"Based on an examination of the research that shows the negative influences of violence in interactive media on youth, the American Psychological Association (APA) today adopted a resolution recommending that all violence be reduced in video games and interactive media marketed to children and youth. Additionally, the APA also encourages parents, educators and health care providers to help youth make more informed choices about which games to play.

...Research on media violence also revealed, that perpetrators go unpunished 73 percent of the time in all violent scenes. 'Showing violent acts without consequences teach youth that violence is an effective means of resolving conflict. Whereas, seeing pain and suffering as a consequence can inhibit aggressive behavior', says psychologist Elizabeth Carll, PhD, co-chair of the Committee on Violence in Video Games and Interactive Media."

(Source:  "APA Calls for Reduction of Violence in Interactive Media used by Children and Adolescents," American Psychological Association Press Release, August 17, 2005; http://www.apa.org/releases/videoviolence05.html.)

"[V]ideo games differ from more passive mediums, such as comic books, in one important way.

'They are interactive, [Kimberly Thompson] said. 'When you play a video game you get feedback, you're rewarded.' In fact, her investigation into a wide range of popular, teen-rated games found that 'players were being rewarded for committing acts of violence. So basically, violence becomes just a part of how you move on in the game.'

Parents who are concerned that their child is spending too much time staring into a video game screen do have options, [Kevin] Kieffer said.

'Parents need to go out of their way to involve youth in other activities,' said Kieffer, who is also a counseling psychologist. Too often, he said, parents use gaming as a way of keeping kids occupied. 'It's easy to say "I'm going to plug you into your Gameboy or video game player -- go have a good time for a couple of hours so I can do what I need to do."'

...'The real issue is to set up a relationship with your children, a relationship where you can fully discuss these issues,' Kieffer said. 'It all boils down to communication, which a lot of families lack these days.'

'We do know that when it comes to kids and games, learning happens,' Thompson said. 'So you really have to ask, just what is it they are learning?'"

(Source:  E.J. Mundell, "Violent Video Games Spur Aggression in Kids," HealthDay, August 19, 2005; http://health.myway.com/art/id/527504.html.)

Teens (especially boys) who have been exposed to violence-either as a victim or as a witness-are much more likely to commit acts of violence themselves than are peers not so exposed.  Researchers investigating the way exposure to violence pushes young adolescents toward violent acts do not, however, see this pathological pattern equally prevalent in all social settings:  this pattern of violence begetting violence typically shows up among teens denied the stabilizing influence of an intact parental marriage.

In a study conducted for the National Institute of Justice, criminologists Stacey Nofziger and Don Kurtz recently parsed data collected in 1995 as part of the National Survey of Adolescents, looking particularly for circumstances linking youthful exposure to violence to subsequent violent juvenile crime.  Much as they had expected, the researchers find that "exposure to violence has serious consequences for violent offending," with "experiences of violence in the juveniles' lives all serv[ing] as substantial risk factors for violent offending."

However, despite theoretical reasons for supposing that low family income and urban residence would foster adolescent violence and that high family income and rural residence would inhibit such violence, in their initial analysis of their data the researchers find that "neither family income nor where the juvenile lives are significant risk factors."  In contrast, their analysis reveals a strong influence of family structure: "Always having lived with both biological parents appears to be a protection against violent offending (O[dds] R[atio] .463) [ p < 0.001]." 

In a second analysis that takes into account both increasing levels of exposure to violence and differences in types of victimization, family income still fails to predict violent teen offenses, but place of residence does emerge as a predictor, with "juveniles living in small towns and rural communities ... significantly less likely to engage in violent offenses" than urban peers.  And the second analysis once again confirms the deterrent effect of  "always having lived with both biological parents" (Odds Ratio of .578; p < 0.001).

  The researchers conjecture that parental marital status may reduce the likelihood of teens' violent offending in a couple ways.  First, an intact parental marriage "greatly influence[s] the economic stability of the family with two parents generally being able to provide greater economic resources."  Second, an intact parental marriage "increase[s] the family networks" in ways that "increas[e] the likelihood of spending time with family members."  Though both conjectures are plausible, readers may recall that neither of the researchers' statistical models establishes a linkage between household income and teen offending and may therefore regard the second conjecture as more compelling than the first.  Teens who spend leisure with aunts, uncles, and cousins are much less likely to pick up a switchblade than peers spending their spare time on the streets with strangers.