Effects of Violent Video Games On Aggressive Behavior, Aggressive Cognition, Aggressive Affect, Physiological Arousal, and Prosocial Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Scientific Literature
Unit5DiscPeerResp2QDA
Response Guidelines
Provide a substantive contribution that advances the discussion in a meaningful way by identifying strengths of the posting, challenging assumptions, and asking clarifying questions. Your response is expected to reference the assigned readings, as well as other theoretical, empirical, or professional literature to support your views and writings. Reference your sources using standard APA guidelines. Review the Participation Guidelines section of the Discussion Participation Scoring Guide to gain an understanding of what is required in a substantive response.
Peer 1 Response: Cait
Anderson & Bushman (2001) conducted the meta-analysis, Effects of Violent Video Games On Aggressive Behavior, Aggressive Cognition, Aggressive Affect, Physiological Arousal, and Prosocial Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Scientific Literature, which determined that there was a correlation between playing video games and aggressive behaviors. In a set of 21 controlled experimental studies, Anderson & Bushman (2001) concluded that there was a correlation between playing video games (x) and engaging in the aggressive behavior (y). Table 1 determined that aggressive behavior was measured at r= .19, therefore concluding that the correlation was statistically significant due to a large number of participants that were involved in the research study. Aggressive behavior in conjunction with playing violent video games was tested with 3,033 participants. If there was a smaller sample size (in this case, less than 3,033 participants), the correlation r=.19 may not have been as large or as significant. This result also yielded significant results because r=.19 is positive, rather than negative. In Table 1 it can also be determined that the results displayed significant results because of the homogeneity test. The homogeneity test determined an outcome of x2(32) 23.25, p > .05 (Anderson & Bushman, 2001). It was measured that the p score was 23.25, compared to the normal value used by SPSS and researchers, which is .05. Because the p-value was larger than .05, it yielded significant results for this research study. If the p-value was smaller than .05, it would not hold the same level of significance.
