Suchergebnisse

For many years, the conventional wisdom was that most acts of aggression and violence stem from insecurities and low self-esteem. The possibility that some mass shooters have low self-esteem, low self-worth, or painful personal insecurities should not lead us to overlook another more likely possibility: that a significant number of mass shooters may have large egos and narcissistic tendencies. This article will (a) describe the psychological concepts of narcissism and narcissistic traits; (b) review previous research on links between narcissism, aggression, and violence; (c) review evidence that some mass shooters exhibit narcissistic traits; and (d) discuss the implications of narcissistic mass shooters for society and the media coverage of their shooting rampages.

This article places media violence research into a broader context than the typical public debate about whether violent video games (or TV programs, or movies) are "the" cause of school shootings and other extreme acts of violence. We describe how scientists today decide whether one variable (e.g., exposure to violent media) increases the risks for, contributes to, or causes another (e.g., aggressive or violent behavior). We discuss the different research methods used to examine the relationship between exposure to violent media and aggressive and violent acts. We review research evidence on the link between exposure to violent media and aggressive behavior, violent behavior, and other undesirable behavior (e.g., less helping, less empathy and compassion for others). We conclude that although exposure to violent media is not "the" cause of aggressive and violent behavior, it is an important risk factor that can contribute to more aggressive and violent behaviors, and fewer prosocial behaviors.

In this commentary, we first analyze Elson and Ferguson's (2013) attempt to offer a theory that would explain why exposure to family, community, school, and media violence could be related to increased aggression, but not cause such aggression. We conclude that the "new" theory they offer is not very "new." It differs from dominant social learning theories only in its claim that the relation between exposure to violence and aggression is almost entirely due to people who are genetically or biologically predisposed to be aggressive also exposing themselves to more violence. We show this assertion is strongly contradicted by existing experimental and longitudinal data. We also show that Elson and Ferguson's so-called "exhaustive review" of empirical data on the topic is seriously flawed; that their claim that effect sizes are trivial is not supported by the math; and that their claim that scholars who believe that violent video games cause aggression are an "extreme" group in a divided field is contradicted by surveys that show the vast majority of researchers believe violent video games increase aggression. We point out that their claim that scholars who believe in media violence effects are having a "moral panic" has no theoretical or empirical support, whereas the contrasting argument that researchers who produce violent media themselves, or use it extensively, are biased by the force of cognitive consistency and experience a "reactance" of "regulatory panic" does have support from psychological theory.

The editors of Communication Research, Drs. Gibbs and Knobloch-Westerwick, wish to issue a retraction of the article entitled ""Boom, Headshot!?": Effect of Video Game Play and Controller Type on Firing Aim and Accuracy" by Jodi L. Whitaker and Brad J. Bushman. This article was first published online on April 30, 2012 and in print in the October 2014 issue of Communication Research (issue 41, pp. 879-891) as doi:10.1177/0093650212446622. It should be noted that, to ensure impartiality, Dr. Knobloch-Westerwick was not involved in the preparation of this decision, because she is on the faculty at the same institution as the corresponding author. This retraction is in response to inquiries from Drs. Markey (Villanova U) and Elson (Ruhr U Bochum), in agreement with the corresponding author Dr. Bushman. A Committee of Initial Inquiry at Ohio State University recommended retracting this article after being alerted to irregularities in some variables of the data set by Drs. Markey and Elson in January 2015. Unfortunately, the values of the questioned variables could not be confirmed because the original research records were unavailable. In 2016, Drs. Markey and Elson sent their report to Dr. Gibbs, one of the editors of Communication Research, who decided that a retraction was warranted. A replication of the study by Dr. Bushman is in review.

People who feel entitled to admiration and respect from others do not make good companions. This research shows one reason why. Entitled people adopt self-image goals (goals that aim to construct and defend a positive self-image), which then lead to interpersonal conflict and hostility. Studies 1A and 1B documented a unique relation between entitlement and self-image goals. Study 2 extended these results by showing, via a longitudinal design, that entitlement prospectively predicts chronic self-image goals. These chronic self-image goals then predict chronic relationship conflict and hostility, all averaged over 10 weeks. Further, Study 2 revealed that self-image goals mediate the effect of pretest entitlement on both weekly hostility and conflict. These results suggest that by pursuing self-image goals, entitled people create conflict and hostility in their relationships.

IMPORTANCE: Despite broad public support for gun safety policies, minimal policy implementation has occurred. OBJECTIVE: To investigate factors that encourage greater private support for and public action on gun safety policy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Three studies were conducted: a public opinion survey (Study 1) was conducted from January 8 to 22, 2019, and 2 experiments (Studies 2 and 3) were conducted from August 27 to October 17, 2019, and April 15 to 21, 2020, respectively. Adults living in the US were eligible to participate in Studies 1 and 3. Students 18 years and older participating in a research experience program were eligible to participate in Study 2. Study 1 was administered online by Ipsos, a market research company. A nationally representative sample of 1000 US adults was obtained from Ipsos' online KnowledgePanel, of whom 508 completed the public opinion survey. For Study 2, which was conducted in a university laboratory, 354 participants were recruited from a university research pool, all of whom completed the study. Study 3 was administered online by the market research company YouGov, which identified 727 US gun owners from its opt-in panel, from which it constructed a census-matched sample of 400 participants. EXPOSURES: Participants read a statement about the 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. Content was manipulated as a 2 (corrective information vs no corrective information) × 2 (system changeable vs system not changeable) between-subjects factorial design with random assignment. The corrective information included polling data highlighting widespread support among gun owners for several gun safety policies. System changeable described gun safety policies passed by Florida's legislature. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Main outcomes were support for gun safety policies and public disclosure of support. RESULTS: The 3 studies included a total of 1262 participants (Study 1: 508 participants; weighted mean [SD] age, 47.7 [17.5] years; 261.9 women [51.6%]; 82.5 ...

In responding to the published comments on our SPSSI Research Summary on Media Violence, we note that several key themes emerge. In assessing the media violence research evidence, it is more informative and less biased to draw conclusions based on the full range of findings than to emphasize findings from individual studies. Using the full range of studies, it is clear that consuming violent media influences the way people think and feel, and increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior. However, when placing such findings into real world settings, it is important to consider media violence exposure as one of many risk factors for violence and aggression rather than as a sole factor. This acknowledgment of multiple causal factors does not make media violence unimportant––it is one of the few risk factors for aggression that can be addressed relatively easily and inexpensively. To this end, researchers are encouraged to now focus their efforts on finding those factors that moderate the media violence exposure–aggression link, and policy makers and professionals who work with children are encouraged to incorporate media violence science into their practices and decision‐making.

Media use among children has increased sharply in recent years, due, in part, to a significant increase in multimedia portable devices. On average, U.S. children aged 8–18 spend more than 7 hours a day engaging with media. Governments, professional bodies, and citizens have become increasingly concerned about the social and personal impact of media with violent themes and depictions. This has been driven, in part, by a series of tragic mass killings in which it appears that media violence exposure may have been a contributing risk factor. Public health and child development professionals are increasingly convinced by converging scientific findings linking media violence exposure to increased aggression. Hundreds of scientific studies involving hundreds of thousands of participants and a wide range of empirical methods have investigated the effects of exposure to violent media. The studies show that: In experimental studies, even brief exposure to media can cause desensitization to real‐world violence, increases in aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, and decreases in empathy and helping behavior. Short‐term effects of media violence and basic psychological processes produce cumulative effects over time, as explained by well‐established theories and research and social, developmental, and cognitive processes. Indeed, habitual exposure to media violence produces relatively stable changes in personality traits, such as trait aggression. Longitudinal research—studies that follow individuals over time—rule out plausible alternate explanations to these findings (for example, that the association between media violence and aggressive behavior is entirely the result of inherently aggressive people chasing more violent media). Media violence exposure is linked with physically hurting others, using words to hurt others, and deliberately damaging the relationships of others. Links have been found between violent media exposure and "real‐world" violent behaviors such as assault, intimate partner violence, robbery, and gang fighting. A growing body of evidence suggests that media with helping and presocial messages can lead to increases in empathy and helping behaviors, and decreases in aggressive behaviors. Changing a child's media diet from aggressive/violent to presocial, educational, and age‐appropriate can reduce aggression, increase presocial behavior, and improve educational outcomes. There is some consensus that a moderate amount of recreational screen time for school children is 1–2 hours per day, and that when screen media are coviewed by and discussed with parents and teachers, children are somewhat less harmed by violent media. Media violence is only one of many risk factors for aggression, but it is one that policy makers, professionals, and parents can address at little cost. Policy makers and media producers would benefit from working cooperatively with media psychologists who have backgrounds in social, developmental, cognitive, and/or personality psychology to produce evidence‐informed policies and media products. Policy makers should consider: (1) revising classification systems to be both evidence‐based and parent‐friendly, (2) including carefully constructed media literacy content in school curricula, and (3) creating a public education campaign on the impact of media violence.

Three studies tested predictions derived from terror management theory (TMT) about the effects of terrorism news on prejudice. Exposure to terrorism news should confront receivers with thoughts about their own death, which, in turn, should increase prejudice toward outgroup members. Non-Muslim (Studies 1-3) and Muslim (Study 3) participants were exposed to news about either Islamic terrorist acts or to control news. When Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was murdered in Amsterdam by an Islamic extremist during data-collection of Study 1, this event was included as a naturally occurring factor in the design. Consistent with TMT, terrorism news and Van Gogh's murder increased death-related thoughts. Death-related thoughts, in turn, increased prejudiced attitudes toward out-group members, especially when participants had low self-esteem, and when terrorism was psychologically close. Terrorism news may inadvertently increase prejudiced attitudes towards outgroups when it reminds viewers of their own mortality.

Numerous studies have shown that playing violent video games alone increases subsequent aggression. However, social game play is becoming more popular than solo game play, and research suggests cooperative game play is beneficial for players. The current studies explore the effects of cooperative game play on player's subsequent aggressive behaviors toward video game partners (Experiment 1) and non-video game partners (Experiment 2), while providing a discussion of possible theories applicable to social video game play. Cooperative games resulted in less aggression between video game partners (Experiment 1) and between non-video game partners (Experiment 2) than did competitive or stand-alone games. Interestingly, cooperative game play and no-game play produced similar levels of aggression (Experiment 1), whereas competitive and solo game play produced similar levels of aggression (Experiment 2). These findings are consistent with the theory of bounded generalized reciprocity. Playing violent games cooperatively can offset the aggression-increasing effects of violent video games.

The current study assessed how playing video games can influence conflict and aggression in relationships. A sample of 1,333 heterosexual couples reported their video game playing habits, conflict regarding the media, and physical and relational aggression (both self and partner directed). Results showed that for men (but not women), time spent playing video games was associated with increased conflict over the amount of time spent using media, as well as the content of those media. Conflict over the media, in turn, was associated with increased physical and relational aggression in the relationship. Thus, conflict over the media offers one explanation for why video game play may increase aggression in romantic relationships.