Prosocial Video Games Reduce Aggressive Cognitions – A Review

Overview of the study

• Write the reference for the article in APA style. Make sure to cite the article in-text when appropriate as per APA 6th edition style.

• Write a brief “overview” or summary of the article. Indicate your assessment of what the study is about and the major findings of the study.

• According to the introduction, what information was already known about the topic (look for references to previous research).

• What variables were studied? Identify independent and dependent variable(s). What were the hypotheses concerning these variables?

• What were the operational definitions of the variables studied?

• Who were the participants in this study? Were there any special participant characteristics?

• What were the procedures used to test the hypotheses? Did you notice any problematic features of the procedure?

• Was the experimental or nonexperimental method used? Were there attempts to control any extraneous variables?

• Discuss the validity of the research to the best of your ability, including construct, internal, and external validity.

• What were the major results of the study? Were the results consistent with the hypotheses?

• How do the results relate to the other studies cited in the introduction?

• How did the researcher interpret the results? Can you think of alternative interpretations?

• Did the author give suggestions for future research or applications? Can you provide other suggestions?

• What would you do if you wished to find out more about this research topic?

The researcher Greitemeyer and Osswald have tried to prove two facts by conducting two adjacent experimentations. The first experiment was carried out to test the hostile expectation biases among the participants who were assigned to play two types of video games. Lemmings were chosen to be the prosocial game, and Tetris was selected to be the neutral game to for this experimentation. On the other hand, the second experiment was conducted to identify the accessibility of aggressive and antisocial thoughts among the participants. The results of these two tests have helped the researchers to come to a decision. Firstly, they have hypothesized that aggressive and antisocial thoughts are decreased when the children play prosocial video games. Secondly, they also claimed that accessibility of antisocial thoughts undergoes declination as the direct result of the prosocial games. The research experiment was aimed to measure the perceived content of the video games (how much prosocial or antisocial is the content of the video game) that are used in the experimental study. On the other hand, the experiment is also focused on measuring the arousal properties of the video games in installing prosocial behavior among the participants (Greitemeyer & Osswald, 2009).

Variables studied

Some of the information were known before Greitemeyer and Osswald conducted the experimentation procedure. Like violent video games often impose aggressive thoughts among the children. This is associated hostile behaviours and anxiety. The children often lose the helping attitude and behavior within themselves. The General Aggression Model (GAM), which was proposed, by Anderson and his coworkers has stated that violence in video games increases the aggressive behaviours, arousals, and aggressive cognition among the children. The GLM or General Learning Model as proposed by Buckley and Anderson points out those prosocial video games may result in a decrease in antisocial activity within a child and can install prosocial tendencies within him/her.

Variables that were studied in Greitemeyer and Osswald research paper are Aggressive thoughts, Anxiety level, Aggressive feelings, State Hostility, Aggressive behavior and Prosocial behavior.

However, the only independent variables that are used in the experiment are the two video games (Lemmings and Tetris), which are used to analyze the behavior of the participants. On the other hand, the aggressive behavior (anxiety, aggressive feeling, and state hostility) and the prosocial behavior (helping nature) are the two dependant variables used in the experiment.

The hypothesis that was drawn by Greitemeyer and Osswald has showed that the use prosocial video game increases prosocial activity among the children and decreases aggressive behavior. On the other hand, the researcher also hypothesized that accessibility of antisocial thoughts undergoes declination when a child plays more prosocial games.

The emotions of the participants were studied after they completed playing the prosocial video games. The positive and negative emotions that were portrayed by the participants were measured with the help of Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) procedure. The Arousal scaling methods are used to measure the feeling of arousal or lack of arousal within the participants when they completed playing the video games. Moreover, the PANAS methodology contained 31 adjectives and based on these attributes the Arousal scaling score was conducted. After that, the participants were provided with questionnaires. Their likings were measured using a 7-point Linkert-type scale. In this method, the ‘0′ comprehends that the participants did not like the game at all and ‘6′ signify that they have liked the game immensely. Finally, the two items are compiled into a common liking scale (positive response was denoted by α = .87, and negative affect was denoted by α = .86). These methodologies are used as an operational definition of prosocial and antisocial behavior (variables) which is obtained from the participant’s score and feedbacks that were given during the test (Greitemeyer & Osswald, 2009).

Procedures followed

For the first set of experiment, Greitemeyer and Osswald selected 35 women and 13 men from Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Germany. However, for the second round of the experiment 18 women and ten men were chosen from the Sussex University, the United Kingdom. Moreover, each and every participant was provided with a partial course credit prior the experiment. 

The particular characteristics of the participants are that they belong from two different nationalities. The researchers involved students from the German university (presumably Germans) for their first set of experimentation. On the other hand, they have selected students with British nationality and hailing from a British University for the second round of their experimental procedure.

In the first experiment, the participants were divided into two groups and each group was assigned to play one game. They have given a time limit of 10 minutes after which the game stopped playing. After that, the participants was asked various questions about the aggression content present in the video games. The response was assessed and analysed based on the 7-point Linkert-type scale analysis. After completion of this step, the participants were put through three ambiguous story stems, and their feedbacks about the stories were thoroughly assessed. Based on their comments and responses the aggressive behavior, feelings and thoughts were evaluated. In the final step of this experimentation, the participants were put through an answering session which was studded and designed with various demographic questions and were debriefed to extract the experimental data for further analysis.

Firstly, the results were judged based on the 10 minutes of video game play by the participants. It is quite evitable to presume that this short span of time is not enough to inject any kind of foreign behavior (antisocial or prosocial) into the minds of the participants. Due to this reason, no notable evidence was found on the fact that a prosocial video game decreases aggressive response during the debriefing process at the end of the experiment. Secondly, the participants were distributed with different gender proportionality with 35 women and 13 men members. Hence, the preliminary analyses revealed that the gender of the participants did not moderate any of the main findings that are expected during the first round of experimentation. Thirdly, the interaction between the type of the video game and dependent measures that include prosocial behaviour, and anti-social behavior was not significant enough to help the researcher to come to a strong conclusion. These are the major problematic features that were found in the experiment (Greitemeyer & Osswald, 2009).

Characteristics of the participants

In the experiment, the scientists have used both experimental and non-experimental processes. When the participants were allowed to play the video games for 10 minutes, they were asked two questions measuring the liking of the game. These two items were highly correlated, and it was streamlined into a single liking scale by using the average of the response obtained. Based on the questions the student replied about the difficulty level of the games and also commented on the perceived aggressiveness of the video games. This method of analysis falls under the non-experimental process implemented to identify the prosocial activities among the participants. Moreover, the second cycle of the non-experimental method was conducted when a rater rated the response of the participants when they are provided with three stem stories. Based on his/her perspective the rater gave score and rating to the participant’s response to analyse the aggressive behavior of the participant after playing the video games.

The experimental approach that was used in this research methodology includes the mixed model analysis of the variance (ANOVA) based on the response obtained from the participants. The mixed model analysis was conducted as A 2 (video game types: Neutral versus Prosocial) X 3 (measures of the dependent variables: aggressive thoughts, aggressive behavior, aggressive feeling). Based on the result obtained from the ANOVA analysis the hypothesis of the experiment was drawn. The interpretation highlights that the prosocial video games decrease aggressive cognition in a child (Greitemeyer & Osswald, 2009).

The experiment was conducted without alerting the participants about the true purpose of the experiment. Hence, the participants were not asked, “How prosocial they perceive the video game is” since it would hamper the ethics and outcome of the experiment. Secondly, the researchers have found out that in previous research works the ratings and coding provided by different coders differed excessively and were highly correlated. Hence, to avoid this mishap, the researchers felt confident in using only one rater. Thirdly, the researcher used two types of games (neutral and prosocial) and did not include the violent game for this experiment. This is the attempts taken by Greitemeyer and Osswald to control the extraneous variables.

The experiment that was conducted by Greitemeyer and Osswald has identified the video games (that were used in the analysis) as the independent variable whereas the prosocial attitude and anti-social attitude of the participants are considered as the dependent variable. Various instrumental tools for analysis have been used to measure the effect and impact of this independent variable on the dependent variables. This measuring and analysing tool includes 7-point Linkert-type Scale, rating system, debriefing the answers obtained from demographic questions and mixed-model analysis (ANOVA). However, the inference drawn by using the underlying constructs is to determine the relationship between the prosocial video games on prosocial behavior and aggressive cognition among the participants. Since the main of this research, work is based on identifying the effects of video games (independent variable) on the behavior (dependent variable) of the participants. The researchers have overlooked and omitted some other confounding factors that may install an aggressive behavior among the members and participants. This confounding factor includes social problems, family problems, relationship problems, etc. These factors may act as second independent variables that can exert influence over the dependent variables. Moreover, before conducting the experimental setup, the researchers did not verify the background of the participants. Hence, the hypothesis of this experiment did not justify the internal validity of this research. The research work is based on surveying the college students within a particular age group. Hence, the research does not justify the fact whether it applies to a broad range of age groups including the older people. Hence, this study fails to generalize the effect of prosocial video games on various other populations (considering the age group) and settings. Hence, the external validity o this experiment is very small.

Major findings of the study

The significant result and findings of the Experiment 1 of Greitemeyer and Osswald are discussed in this paragraph. Aggressive attributes like aggressive thoughts and aggressive feelings among the participants were found to be less among those participants who have played the prosocial video games. The result also portrays that aggressive behavior was more frequent than the aggressive and disturbing thought and aggressive feelings among the participants. The perceived offensive content was found to be less in the neutral and prosocial video games (as reported by the participants).

This results and findings of the Experiment 1 by Greitemeyer and Osswald are very much consistent with the hypothesis which states that Prosocial video games reduces aggressive behavior and promotes prosocial activity among the participants.

The GAM ideology as proposed by Anderson and his coworkers showed that violent content in a media imposes aggressive behavior among the children. This was also highlighted in Greitemeyer and Osswald work, which hypothesized that aggressive behavior, was more frequent than the aggressive thought and aggressive feelings among the participants. Moreover, the validity of GLM model as proposed by Buckley and Anderson was also hypothesized by the findings of Greitemeyer and Osswald. They hypothesized that aggressive thoughts and aggressive feelings among the participants were found to be less among those participants who have played the prosocial video games.

The researchers interpreted that there is a significant decrease in the aggressive cognition when a participant plays more prosocial video games. From the findings and the result of this experiment, it can be alternatively interpreted that the use of prosocial games increases the instinct of helping attitude among the participants. The use of prosocial games installs empathy among the participants. The use of prosocial games promotes prosocial activities among the participants.

According to the researchers Greitemeyer and Osswald, there is an enormous scope for future research based on the findings of the current experiment. The next future scopes as suggested by the researchers are discussed and highlighted. This research can act as the building block to evaluate whether the use of prosocial games reduces expectation biasedness of the hostility. It would also serve as a building block to assess whether the use of prosocial games is effective in suppressing the accessibility of antisocial thoughts among the participants or not. The future research can also provide a detailed study and evaluation of how the prosocial games are effective in reducing the aggressive cognition among the participants. This study can be further extended to find out the effects of other Medias like songs, television, movies, etc. in inducing aggressive thoughts and feelings among the participant.

Interpretation of the results

If I would find more about this research topic, then I would wish to generalize the effect of prosocial video games on various other populations considering different age groups, races, and nationality. Moreover, I would like to research on various articles and review papers that were published prior or after this research work and would try to make a bridge and link between all of them. Finally, I would like to know about the background of each and every participant in order to cancel out the confounding factors so that it can increase the internal validity of the experiment.

Hypothesis : Visual imagery improves memory

The relationship between visual imagery and memory can be considered as the negative linear relationship in case of retaining any kind of memory. However, the percentage of retained memory is observed to be higher in the case of long-term memory (influenced by the visual imagery). On the other hand, the percentage of retained memory is found to be lesser in the case of short-term memory. However, both of these (long-term memory and short-term memory) seem to follow a negative linear relationship with the visual imagery.

Visual imagery	Retention of visual memory for long-term
1 hour	100 percent
2 hours	99 percent
5 hours	99 percent
9 hours	97 percent
24 hours	95 percent
48 hours	90 percent
72 hours	88 percent
144 hours	85 percent
288 hours	84 percent

Table 1: Table showing the relationship between the visual imagery and retention of visual memory
Source: (MacFarland & Glisky, 2012)

The Figure (1) and Table (1) signifies the fact that the retention of visual memory has a negative linear relationship in the case of long-term memory. However, the person seems to possess more than 80 percent of the memory, but it is less compare to the first impact of the memory (which seems to secure a position of 100 percent). Moreover, the long-term memory based on visual imagery appears to remain persistent and stable over the course of time. The people with visual imagery seem to memorize majority of the facts and incidents of the visual imagery in spite of having a negative linear relationship.

Visual imagery	Retention of visual memory for short-term
1 hour	100 percent
2 hours	85 percent
5 hours	75 percent
9 hours	60 percent
24 hours	40 percent
48 hours	35 percent
72 hours	30 percent
144 hours	25 percent
288 hours	25 percent

Table 2: Table showing the relationship between the visual imagery and retention of visual memory
Source: (MacFarland & Glisky, 2012)

 The Figure (2) and Table (2) signifies the fact that the retention of visual memory has a negative linear relationship in the case of short-term memory. However, the person seems to possess less than 30 percent of the memory, which is very much, less in comparison to the first impact of the memory (which seems to secure a position of 100 percent). Moreover, the short-term memory based on visual imagery appears to fade away over the course of time. The people with a visual imagery seem to forget the majority of the facts and incidents of the visual imagery. Hence, it is quite evident that the visual imagery and retention of memory follows a negative linear relationship in the case of short-term memory (MacFarland & Glisky, 2012).

To examine the facts and authenticity, I would prefer to use an experimental setup to evaluate accurately and assess the relationship between the visual imagery and retention of visual memory. Moreover, the tools and methodology need to evaluate the speed of response and accuracy of the memory. Hence, various methods like 7-point Linkert-type Scale, rating system, debriefing the answers obtained from demographic questions, and mixed-model analysis (ANOVA) can be implemented to get the experimental data and result. 

Moreover, in this case, visual imagery can be considered as the “cause” or the independent variable. On the other hand, the memory can be regarded as the “effect” or dependent variable.

The operational definition of “visual imagery” can be stated as sensory stimulation, the neurological functioning of the representation, information processing ability of the brain and a network and proposition of stimulus and responses occur due to visual simulation. On the other hand, the operational definition of “memory” can be stated as brain coding, intelligence, the speed of response and accuracy of the memory and retention of the memory. The independent variable (visual imagery) can be manipulated by repetitively showing the same object or event is in front of the participant in a customary manner. This phenomenon would increase the memory retention and would provide a false result to the experiment that would lead to the manipulation of the dependent variable just like a cyclic process. Bothe the variables can be measured by the application of experimental tools like 7-point Linkert-type Scale, rating system, debriefing the answers obtained from demographic questions and mixed-model analysis (ANOVA). This methodologies and tools would help the researcher and observer in obtaining an accurate result.

References

Greitemeyer, T., & Osswald, S. (2009). Prosocial video games reduce aggressive cognitions. Journal of experimental social psychology, 45(4), 896-900.

McFarland, C., & Glisky, E. (2012). Implementation intentions and imagery: Individual and combined effects on prospective memory among young adults. Memory & Cognition, 40(1), 62-69.