C2c1 Anderson and Dill (2000): video games and aggression Flashcards
Aim of Anderson and Dill (2000)
to see if people who played violent video games became aggressive
Procedure of Anderson and Dill (2000)
1) lab experiment with 210 psychology students split into 2 groups
2) each group either played a violent or non-violent video game for 30 minutes. (The games were Myst and Wolfenstein 3D)
3) participants told study was about development of motor skills- to prevent them guessing aim
4) participants placed in cubicle and told to play against opponent in another cubicle. There was actually no opponent
5) after 15 min, they were told to play a competitive game with their opponent involving a reaction test. The person that pressed it fastest got to punish opponent with blast of noise
Results of Anderson and Dill (2000)
The participants that gave the longest and loudest blasts of noise were the participants that played the violent game. Women also gave greater punishment than men
Conclusion of Anderson and DIll
Playing violent games increased levels of aggression in participants, particularly women. It may be that the game made them think in an aggressive way and that long-term use could result in permanent aggressive thought patterns
Strengths of Anderson and Dill
1) lab experiment- conditions controlled. The participants each played the game for the same amount of time and given same instructions and procedure- makes experiment reliable.
2) findings useful and applicable to real world.
Weaknesses of Anderson and Dill
1) Even though participants were told the experiment was about motor skills, they could’ve guessed aim anyways, since they knew it was a psychology experiment
2) Participants behaviour was being monitored-may not be the same as them playing at home. -not realistic
3) Deception
4) Protection of participants- they thought they were inflicting pain/damage to someone- unethical
