head gets ripped off, but that I do still have my own ethics on whether it's right or wrong (And head rippage is most likely wrong)

So I'd say either your ''comment'' is biased, claiming that ''you (everyone) gets affected". (And I bet that at least more than 1000 people do not get affected)

Or somehow my brain is so uber that it prevents me getting affected in any way.

[edit on 7/12/07 by -0mega-]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by -0mega-
 


Wow. Does this news upset you so much? I never claimed it increases aggression. I said exactly what was claimed in the article -- decreased ability to suppress violent urges. That may sound like a double negative, but it's not.

If your fuse is already short, than you will be more prone react aggressively. If you've got a better control of your behaviour, then you might not really act upon it (although you might think about whacking someone).

So yes, it does affect people's judgement in a sense.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma
Wow. Does this news upset you so much?

The news does not upset me.
I just know that it's wrong.


Originally posted by Beachcoma
I never claimed it increases aggression. I said exactly what was claimed in the article -- decreased ability to suppress violent urges. That may sound like a double negative, but it's not.


In essence, reducing the ability to suppress aggressive behaviour, leads to more (as in frequency) aggressive behaviour.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Never mind.. misinterpreted response.

[edit on 7-12-2007 by Beachcoma]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 05:24 AM
link   
I have over a thousand hours in violent videogames. K, well, after all this time, aggression has NOT gone up, but then again, I am always extremely calm and don't think I've ever acted aggressively.

That being said, I did notice violent thoughts went up, but so did thoughts about Deagles and FPS doug. That has MUCH more to do with becoming obsessed than anything else, but the good news it, as I've stopped playing these games for a few months, this tendancy is going down.
Thank god, atleast, because playing videogames that much borderlines on Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, and certaintly wasn't bad for my health.

Aggression - no. Thoughts - yeah, though that may be to do the fact that I was desensitized to a point where I thought violence was OK and I was constantly thinking about PLAYING CS. OCD. Also notice the article fails to mention whether these changes are permanant.

The main problem with violence in the media is becoming desensitized to it and teaching children that violence is OK. THAT, is the problem, and I'm afraid it's not the childs problem either. It's YOUR problem. YOU made them, so get off YOUR are and BRING THEM UP, instead of blaming videogames for problems YOU caused.

If your son / daughter likes aircraft, get them to volunteer at your local airfield. if they like basketball make them play basketball. Get them a job. Get them to volunteer at a soup kitchen. Swimming - PADI Open Water Diving ticked. Flying - GPL. Do whatever it takes so they DON'T waste there life getting obsessed with videogames, becoming taught it's OK for violence. It's NOT ok, and they NEED to be taught that.

[edit on 7/12/2007 by C0bzz]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by C0bzz
Also notice the article fails to mention whether these changes are permanant.


No, the article didn't mention that. However the study (from melatonin's link) did suggest a possible change if the individual being exposed is still growing up:


Thus, although we examined short-term changes in the cortical response of adults watching violent stimuli, exposure occurring at different frequencies or at different stages of development may induce other cortical changes that affect aggressive behavior.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 11:15 AM
link   
So the short of this is that video games and other media in fact can have an impact on a person? This will prove interesting to see how many sacks of scum get off on murder charges now because they can use this study to prop up their claims that they are in no way responsible for their actions because the movies and games made them do it. The study might not say that its a direct link to violence but if you are suppressing the negative reaction to violence its pretty obvious that you are far more likely to be violent yourself, or at least thats how I see it.

Of course I have to add another voice of dissent to this whole mess, I've played some of the most violent and controversial games we have ever seen (Manhunt, GTA, Postal 2, etc) and I happen to own several firearms as well; just the recipe that one would think leads to a mass murdering spree, however I'm not typing this out to you from a jail cell. In fact I have never had the slightest inkling to commit such acts, yet I also listen to music that many would classify as violent and praising fighting in general. Call me crazy but I don't see becoming desensitized as a totally bad thing; having such a paralyzing fear of violence that you shut down is in fact a bad thing.

If all you can do in a life or death situation is hunker down and keep telling yourself "OMG VIOLENCE, WRONG, AFRAID" then I would say you have some broken synapses somewhere. Granted violence is in some cases completely unnecessary and wrong there is a time and a place for everything I believe. If someone is in my home meaning to do harm to myself I shouldn't be devoid of the urge to stand up and defend myself, I shouldn't be paralyzed in fear because all I know is that its bad and I want it to go away. Violence in self defense is completely acceptable in my book, as is violence to protect those who cannot protect themselves for whatever reason. So step back and ask yourself if this anti-violence streak is all its cracked up to be...



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Helig
Violence in self defense is completely acceptable in my book, as is violence to protect those who cannot protect themselves for whatever reason.


Yup. I agree. It's a necessary part of survival. Even says so in the study:


The involvement of ltOFC in the regulation of reactive aggression is not surprising if one considers how dependent this behavior is on external contexts. When danger is sensed, for example, one must consider several different factors before deciding how to respond. Is the threat real? Would the environment tolerate aggressive behavior? Is the other individual stronger? Only by integrating these contextual details can one achieve an adequate sense of the situation and respond (or not) accordingly.


Here's the link to study (since most people seem to have missed it):
Repeated Exposure to Media Violence Is Associated with Diminished Response in an Inhibitory Frontolimbic Network

The article in the OP is simplifying it, but as with most simplification, it tends to get misinterpreted.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Well, that is not my brain, my brain is not here to be insulted by people who probably live on hate in the first place because they can not control their brain. Neither would a child if the child was taught proper behavior in the first place. No, no, no, people who get more violent wanted to act that way in the first place, although some people may be affected due to chemical imbalances in the brain in the first place. Then some would get depressed because they have not learned to control their own emotions in the first place, and perhaps lack the tools to do that, although some people may need drugs to help.

I really doubt if a trained soldier would act that way also, since the training is there to surplant being affected by anything in the first place, which is needed for survival in the first place.

No, no, no, only certain people want other people to walk around like zombies so they can exert more control over others by refusing to get along with anyone and come out with prejudice and bias reports that only define their own characteristics in the first place.

Did you not read where people who mention things usually have been stated to be talking about their own experiences in the first place when judging other people in another report just recently?

Now, I admit that some people have addictive personalities and need to cure their implusive disorders and there are other factors that may add to some people getting more aggressive. Heck even there if you can not help yourself, who else is really going to help you without charging you for it and any of that, because it does take money?

No, then lack of money can make you more aggressive and prone to violence, along with anything else that interferes with your sense of equality for yourself or perhaps for others.

In the end all factors have to be added into the mix and half-witted excuses for behavoirs is just another excuse to make it seem as if that person had no intent in the first place when examining any issue brought up.

Transedental Meditation is known to help high blood pressure, so first a person would have to consider his/her own habits and how at the time that person is responding to the world and others around them, not only with violent TV or games or anything else.

A research has to include many factors that may contribute to the aggressiveness seen in some people, and video games would be the least of the worries when facing love that can not be gotten in a world that could care less with some research that does not add anything except a bias opinion in the first place.

Some people do need help, and there are warnings given on such games and ratings to such movies and then the attitude of the person has to continue to give the opposite mood the endeavor to keep oneselfs healthy in respect to this world in the first place.

It is simply appauling that some people still tend to support his/her own negativity about what they consider to be in this world except their own negative responses going on.

It is a cop-out in the end.

That would be like picking a gun to not know that the person is the one responsible about how the gun is used, and violence is the excuse given for that person to have shot some people like what just happened in Omaha. The person did not want to think better about the future even though the future may not be better for awhile, but then, a human has free will and that is the determining factor in the first place. To state that the human brain is hard-wired instead of soft-wired and that you can program yourself is to lead to delusional results that only refer to:

If you only had a brain to begin with you would.........? (finish the rest of the sentence).

I myself prefer jolly to lean and mean in the first place, because the people who came up with that one, only wanted an excuse for his/her self to keep that kind of behavior in the first place.

If that person only had a brain.............

But yes, some humans are really retarded when it comes down to doing any research that actually support telling any truth. It must be the Devil then doing that. I suggest seeing exorcists and phychologists then, for that person. There is nothing anyone else to do for that person, except learn more about how selfish and narrow-minded some people have become.

Shame, shame, shame on these type of people. They only wish to control others, and that is not acceptable when the behavoir probably is wrong in the first place. Instead of remembering the last time Columbia University was in the News listening by having the President of Iran speak there as if that would be something great for the University, you have a University that seems to have nothing to teach at it, it would seem.

I think in the end a pig farm would help there, so they could really smell the smell given off by the odor they wish to grant upon others in this world in the first place.

Perhaps they should just hide away, since they only see the bad people instead of anything good in the first place. Now, where is really their brain at?

Sell the University, it offers no education on anything there, I would have to admit to assume about that University in the first place.

Then I would read about something good, and try to keep from laughing too hard at the research in the first place.

What are those people smoking at that University?







posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmoebaSizedNow, I admit that some people have addictive personalities and need to cure their implusive disorders and there are other factors that may add to some people getting more aggressive. Heck even there if you can not help yourself, who else is really going to help you without charging you for it and any of that, because it does take money?
..

But yes, some humans are really retarded when it comes down to doing any research that actually support telling any truth. It must be the Devil then doing that. I suggest seeing exorcists and phychologists then, for that person. There is nothing anyone else to do for that person, except learn more about how selfish and narrow-minded some people have become.






So are you saying that somehow the study on violent media is flawed?



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:38 PM
link   
By the way, here is an experiment......................

From the President on down, to everyone in this world...................

How much violence would there be in the world, if all communication equipment (like land-phone lines, cell phones, ect.) went down across this world this month for all of Christmas and other Holidays?

The wheels of the brain start turning...................................

The phone is still a luxury in this Country and probably across this world yet, as of nowadays.

It is not considered to be needed.

Whom are the people who would get mad at that?
Whom are the people that would be affected if phones were only off for one day?

How do you feel?



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:52 PM
link   
I probably think the research is valid because it supports my own conclusions. I don't see how repeated exposure to violence -- fictional or real--can have a positive effect on people. It might not influence a non-violent person to go out and blow someone away, but it doesn't reinforce constructive behavior either. But I'm something of a wuss. The violence I was exposed to as a child was very mild compared to what is common now.

As a college professor, once a semester I often allow my students to pick a movie and then analyze it critically, just as they would analyze a book. These are typical, middle-class students, very bright, usually well socialized. They vote on the movie to be shown. Almost inevitably, they pick a very violent one, the more violent and anti-social the better. I believe one reason is because they want to impress each other with their toughness. My main observation of this exercise is that few of the students are able to analyze the movie at all, or even to say why they chose it. It's as if they don't think about what they've seen, they just experience it. Their critical skills are not applied. Now I ask them to give reasons for their nominations before they can be submitted.

I can't say this generation is better or worse than mine, just different. Certainly they are more accustomed to depictions of violence than I am. It will take time and more research to be able to draw conclusions.

I don't agree that such studies give people an excuse for violent behavior. They don't preclude personal responsibility for one's actions. I would like to see more research on this subject.



[edit on 7-12-2007 by Sestias]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by SestiasI don't agree that such studies give people an excuse for violent behavior. They don't preclude personal responsibility for one's actions. I would like to see more research on this subject.



[edit on 7-12-2007 by Sestias]



I think this is a good overview of the subject, with some links to help round out your personal research.

www.media-awareness.ca...

I too am still up in the air as to how much of an impact media has on behavior. I lean more to the genetic component as the determining factor.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:40 PM
link   
How many people have played video games and them fantasized with a friend or fellow gamer about wishing one had a rail gun at their disposal to take out their bosses from halfway across town? Total obliteration from a depleted uranium slug. Fantasy courtesy of Quake 3 Arena
I mean, playing violent video games does help one to have these kinds of thoughts. Those who are right in the mind just shrug it off. It's no big deal. But even kids fantasize about being cops and Darth Vader. How cool would it be to have the power of the dark side of the force? C'mon, come clean, who hasn't thought at least once that the scene in Star Wars where Vader kills the commander over the video screen wasn't cool? Who didn't wish privately that they could have that kind of power?

My basic line of reasoning has been that if a McDonald's commercial could make crave a burger, or a Guiness commercial could prompt me to phone my buddy to go out for drinks, then there had to be a correlation on behavioral and thought changes between violent images in movies and games. And besides, anybody ever get aroused watching and adult film? Okay, how about something more tame like Body Heat or Basic Instinct? How about Fast Times at Ridgemont High, the scene with Phoebe Cates emerging from the swimming pool? Or just Molly Ringwald getting her first kiss on her birthday in Sixteen Candles? So why should something as primal as violent thoughts be exempt from being exposed to violent images?

Anyway, I'm not ashamed to say that when I was a kid I used a towel as a cape and and old pair of my mother's stockings as a mask to pretend I was Batman. It would have been just as easy to play the Joker. Though, I've never actually thought that I was either. I do remember being influenced by old WWII movies and Kung Fu movies. John Wayne and Bruce Lee. I really wanted to kick some butt! I mean, I really wanted to kick some butt. I was a kid and that's what I wanted to do. I didn't really want to be in the trenches or in a fight with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, I just wanted to win the war and win the fight, if that makes any sense. Just pumped up with a desire to mimic what I'd seen on TV. Definitely related to the depicted violence that I'd seen, where else would I have gotten those ideas?


I didn't need a study to tell me what I already knew. Gangstas on the street look and act just like the gangstas on MTV. Given recent events in Omaha, Nebraska, just where did that young man get his misguided ideas about being famous from? Could it be that the mass media and Hollywood have negative influence on people of his mental and emotional condition, and pharmaceutical needs? I don't know the answer to that but I wonder, and my feeling is that it does to some unknown extent.

What children are exposed to today are very different from what was available when I was a child. Their definition of what's entertainment is much broader. Life is not life anymore, it's a game where everybody is a player. It used to be dog eat dog, every man for himself, but it was taken seriously, it was considered life. Today many old restraints have been removed just by the acceptance that life is nothing but a game. That attitude alone has to account for some of the trouble we've seen from our children. I mean being that our President talks and thinks that way, you know we have problems. It ain't nuttin' but Parker Brothers and Milton Bradley, dawg.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Though the article is interesting, it ignores the difference between correlation and causation. There is clearly a connection between violent images, and tendency to commit violent actions, but it might be as simple as many people who commit violent crimes seek out violence in other places. I don't think that is specifically the case, but there is no reason for the articles thesis to be accepted just because the supporting details make sense.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Hmm..

Odd. I watch all sorts of violent movies (avid fan of horror movies and such) and I am very non-lethal. I have never attacked anyone (not even in school), I have never drawn a weapon on anyone. I have never reacted to violence with the need for violence.

As to the poster who commented on 300 and Blackhawk Down.. 300 was just an interesting (though historically incorrect) movie and Blackhawk Down made me feel depressed and sickened. Not violent.

I think there needs to be more research in this area if they want to prove it. Like a wider base of test subjects.

VV



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 10:21 PM
link   
I think some people are more easily influenced than others. It really depends on how much influence you allow what you see or hear to have on you.

I give myself a steady mental diet of horror movies, dark fantasy novels, violent video games, and death metal music. Heck, I'm even a death metal musician myself. Despite all of this, I am probably the most harmless and nonviolent person you will ever meet.

I'm not saying that violent media has no influence on people at all. I'm pretty sure that there are quite a few people out there who are easily influenced by it. But I think it really depends on moral and ethical principles of the people in question. It also depends on how strong they are mentally and emotionally. As with most things, this is another topic where there really are no black and white answers.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join