Student 1 Random Student Mrs. Wilson Expository W.docx

Student 1
Random Student
Mrs. Wilson
Expository Writing
5 Dec. 2014
Technology and Video Games – Does The Good Outweigh The
Bad?
Video Games may actually improve cognitive ability by up to
20% over non-gamers says
a recent study by The University of Southern California.
Despite this evidence, Ed Bell believes,
although admitting that technology has improved some aspects
of society, that we do not know
how to distinguish the good uses of technology from the bad. Ed
Bell’s assertion that everything
was better back in the “good ole days” is misleading. Although
technology is sometimes used
indiscriminately, as Ed Bell believes in Technology, Movement,
and Sound; the benefit that
technology has had on our society, I believe, outweighs the cons

– although there are cons.
Teachers in America are under constant pressure to improve
test scores, and raise
achievement, yet in a society tethered to technology, they are
losing the battle to keep kids
engaged. Ed Bell’s discourse about a leaf blower and noise
pollution left much to be desired, yet
his appreciation of the “good ole’ days,” may be agreed upon by
many teachers. Back in the
“good ole days,” teachers had fewer distractions from their
instruction other than the occasional
note-passing or whispering during the lesson. In today’s
society, teachers have to contend with
the constant struggle to keep kids engaged in more than the
latest app or text from their friend or
parent. The problem has become almost epidemic, leading to
kids learning less in addition to
impeding the progress of class. This sometimes makes it
necessary to reteach what the students
fail to absorb because they had their head in their phone during
the lesson. Unfortunately, this is
not the only negative effect technology has had on our society.

Student 2
Although Ed Bell’s diatribe seems to wage war on technology,
it is the message of
inactivity that I think is the greater take-away from the article.
For years, with the increasing
presence of modern conveniences in our daily lives, society’s
activity level has steadily
decreased. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
recommends that American
adults should get the equivalent of two and a half hours of
moderate-to-vigorous physical activity
each week. Children should get about an hour a day. With the
popularity of games, and the
advancement of time-saving technology, there is less of this
activity than there used to be – but
that is not all. With the advancement of computers and
automation in the workplace, the
American employee is not working as hard either – well, not
laboriously, anyway. In 1950,
thirty percent of Americans worked in high-activity
occupations; by 2000, that proportion had
dropped to only twenty-two percent, according to a Harvard
School of Public Health article. Ed
Bell’s article is seemingly mostly negative, but there are some

positive benefits to technology as
well.
Ed Bell’s article seems to be very anti-technology, failing to
mention the numerous ways
that technology has improved the thought processes of the
human brain. It was thought that the
human brain could not expand or grow beyond the age of twenty
without compromising existing
brain cells, but in an article by Bob Freeman, researchers at
Harvard made a startling discovery.
The military has an increasing need for soldiers to think on
their feet and who are able to make
decisions quickly and in a moment of distress. These
researchers have found that gamers, more
than non-gamers, possess this ability; in fact, adult gamers in
the military score ten to fifteen
percent higher than non-gamers in perceptual and cognitive
ability. The military is taking this
new research very seriously, because they want to prepare
soldiers to be better able to match wits
with an ever-increasingly complex enemy in the military’s war
on terror.

Student 3
The “good ole days” as Ed Bell puts it, may not have been that
beneficial for students
with learning disabilities. These students, however, actually
benefit from new educational
technology. Mark Griffith, author of the article “The
Educational Benefits of Video Games,”
admits that video games can be bad for health. They can become
addictive by releasing an
overabundance of serotonin in the brain which contributes to
euphoric feelings while playing the
games says Steven Johnson in an article titled, “Your Brain on
Video Games.” Regardless,
games do have significant positive effects on educational
development in kids with learning
disabilities. In addition to enabling learning content to become
more attractive to these students,
it also increases participation, provides instant feedback for
them as they play and allows
students to track their scores. These games have been shown to
improve cognitive response,
reaction times, and problem-solving in kids, especially those
with learning disabilities. Because
of this new learner, educational software developers are racing

to create new types of educational
programs that incorporate game-based curricula. Developers
model these programs after what
students today are familiar with such as tracking their scores,
trial and error, feedback on
problems missed, competition among their peers, and the ability
to try again to improve their
score.
Ed Bell is right about one thing, technology needs to be used
responsibly and reasonably.
It has so many benefits such as contributing to the positive
growth of the brain so that it can learn
more, think faster, and have a greater degree of cognitive
ability; cognitive ability that can be
derived by simply playing challenging and fast-paced video
games. By taking these video games
and modifying them to help teach kids gives kids the incentive
to learn. It motivates them to
participate and makes learning fun by giving students an
enjoyable way to learn that is actually
based on what they do in their leisure time already – play
games. With these benefits, adults and

Student 4
children need to understand that technology should be used
responsibly and reasonably such as
taking the stairs instead of the elevator, biking to school or
work, and turning off the devices in
class while the instructor is teaching. Americans should feel
free to embrace technology, but with
technology comes great responsibility. Society can and should
be able to incorporate physical
activity to stay healthy and live a fulfilling life while being
responsible enough to use technology
for the convenience, educational benefits, and entertainment it
was intended for.

Student 5
Citations
(Bell) Technology, Movement, and Sound
(Brownson RC, 2008) Declining Role of Physical Activity in the
United States, What Are
The Contributors?
(Freeman) Researchers Examine Video Game Benefits
(Griffith) The Educational Benefits of Video Games
(Johnson) Your Brain On Video Games
Student 1
Random Student
Mrs. Wilson
English 1010

14 November 2014
Unintended Consequences
There is an old adage that says sometimes the cure can be worse
than the illness. In his
article “Technology, Movement and Sound” Ed Bell asserts that
the advances in technology for
society are not always positive. While they may provide
convenience, expand capabilities or
create efficiencies, they can also bring unintended
consequences. I agree with his thesis. In his
article, Bell relates how the leaf blower took a simple task and
made it complex. A contemporary
example of technology that is not positive in all ways is the cell
phone. It would be interesting to
hear Alexander Graham Bell’s thoughts if he could see how his
basic tool for communication,
the telephone, has developed into a small handheld item that
controls the daily lives of so many
in today’s world. The rake was a simple tool that solved a basic
need. It was designed to
perform one task and did it well. The same can be said for the
cell phone but what about the
unintended consequences of this simple device? Cell phone
texting eliminates personal

communication which builds relationships; using cell phones
can be expensive; and heavy cell
phone usage can cause physical ailments.
In the early days of the telephone it addressed the need for
faster communications. The
telegraph could send simple messages, but it lacked the personal
nature of hearing the voice of
the person to whom you were communicating. And you could
respond in a two way
conversation. But it was limited by the physical requirement
for poles and wires strung across
the countryside. What an improvement it would be if those
physical constraints were eliminated.
Student 2
That question spawned the development of the wireless
communication device - first bag phones,
then large portables, and now the relatively tiny cell phone. At a
moment’s notice we can
communicate with anyone around the world. And strangely
enough, that cell phone has in many
ways led us right back to the telegraph. Texting or sending e-

mails or posting on social media is
replacing personal contact. True, you can communicate 24
hours a day. But while the words
may be the same, they can lose their meaning without seeing the
person’s reactions. It has also
emboldened people to make comments that they would not
otherwise make. They are less
sensitive to the feelings of the recipient and they often exercise
less restraint in their
communication.
There is a tradeoff between the values of time versus money.
Just as the leaf blower
accomplishes its task at a much higher financial cost than the
rake, the cell phone can be
expensive. Just a few years ago my monthly rate for a land line
was approximately thirty dollars.
Today my cell phone bill can approach two hundred dollars.
One of the primary benefits
described about the leaf blower was it saves time. You can
clear a much larger area in less time.
But there is a place for taking things at a slower pace. I enjoy
the time away from the hustle and
bustle while raking the leaves. The cell phone allows you to
communicate instantaneously, but

that also means the expectation from the caller is an immediate
response. In my own
environment I am shackled to the cell phone twenty-four hours a
day. It makes it hard to escape
from the rapid pace of today’s society. The attachment to the
cell phone is becoming a
psychological crutch. It has spawned a new phobia.
Nomophobia is defined as the fear of being
out of contact with someone via mobile phone and the phobia is
growing exponentially. A
recent study conducted in 2012 by the British security firm
SecurEnvoy reports that 66 percent
Student 3
of 1000 people polled said they are afraid of losing or being
away from their cell phones. (LA
Times, 2012)
The impact is not only mental. Using the leaf blower rather
than the rake robs us of very
beneficial exercise. It changes the type of exercise that you get.
Rather than tasking muscles to
pull the rake across the field, you have to use the back muscles

to hold the leaf blower. It sounds
farfetched, but the cell phone has brought about new ailments as
well. One of the most common
is known as “text neck”. As people use their phones, they
typically lean the head forward rather
than sitting in an upright position. As the body leans forward,
the weight of the head has an
increased strain on the neck and the spine. Over time this “text
neck” can cause pain and in
extreme cases require surgery. Another common ailment is
carpal tunnel syndrome brought
about by the repeated motions of the hands, particularly the
thumbs on the small cell phone
screens. One of the most serious potential health risks of the
cell phone is the contribution to
development of a brain tumor. In a 2008 interview with the
Scientific American, Lawrie Challis,
former chairman of the U.K.’s Mobile Telecommunications and
Health Research program said,
"For people who've used their cell phones for more than ten
years and who use their phone on
the same side as the tumor, it appears there's an association. We
can't rule out the possibility of
risk." Two recent examples of heavy cell phone users that died

of brain tumors were well known
attorney Johnny Cochran and Senator Ted Kennedy. My
daughter has a classmate who is barely
into her twenties and suffering from a brain tumor. Like the
gentlemen mentioned, she too wore
a Bluetooth receiver for her cell phone and became victim to
another unintended consequence.
The objective of new innovation is to make our jobs easier and
allow us to be more
effective. The leaf blower met that goal. So did the cell phone.
It was developed to give us a
better means of communication. It is also true that it is faster
and more convenient, so it met its
Student 4
goal. But it robs us of our privacy and of our time and brings
about unintended consequences.
Like the leaf blower and the cell phone, the benefits are
outweighed by the increased
expectations that we can produce a greater quantity of work. It
is important to note that we
cannot hang on to the past. Innovation is inevitable. But even
with that in mind, there will

always be times when the rake is the better option.
Student 5
Bell, E. (2009) Technology, Movement, and Sound. In The
Composition of Everyday Life (4th
ed.) (pp 470-471) Cengage Learning
Netburn, D. (2012, February 17) Nomophobia: -- fear of being
without your phone – is on the
rise. LA Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com
Wenner, M (2008, November 21). Fact or Fiction? Cell Phones
Can Cause Brain Cancer.
Scientific American. Retrieved from http://www.Scientific
American.com
Young Cyber Addicts

By AMY WU
A graduate of New York University, Amy Wu has written
articles on technology and business
for Newsweek, U.S. News & World Report, Billboard, and The
New York Times. The following
essay appeared in Minutes of the Lead Pencil Club: Pulling the
Plug on the Electronic
Revolution, a 1996 collection of "letters, essays, cartoons, and
commentary on how and why to
live contraption-free in a computer-crazed world."
The phenomena of sending letters to all of my high school
friends with the touch of a button, and
joining the "rec.music.Dylan" for diehard Dylan fans
transformed me into a shameless cyber
addict in my freshman year. Like the hundreds of other bleary-
eyed addicts I made my nightly
trek to the computer lab, where a queue-shaped waiting line was
already formed, my fingers
itching to touch the keyboard and my mind already set on
chatting with my online boyfriend
R2D2. For weeks I forfeited sunshine for a fluorescent terminal
A whole new world was opening
up before me until my "A" average in anthropology drifted to a

mediocre "B." The Internet is
becoming young America's latest addiction, especially on
college campuses. The "Just Say No"
to sex, drugs, and alcohol may soon pertain to e-mail and
surfing the information superhighway'
Soon CA (Cyber Addicts Anonymous) may be added to AA.
Blame it on the free e-mail
accounts and easy access most colleges offer.
A cyber addict is as easy to distinguish as a swaggering
alcoholic. They sit before a screen for
hours laughing, talking, and smiling at a screen, hopelessly lost
in their own world. They proudly
tell you that yes they do spend four hours a day in cyberspace,
that yes they have a fruitful social
life where they chat with friends with names like KillBarney,
that yes they procrastinate on
major papers so they can keep up with their e-mail
correspondence. When asked what they
would do if the school took away their most prized possession,
they gasp and turn pale with the
possibility. "If I didn't have access I'd have to get a life," a
junior said with a nervous laugh. For
others it would be more of an inconvenience than a total loss. "I
wouldn't freak, some people

would just freak," a freshman said. Others say that they would
just buy a modem. All they have
to do is log on to the school's system still free of cost.
The temptation of entering cyberspace is great for many young
people. It's a cheap and quick
alternative to snailmail (the kind with a stamp). The "Talk"
channel bears an uncanny
resemblance to the telephone. Logging onto the Net allows you
to chat with as many as thirty
people at the same time. There are hundreds of newsgroups
where the latest movies can be
debated, where the psychology of body art can be dissected and
where Camille Paglia and Rush
Limbaugh can be bashed. Instant friends from as far away as
Australia and Africa are made
through the "soc.penpals." Love at first byte is even a
possibility. My girlfriend and a cyber
friend went out to a café after meeting each other online.
Unfortunately conversation over
cappuccino didn't make them compatible, and they never e-
mailed each other again. The Internet
is a channel for the curious. With the click of a mouse the Dead
Sea scrolls can be viewed, the

President's health care plan will appear, and letters to editors or
to cyberzines can be written. For
a generation accustomed to fast music, fast food, and quick
results, the Internet is a perfect match
- it's easy, it's fast, it's fun, it's free. It is also addictive and as
dangerous its it is educational.
There are stories of young people who have disappeared into the
computer, who become so
addicted that they cybersurf for nine or ten hours and continue
into the night. There are always
one or two of these hopeless addicts in the lab. They have
glazed expressions on their faces and
if you wave to them they think you're a figment of virtual
reality instead of reality.
The Dead Sea scrolls aren't addictive, but mudding - a
Dungeons and Dragons type game - and
checking how many e-mail messages you've received is. One
young woman tearfully told me
how she became addicted, "Oh I was bad." she said. "I wouldn't
count the hours, I would just be

there." She and her channel friends would chat about everything
from Nine Inch Nails's newest
album to rumors of Kurt Cobain's ghost. Her addiction reminded
me of my addicted roommate
who begged me to hold her computer card for a week after she
had done poorly on a mid-term
because she spent the previous night on the Internet. Needless
to say the week didn't last.
Another young woman, whose grades plummeted from 3.3 to 2.5
after getting hooked on the
Internet, tried to explain. "I didn't stop studying," she said, "you
just like get addicted to it.
You're so into the conversation you don't want to get off and
study, you just study less." It's a
typical response from a cyber addict.
These young people are drawn into a world where they are
connected to the world but sadly
disconnected to their environment. Many have lost friends and a
social life which includes going
to the movies or out for pizza. Some haven't talked on the phone
and written a letter for a year.
Many have given up school activities, student government, and
sports. Earlier this year my

suitemate's boyfriend even called my room and told me to tell
her to get off the computer so he
could talk to her. "Get off the computer!" I screamed. "Don't
bother me!" she shot back. The
boyfriend was despondent and inconsolable and threatened to
throw her computer out the
window. Many addicts lock themselves in coffin-styled dorm
rooms and spend sunny days
sitting under a fluorescent light staring at a screen for hours
until that glazed expression is
achieved.
If only colleges charged Internet use per hour, if only accounts
were given out on the basis of
need, if only hours were limited, then maybe horror stories
about young people who have failed
classes because of too much e-mail, who have disappeared in
the mudding world, who haven't
spoken to a human being in a week, who haven't felt the sun in
days, and are proud of all the
above, wouldn't exist. As seemingly great as free access on the
information superhighway may
seem to prospective students and parents, the dangers and
damage it can cause outweigh the

positives. "I know some people who had to cut down because
they developed carpal tunnel
syndrome," one young woman said. She stared at her own
atrophying wrists, the result of one too
many hours chatting with the "Mystery Theater 3000," smiled
sweetly, and said she had
to finish e-mailing Darth Vader, her new online boyfriend. It
was just another sad story from a
young cyber addict.
Violent Media is Good for Kids
Renowned comic-book author Gerard Jones argues that bloody
videogames, gun-glorifying
gangsta rap and other forms of 'creative violence' help far more
children than they hurt, by
giving kids a tool to master their rage. Is he insightful, or
insane? Discuss it with Jones himself
in our Talkback section.
By Gerard Jones | Tue Jun. 27, 2000 11:00 PM PDT
At 13 I was alone and afraid. Taught by my well-meaning,
progressive, English-teacher parents

that violence was wrong, that rage was something to be
overcome and cooperation was always
better than conflict, I suffocated my deepest fears and desires
under a nice-boy persona. Placed
in a small, experimental school that was wrong for me, afraid to
join my peers in their bumptious
rush into adolescent boyhood, I withdrew into passivity and
loneliness. My parents, not trusting
the violent world of the late 1960s, built a wall between me and
the crudest elements of
American pop culture.
Then the Incredible Hulk smashed through it.
One of my mother's students convinced her that Marvel Comics,
despite their apparent juvenility
and violence, were in fact devoted to lofty messages of pacifism
and tolerance. My mother
borrowed some, thinking they'd be good for me. And so they
were. But not because they
preached lofty messages of benevolence. They were good for me
because they were juvenile.
And violent.
The character who caught me, and freed me, was the Hulk:
overgendered and undersocialized,

half-naked and half-witted, raging against a frightened world
that misunderstood and persecuted
him. Suddenly I had a fantasy self to carry my stifled rage and
buried desire for power. I had a
fantasy self who was a self: unafraid of his desires and the
world's disapproval, unhesitating and
effective in action. "Puny boy follow Hulk!" roared my fantasy
self, and I followed.
I followed him to new friends -- other sensitive geeks chasing
their own inner brutes -- and I
followed him to the arrogant, self-exposing, self-assertive,
superheroic decision to become a
writer. Eventually, I left him behind, followed more
sophisticated heroes, and finally my own
lead along a twisting path to a career and an identity. In my 30s,
I found myself writing action
movies and comic books. I wrote some Hulk stories, and met the
geek-geniuses who created him.
I saw my own creations turned into action figures, cartoons, and
computer games. I talked to the
kids who read my stories. Across generations, genders, and
ethnicities I kept seeing the same
story: people pulling themselves out of emotional traps by
immersing themselves in violent

stories. People integrating the scariest, most fervently denied
fragments of their psyches into
fuller senses of selfhood through fantasies of superhuman
combat and destruction.
I have watched my son living the same story -- transforming
himself into a bloodthirsty dinosaur
to embolden himself for the plunge into preschool, a Power
Ranger to muscle through a social
competition in kindergarten. In the first grade, his friends
started climbing a tree at school. But
he was afraid: of falling, of the centipedes crawling on the
trunk, of sharp branches, of his
friends' derision. I took my cue from his own fantasies and read
him old Tarzan comics, rich in
combat and bright with flashing knives. For two weeks he lived
in them. Then he put them aside.
And he climbed the tree.
But all the while, especially in the wake of the recent burst of
school
shootings, I heard pop psychologists insisting that violent
stories are
harmful to kids, heard teachers begging parents to keep their

kids away
from "junk culture," heard a guilt-stricken friend with a son
who loved
Pokémon lament, "I've turned into the bad mom who lets her kid
eat
sugary cereal and watch cartoons!"
That's when I started the research.
"Fear, greed, power-hunger, rage: these are aspects of ourselves
that we
try not to experience in our lives but often want, even need, to
experience vicariously through stories of others," writes
Melanie
Moore, Ph.D., a psychologist who works with urban teens.
"Children
need violent entertainment in order to explore the inescapable
feelings
that they've been taught to deny, and to reintegrate those
feelings into a
more whole, more complex, more resilient selfhood."
Moore consults to public schools and local governments, and is
also
raising a daughter. For the past three years she and I have been
studying

the ways in which children use violent stories to meet their
emotional and developmental needs -
- and the ways in which adults can help them use those stories
healthily. With her help I
developed Power Play, a program for helping young people
improve their self-knowledge and
sense of potency through heroic, combative storytelling.
We've found that every aspect of even the trashiest pop-culture
story can have its own
developmental function. Pretending to have superhuman powers
helps children conquer the
feelings of powerlessness that inevitably come with being so
young and small. The dual-identity
concept at the heart of many superhero stories helps kids
negotiate the conflicts between the
inner self and the public self as they work through the early
stages of socialization. Identification
with a rebellious, even destructive, hero helps children learn to
push back against a modern
culture that cultivates fear and teaches dependency.
At its most fundamental level, what we call "creative violence"
-- head-bonking cartoons, bloody
videogames, playground karate, toy guns -- gives children a tool

to master their rage. Children
will feel rage. Even the sweetest and most civilized of them,
even those whose parents read the
better class of literary magazines, will feel rage. The world is
uncontrollable and
incomprehensible; mastering it is a terrifying, enraging task.
Rage can be an energizing emotion,
a shot of courage to push us to resist greater threats, take more
control, than we ever thought we
could. But rage is also the emotion our culture distrusts the
most. Most of us are taught early on
to fear our own. Through immersion in imaginary combat and
identification with a violent
A scene from
Gerard Jones and
Gene Ha's comic
book "Oktane"
protagonist, children engage the rage they've stifled, come to
fear it less, and become more

capable of utilizing it against life's challenges.
I knew one little girl who went around exploding with fantasies
so violent that other moms
would draw her mother aside to whisper, "I think you should
know something about Emily...."
Her parents were separating, and she was small, an only child, a
tomboy at an age when her
classmates were dividing sharply along gender lines. On the
playground she acted out "Sailor
Moon" fights, and in the classroom she wrote stories about
people being stabbed with knives.
The more adults tried to control her stories, the more she acted
out the roles of her angry heroes:
breaking rules, testing limits, roaring threats.
Then her mother and I started helping her tell her stories. She
wrote them, performed them, drew
them like comics: sometimes bloody, sometimes tender, always
blending the images of pop
culture with her own most private fantasies. She came out of it
just as fiery and strong, but more
self-controlled and socially competent: a leader among her
peers, the one student in her class
who could truly pull boys and girls together.

I worked with an older girl, a middle-class "nice girl," who
held herself together through a chaotic family situation and a
tumultuous adolescence with gangsta rap. In the mythologized
street violence of Ice T, the rage and strutting of his music and
lyrics, she found a theater of the mind in which she could be
powerful, ruthless, invulnerable. She avoided the heavy drug
use that sank many of her peers, and flowered in college as a
writer and political activist.
I'm not going to argue that violent entertainment is harmless. I
think it has helped inspire some people to real-life violence. I
am going to argue that it's helped hundreds of people for
everyone it's hurt, and that it can help far more if we learn to
use it well. I am going to argue that
our fear of "youth violence" isn't well-founded on reality [5],
and that the fear can do more harm
than the reality. We act as though our highest priority is to
prevent our children from growing up
into murderous thugs -- but modern kids are far more likely to
grow up too passive, too
distrustful of themselves, too easily manipulated.

We send the message to our children in a hundred ways that
their craving for imaginary gun
battles and symbolic killings is wrong, or at least dangerous.
Even when we don't call for
censorship or forbid "Mortal Kombat," we moan to other parents
within our kids' earshot about
the "awful violence" in the entertainment they love. We tell our
kids that it isn't nice to play-
fight, or we steer them from some monstrous action figure to a
pro-social doll. Even in the most
progressive households, where we make such a point of letting
children feel what they feel, we
rush to substitute an enlightened discussion for the raw material
of rageful fantasy. In the
process, we risk confusing them about their natural aggression
in the same way the Victorians
confused their children about their sexuality. When we try to
protect our children from their own
feelings and fantasies, we shelter them not against violence but
against power and selfhood.
The title character of
"Oktane" gets nasty

http://www.mortalkombat.com/
Top image: "Tommy & the Monsters"© TM Gerard Jones and
Will Jacobs. Art©Arthur Adams.
Other images: "Oktane"© TMGerard Jones & Gene Ha.
Video game violence and our sons
By Rebecca Hagelin
3/28/2006
“Life is like a video game. Everyone has to die sometime.”
If you spent part of your youth playing “Pac-Man” and “Space
Invaders,” such a statement must
seem bizarre. Video games were … well, games -- innocent
diversions that did nothing worse
than eat up dotted lines and too much of our allowances. A
waste of time? Perhaps. But nobody
got hurt.

At least, they didn’t used to.
The opening statement above was spoken by Devin Moore, a
teenager who murdered three
people -- two police officers and a 911 dispatcher -- in a
Fayettesville, Ala., police station in
2003. Arrested on suspicion of car theft, Moore was brought in
for booking and ended up on a
bloody rampage.
He lunged at Officer Arnold Strickland, grabbed his gun and
shot him twice. Officer James
Crump, who responded to the sound of the gunfire, was shot
three times. And before he ran
outside with police car keys he snatched, Moore put five bullets
in Dispatcher Ace Mealer. Was
this the first time Moore had committed such a heinous crime?
Yes and no.
Moore was a huge fan of a notorious video game called Grand
Theft Auto. As the title suggests,
the goal is to steal cars. If that’s all there was to the "game" it
would be bad enough, but it gets
worse: the way to acquire and hold on to the cars is to kill the
police officers who try to stop you.
And the sick minds behind the game give you plenty of choices

-- shooting them with a rifle,
cutting them up with a chainsaw, setting them on fire,
decapitation.
If you shoot an officer, you get extra points for shooting him in
the head. It's no surprise, then,
that all of Moore’s real-life victims had their heads blown off.
According to court records, Moore spent hundreds of hours
playing Grand Theft, which has been
described as “a murder simulator.”
But this time, his victims weren’t a collection of animated
pixels on a TV screen. They were
flesh-and-blood human beings whose lives were snuffed out in
seconds. They had families who
continue to mourn their loss -- such as Steve Strickland, Officer
Strickland’s brother. Tomorrow,
he will testify before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee’s
Subcommittee on the Constitution,
Civil Rights and Property. Chaired by Sen. Sam Brownback, R-
Kan., the purpose of the hearing
is to examine the constitutionality of state laws regulating the
sale of ultra-violent video games to
children. Three psychologists will testify about the potential

link between playing violent video
games and copycat violence, and whether the games contribute
to aggressive behavior.
With the ever-expanding use of technology by our children,
such hearings are critical. We must
determine if Moore and other murderers like him are anomalies
or if ultra violent video games
dangerously warp the psyches of our youth. Those tempted to
scoff at the connection between
video games and behavior should bear a couple of things in
mind. First, video games are not
passive or spectator media. While playing the game, teenage
boys and young men, the largest
users of video games, actually become the characters who cut
up their victims with chainsaws,
set them on fire, or chop off their heads.
According to Dr. Elizabeth Carll of the American Psychological
Association (who also will
testify tomorrow), this active participation enhances the
“learning” experience. And video games
are often played repeatedly for hours on end -- so, hour after
hour, teens playing games such as
Grand Theft Auto “learn” how to kill police officers and earn
points for their barbarianism.

The second fact to keep in mind is that teenagers’ brains are
still developing and are extremely
impressionable. The parents of teens hardly need reminding that
for all their joys, teens often
lack judgment, critical thinking skills and foresight.
Some are better than others, yes, but many (like Moore) are
startlingly deficient. In short: Put a
“murder simulator” in their hands, and you just might be asking
for trouble. But don’t put words
in my mouth – I am not saying that every kid that plays a
violent video game will become a
criminal.
And as a staunch conservative who believes that “the
government that governs least governs
best,” I’m not advocating a plethora of laws that may have a
chilling effect on free speech. I do,
however, recognize that it is sometimes necessary to provide
special protections for minors from
harmful materials - take pornography and alcohol, for example.
As a mother, I also believe that
our nation must examine how the products of our toxic culture
affect the civility and safety of
our children and of our society. We owe it to the students who

died at Columbine; we owe it to
Devin Moore’s victims; we owe it to our own children.
But armed with the truth, and a God-given mandate to train our
own children, we must never
depend on government to take care of our kids or raise them.
Parents must wake up to the fact
that our nation’s boys are being used and manipulated by an
industry making billions of dollars
by warping their minds. As I outline in my book, Home
Invasion: Protecting Your Family in a
Culture That’s Gone Stark Raving Mad, it doesn’t take an act of
Congress to take back your
home -- it takes active, loving, informed parenting. It takes
setting boundaries and sticking with
them. It takes understanding our kids, and understanding that
our kids need us to guide them.
Senator Brownback is taking a bold step and doing his job as an
elected official in exploring the
effects of video game violence - it's up to parents to use the
information to protect our sons and
our society.

M
ost reported effects of videogames -
particularly in the popular press - appear
to centre upon the alleged negative
consequences. These have included my own
research into video game addiction,1,2 increased
aggressiveness,3 and the various medical and
psychosocial effects.4 However, there are many
references to the posit ive benefits of
videogames in the literature.5,6 Research dating
right back to the early 1980s has consistently
shown that playing computer games
(irrespective of genre) produces reductions in
reaction times, improved hand-eye
co-ordination and raises players’ self-esteem.
What’s more, curiosity, fun and the nature of
the challenge also appear to add to a game’s
educational potential.7 This paper briefly

overviews some of the educational benefits of
videogame playing.
Videogames as educational
research tools
Videogames can clearly consume the atten-
tion of children and adolescents.8 However, it is
important to assess the extent that videogame
technology had an impact on childhood educa-
tion. Since videogames have the capacity to
engage children in learning experiences, this
has led to the rise of “edu-tainment” media. Just
by watching children it becomes very clear that
they prefer this type of approach to learning.
However, it appears that very few games on the
commercial market have educational value.
Some evidence suggests that important skills
may be built or reinforced by videogames. For
example, spatial visualization ability (i.e., men-

tally, rotating and manipulating two- and
three-dimensional objects) improve with video
game playing.9 Videogames were also more
effective for children who started out with rela-
tively poor skills. It has also been suggested that
videogames may be useful in equalizing indi-
vidual differences in spatial skill performance.
For over 20 years researchers have been using
videogames as a means of researching individ-
uals. Many of these reasons also provide an
insight as to why they may be useful education-
ally. For instance :
� Videogames can be used as research and/or mea-
surement tools. Furthermore, as research tools they
have great diversity
� Videogames attract participation by individuals
across many demographic boundaries (e.g., age,
gender, ethnicity, educational status)

� Videogames can assist children in setting goals,
ensuring goal rehearsal, providing feedback, rein-
forcement, and maintaining records of behavioural
change
� Videogames can be useful because they allow the
researcher to measure performance on a very wide
variety of tasks, and can be easily changed, stan-
dardized and understood
� Videogames can be used when examining individual
characteristics such as self-esteem, self-concept,
goal-setting and individual differences
� Videogames are fun and stimulating for participants.
Vol. 20 No.3, 2002 Education and Health 47
Dr Mark Griffiths is Professor
of Gambling Studies in the
Psychology Division,
Nottingham Trent University.
What is clear from the empirical literature is that the negative
consequences of playing almost always
involve people who were excessive users of videogames.

Mark Griffiths
The educational benefits of
videogames
Videogames have great positive potential in
addition to their entertainment value and there
has been considerable success when games are
designed to address a specific problem or to teach
a certain skill.
Research has
consistently
shown that
playing computer
games produces
reductions in
reaction times,
improved
hand-eye
co-ordination
and raises
players’
self-esteem.
http://sheu.org.uk/content/page/education-and-health-journal
Consequently, it is easier to achieve and maintain a
person’s undivided attention for long periods of
time.10 Because of the fun and excitement, they may
also provide an innovative way of learning
� Videogames can provide elements of interactivity that

may stimulate learning
� Videogames also allow participants to experience
novelty, curiosity and challenge. This may stimulate
learning
� Videogames equip children with state-of-the art tech-
nology. This may help overcome technophobia (a
condition well-known among many adults). Over time
it may also help eliminate gender imbalance in IT use
(as males tend to be more avid IT users)
� Videogames may help in the development of trans-
ferable IT skills
� Videogames can act as simulations. These allow par-
ticipants to engage in extraordinary activities and to
destroy or even die without real consequences
� Videogames may help adolescents regress to child-
hood play (because of the ability to suspend reality in
videogame playing)
There of course some disadvantages to

researching videogames in an educational con-
text. For instance :
� Videogames cause participants to become excited
and therefore produce a whole host of confounding
variables such as motivation and individual skill11
� Videogame technology has rapidly changed across
time. Therefore, videogames are constantly being
upgraded which makes it hard to evaluate educa-
tional impact across studies
� Videogame experience and practice may enhance a
participant’s performance on particular games, which
may skew results
Despite the disadvantages, it would appear
that videogames (in the right context) may be a
facilitatory educational aid.
Videogames and the
development of skills among
special need groups
Videogames have been used in comprehen-

sive programmes to help develop social skills in
children and adolescents who are severely
retarded or who have severe developmental
problems like autism.12,13 Case studies such as
those by Demarest14 are persuasive. Demarest’s
account of her own autistic 7-year old son
reported that although he had serious deficien-
cies in language and understanding, and social
and emotional difficulties, videogame playing
was one activity he was able to excel. This was
ego-boosting for him and also had a self-calm-
ing effect. Videogames provided the visual
patterns, speed and storyline that help chil-
dren’s basic skills development. Some of the
therapeutic benefits Demarest outlined were
language skills, mathematics and reading skills,
and social skills.
Language skills

These included videogame play being able
to facilitate (i) discussing and sharing, (ii) fol-
lowing directions (understanding prepositions
etc.), (iii) giving directions, (iv) answering ques-
tions, and (v) having a discussion topic with
visual aides to share with others.
Basic maths skills
These included videogame playing pro-
moting basic maths skills as children learn to
interact with the score counters on videogames.
Basic reading skills
These included videogames’ character dia-
logue which are printed on the screen (‘Play’,
‘Quit’, ‘Go’, ‘Stop’, Load’ etc.).
Social skills
Videogames provided an interest that was
popular with other children makes talking and
playing together so much easier. At school there

are always other children who share a passion
for videogame play.
Horn15 used videogames to train three chil-
dren with multiple handicaps (e.g., severely
limited vocal speech acquisition) to make scan
and selection responses. These skills were later
transferred to a communication device. Other
researchers have used videogames to help
learning disabled children in their development
of spatial abilities,16 problem-solving exer-
cises17 and mathematical ability.18 Other
researchers have offered comments on how best
to use computer technology for improved
achievement and enhanced motivation among
the learning disabled.19,20
There are now a few studies that have
examined whether videogames might be able to
help in the treatment of another special needs

group - children with impulsive and attentional
diff icult ies . Kappes2 1 tr ied to reduce
impulsivity in incarcerated juveniles (ages 15 to
18 years) by providing either biofeedback or
experience with a videogame. Impulsivity
scores improved for both conditions. Improve-
ment was also noted in negative
self-attributions and in internal locus of control.
The authors concluded that most likely expla-
nation for the improvement in both
experimental conditions was the immediate
feedback. Clarke22 also used videogames to
48 Education and Health Vol. 20 No.3, 2002
Despite the
disadvantages, it
would appear
that videogames
(in the right
context) may be a
facilitatory
educational aid.

help adolescents learn impulse control. A
videogame was used for four weeks with four
subjects (11 to 17 years) diagnosed with impulse
control problems. After the experimental trial,
the participants became more enthusiastic and
co-operative about treatment.
Brain-wave biofeedback
New (as yet unpublished) research23 sug-
gests videogames linked to brain-wave
biofeedback may help children with attention
deficit disorders. Biofeedback teaches patients
to control normally involuntary body functions
such as heart rate by providing real-time moni-
tors of those responses. With the aid of a
computer display, attention-deficit patients can
learn to modulate brain waves associated with
focusing. With enough training, changes
become automatic and lead to improvements in

grades, sociability, and organizational skills.
Following on from research involving pilot
attentiveness during long flights, a similar prin-
ciple has been developed to help
attention-deficit children stay focused by
rewarding an attentive state of mind. This has
been done by linking biofeedback to commer-
cial videogames.
In their trial, Pope24 selected half a dozen
‘Sony PlayStation’ games and tested 22 girls
and boys between the ages of 9 and 13 who had
attention deficit disorder. Half the group got
traditional biofeedback training, the other half
played the modified video games. After 40
one-hour sessions, both groups showed sub-
stantial improvements in everyday brain-wave
patterns as well as in tests of attention span,
impulsiveness, and hyperactivity.

Parents in both groups also reported that
their children were doing better in school. The
difference between the two groups was motiva-
tion. The video-game group showed fewer
no-shows and no dropouts. The researchers do
warn that the ‘wrong kinds of videogame’ may
be detrimental to children with attention disor-
ders. For instance, ‘shoot ‘em up’ games may
have a negative effect on children who already
have a tendency toward short attention and
impulsivity. They also state that the technique is
an adjunct to drug therapy and not a replace-
ment for it.
Videogames and health care
Videogames have also been used to
improve children’s health care. Several games
have been developed specifically for children
with chronic medical conditions. One of the

best-studied is an educational game called
‘Packy and Marlon’.25 This game was designed
to improve self-care skills and medical
compliance in children and adolescents with
diabetes. Players assume the role of characters
who demonstrate good diabetes care practices
while working to save a summer camp for chil-
dren with diabetes from rats and mice who have
stolen the supplies. ‘Packy and Marlon’ is now
available through ‘Click Health’
(www.clickhealth.com), along with two addi-
tional health-related software products,
‘Bronkie the Bronchiasaurus’ (for asthma
self-management) and ‘Rex Ronan’ (for smok-
ing prevention).
In a controlled study using ‘Packy and
Marlon’,26 8- to 16-year olds were assigned to
either a treatment or control group. All partici-

pants were given a ‘Super Nintendo’ game
system. The treatment group was given ‘Packy
and Marlon’ software, while the control sub-
jects received an entertainment videogame. In
addition to more communication with parents
and improved self-care, the treatment group
demonstrated a significant decrease in urgent
medical visits.
Rehabilitation
There are also several case reports describ-
ing the use of videogames for rehabilitation. In
one application, an electronic game was used to
improve arm control in a 13 year old boy with
Erb’s palsy.27 The authors concluded that the
game format capitalized on the child’s motiva-
tion to succeed in the game and focused
attention away from potential discomfort.
Electronic games have also been used to
enhance adolescents’ perceived self-efficacy in

HIV/AIDS prevention programs.28 Using a
time travel adventure game format, informa-
tion and opportunities for practice discussing
prevention practices were provided to
high-risk adolescents. Game-playing resulted
in significant gains in factual information about
safe sex practices, and in the participants’ per-
ceptions of their ability to successfully negotiate
and implement such practices with a potential
partner.
Concluding remarks
It is vital that we continue to develop the
positive potential of videogames while remain-
ing aware of possible unintended negative
effects when game content is not prosocial. At
the present time, the most popular games are
usually violent. Given current findings, it is rea-
sonable to be concerned about the impact of

violent games on some children and adoles-
cents. Game developers need support and
encouragement to put in the additional effort
necessary to develop interesting games which
do not rely heavily on violent actions.
Players assume the
role of characters
who demonstrate
good diabetes care
practices while
working to save a
summer camp for
children with
diabetes from rats
and mice who
have stolen the
supplies.
It is vital that we
continue to
develop the
positive potential
of videogames
while remaining
aware of possible
unintended
negative effects
when game
content is not

prosocial.
Relationships between playing violent elec-
tronic games and negative behaviors and
emotions may never be proven to be causal by
the strictest standard of “beyond a reasonable
doubt,” but many believe that we have already
reached the still-compelling level of “clear and
convincing evidence.”
Finally, most parents would probably sup-
port the use of videogames if they were sure
they helped their children learn about school
subjects. There are several elements which the
teacher, parent, or facilitator should evaluate
when choosing a health promoting/educa-
tional or helping videogame (adapted from
Funk29).
� Educational or therapeutic objective. The objec-

tive of the game should be clear. Professional
helpers and developers should have a known goal in
mind for the players of the game. The outcomes they
are seeking should be clear to the teacher and to the
player
� Type of game. There are many types of activity con-
tent : games, puzzles, mazes, play,
fantasy/adventure, simulations, and simulation
games. Some games require physical skill and strat-
egy, while others are games of chance. Some
videogames are board or adventure game, while oth-
ers involve simulation involving real events or
fantasy. No evidence supports a greater therapeutic
or educational effect in either situation
� Required level and nature of involvement. The
evaluator should assess whether the videogame
player is passive or active. In some games, the com-
puter plays the game while the participant watches

the results. In computer-moderated games, the com-
puter provides the environment for the game to occur
and presents decisions or questions to the player at
key points during the game. The computer then
reveals the consequences of the decisions made by
the player
� Information and rules. Some games allow the
player to have a range of knowledge and information
about past experiences with the game. Others pro-
vide minimal amounts of information to the player.
Part of the strategy may involve the player’s
response to this lack of information. Rules and player
participation in setting rules may vary among games
� The role of luck. Some games are driven by chance.
It is assumed that the greater the influence of chance
in the working of the game, the less educational and
therapeutic in nature. However, some players prefer
games of chance over games of strategy

� Difficulty. Some games allow the player to choose
the difficulty level. Others adjust difficulty level based
on the progression of the player. This approach
allows the game to become progressively more inter-
esting as it becomes more challenging
� Competition. Many games build in competition.
Some players are attracted by competition. Teachers
may wish to examine if the competition is presented
in such a way that all can win and that one does not
win at the expense of all others
� Duration. Some games have very short duration,
while others may go on at length. Making of user
rewards, personal challenges, or changes in color or
graphical surroundings to maintain interest some
games can hold player interest for long periods of
time
� Participant age and characteristics. Computerized
games have been developed for a range of ages. It

assumes that the participant can understand the
rules of the game and has the skill level to accom-
plish the motor aspects of playing the game. Some
games allow for modification of text to meet the
needs of poorly sighted players
� Number of players. Some videogames are solitary
in nature. Others pit players against each other or the
computer. Solitary games may meet the needs of
those who find group work difficult
� Facilitator’s role. In some videogames, the teacher
or facilitator merely observes. In others, the facilitator
may be an important part of the game format
� Setting. Fully prepare staff to integrate these games
into the curriculum. Without proper acceptance, the
games may be used primarily as a game or toy rather
than as a therapeutic or educational tool
Videogame technology brings new chal-
lenges to the education arena. Videogames

represent one technique that may be available
to the classroom teacher. Care should be taken
that enthusiastic use of this technique does not
displace other more effective techniques. Video
and computer-based games may possess
advantages not present in other learning strate-
gies. For example, the ability to choose different
solutions to a difficult problem and then see the
50 Education and Health Vol. 20 No.3, 2002
Videogame
technology brings
new challenges to
the education
arena.
Education and Health
In the next issue:
Young People in 2001
Young people tell us what they do at home,
at school and with their friends
effect those decisions have on a fictional game

allows students to experiment with prob-
lem-solving in a relative safe environment.
Videogames have great positive potential
in addition to their entertainment value. There
has been considerable success when games are
specifically designed to address a specific prob-
lem or to teach a certain skill. However,
generalizability outside the game-playing situ-
ation remains an important research question.
What is also clear from the empirical literature
is that the negative consequences of playing
almost always involve people who were exces-
sive users of videogames. From prevalence
studies in this area, there is little evidence of
serious acute adverse effects on health from
moderate play. Adverse effects are likely to be
relatively minor, and temporary, resolving
spontaneously with decreased frequency of

play, or to affect only a small subgroup of play-
ers. Excessive players are the most at-risk from
developing health problems although more
research appears to be much needed.
References
1 Griffiths, M.D. & Hunt, N. (1995). Computer game playing in
adolescence : Prevalence and demographic indicators.
Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 5,
189-194.
2 Griffiths, M.D. & Hunt, N. (1998). Dependence on computer
game playing by adolescents. Psychological Reports, 82,
475-480.
3 Griffiths, M.D. (1998). Video games and aggression : A
review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 4,
203-212.
4 Griffiths, M.D. (1996). Computer game playing in children
and adolescents : A review of the literature. In T. Gill (Ed.),
Electronic Children : How Children Are Responding To The

Information Revolution. pp.41-58. London : National
Children’s Bureau.
5 Lawrence, G.H. (1986). Using computers for the treatment
of psychological problems. Computers in Human Behavior,
2, 43-62.
6 Griffiths, M.D. (1997). Video games and clinical practice :
Issues, uses and treatments. British Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 36, 639-641.
7 op cit (above, n.1).
8 Malone, T.W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically
motivated instruction. Cognitive Science, 4, 333-369.
9 Subrahmanyam, K. & Greenfield, P. (1994). Effect of video
game practice on spatial skills in boys and girls. Journal of
Applied Developmental Psychology, 15, 13-32.
10 Donchin, E. (1995). Video games as research tools: The
Space Fortress game. Behavior Research Methods,
Instruments, & Computers, 27 ,217-223.
11 Porter, D.B. (1995). Computer games: Paradigms of

opportunity. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, &
Computers 27 (2), 229-234.
12 Gaylord-Ross, R.J., Haring, T.G., Breen, C. &
Pitts-Conway, V. (1984). The training and generalization of
social interaction skills with autistic youth. Journal of
Applied Behaviour Analysis, 17, 229.
13 Sedlak, R. A., Doyle, M. and Schloss, P. (1982) “Video
Games - a Training and Generalization Demonstration with
Severely Retarded Adolescents”, Education and Training in
Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 17 (4),
pp.332-336.
14 Demarest. K. (2000). Video games – What are they good
for? Located at:http://www.lessontutor.com/kd3.html
15 Horn, E., Jones, H.A. & Hamlett, C. (1991). An investigation
of the feasibility of a video game system for developing
scanning and selection skills. Journal for the Association for
People With Severe Handicaps, 16, 108-115.
16 Masendorf, F. (1993). Training of learning disabled

children’s spatial abilities by computer games. Zeitschrift fur
Padagogische Psychologie, 7, 209-213.
17 Hollingsworth, M. & Woodward, J. (1993). Integrated
learning : Explicit strategies and their role in problem
solving instruction for students with learning disabilities.
Exceptional Children, 59, 444-445.
18 Okolo, C. (1992a). The effect of computer-assisted
instruction format and initial attitude on the arithmetic facts
proficiency and continuing motivation of students with
learning disabilities. Exceptionality, 3, 195-211.
19 Blechman, E. A., Rabin, C., McEnroe, M. J. (1986). Family
Communication and Problem Solving with Boardgames and
Computer Games. In C. E. Schaefer & S. E. Reid (Ed.),
GAME PLAY: Therapeutic Use of Childhood Games pp.
129-145. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
20 Okolo, C. (1992b). Reflections on “The effect of
computer-assisted instruction format and initial attitude on
the arithmetic facts proficiency and continuing motivation of

students with learning disabilities”. Exceptionality, 3,
255-258.
21 Kappes, B. M., & Thompson, D. L. (1985). Biofeedback vs.
video games: Effects on impulsivity, locus of control and
self-concept with incarcerated individuals. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 41, 698-706.
22 Clarke, B. & Schoech, D. (1994). A computer-assisted
game for adolescents : Initial development and comments.
Computers in Human Services, 11(1-2), 121-140.
23 Wright, K. (2001). Winning brain waves : Can custom-made
video games help kids with attention deficit disorder?
Discover, 22. Located at http://www.discover.com/
mar_01/featworks.html
24 Pope, A. & Palsson, O. In Wright, K. (2001). Winning
brain waves : Can custom-made video games help kids
with attention deficit disorder? Discover, 22. Located at
http://www.discover.com/mar_01/featworks.html
25 Brown, S. J., Lieberman, D. A., Germeny, B. A., Fan, Y. C.,

Wilson, D. M., & Pasta, D. J. (1997). Educational video
game for juvenile diabetes: Results of a controlled trial.
Medical Informatics 22, 77-89.
26 ibid.
27 Krichevets, A.N., Sirotkina, E.B., Yevsevicheva, I.V. &
Zeldin, L.M. (1994). Computer games as a means of
movement rehabilitation. Disability and Rehabilitation : An
International Multidisciplinary Journal, 17, 100-105.
28 Thomas, R., Cahill, J., & Santilli, L. (1997). Using an
interactive computer game to increase skill and self-efficacy
regarding safer sex negotiation: Field test results. Health
Education and Behavior, 24, 71-86.
29 Funk, J.B., Germann, J.N. & Buchman, D.D. (1997).
Children and electronic games in the United States. Trends
in Communication, 2, 111-126.
Excessive players
are the most
at-risk from

developing health
problems.
Researchers Examine Video Gaming’s Benefits
By Bob Freeman
Special to American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Jan. 25, 2010 – Think interactive video games
are a waste of time or more
suited for children? Think again. Research under way by the
Office of Naval Research indicates
that video games can help adults process information much
faster and improve their fundamental
abilities to reason and solve problems in novel contexts.
"We have discovered that video game players perform 10 to 20
percent higher in terms of
perceptual and cognitive ability than normal people that are
non-game players," said Ray Perez,
a program officer at the ONR's warfighter performance
department in a Jan. 20 interview on
Pentagon Web Radio's audio webcast "Armed with Science:
Research and Applications for the
Modern Military."

"Our concern is developing training technologies and training
methods to improve performance
on the battlefield," said Perez, who holds a doctorate in
educational psychology.
Perez described the war against terrorists as presenting
significant challenges to warfighters on
the ground because they must be able to adapt their operations
to innovative and deadly
adversaries who constantly change their tactics.
"We have to train people to be quick on their feet - agile
problem solvers, agile thinkers - to be
able to counteract and develop counter tactics to terrorists on
the battlefield," Perez said. "It's
really about human inventiveness and creativeness and being
able to match wits with the
enemy."
It's also about adaptability. Perez said this means "being able to
work outside your present
mindset, to think beyond what you have been taught, to go
beyond your experience to solve

problems in new and different ways."
Perez used the term "fluid intelligence" to describe the ability
to change, to meet new problems
and to develop new tactics and counter-tactics. Fluid
intelligence, he explained, allows us to
solve problems without prior knowledge or experience.
This raises the question of whether fluid intelligence is innate
or can be developed and improved.
"For the last 50 years, fluid intelligence was felt to be
immutable," Perez said, "meaning it
couldn't be changed, no matter what kinds of experiences you
have."
This, he added, is related to the idea of brain plasticity. "The
presumption was that the structure
of the brain and the organization of the brain are pretty much
set in concrete by the time you are
out of your teens," he explained.
It once was widely believed that after the age of 20, Perez said,
that most humans had achieved

their brain cell capacity, and that new brain cells were acquired
at the expense of existing ones.
But conventional beliefs about brain plasticity and aging are
changing. The video game-like
training programs at the Office of Naval Research, he noted, are
producing surprising results.
“We know that video games can increase perceptual abilities
and short-term memory,” he said.
They allow the player to focus longer and expand the player’s
field of vision compared to people
who don’t play video games, he added.
While there is empirical evidence of increased brain plasticity
in video gamers, Perez said, the
process behind it is not well understood. His belief, he said, is
that the neural networks involved
in video gaming become more pronounced, have increased blood
flow, and become more
synchronized with other neural networks in the brain.
"We're now looking for the underlying neural mechanisms that
are responsible for these changes
in behavior and in abilities," Perez said. "We're using various

kinds of neural imaging techniques
like [functional magnetic resonance imaging] that identify
different areas of the brain that show
activity when you're performing certain tasks, and we can begin
to look at what area of the brain
is active during the processing of video information.
"We think that these games increase your executive control, or
your ability to focus and attend to
stimuli in the outside world," he added.
Early indications suggest that cognitive improvements from
video games can last up to two and
half years, Perez said, but he admitted that so far the results
have been relegated to observations
and measurements in a controlled laboratory environment.
"The major question is that once you've increased these
perceptual abilities and cognitive
abilities, do they transfer to everyday tasks," he said, "and how
long do they continue to
influence the person working on these everyday tasks?"
In the meantime, the researchers are looking at ways to

integrate video game technology into
learning tools. Perez said that they are looking at everything
from small-screen training on
personal digital assistants and laptops to simulators and virtual
environments.
One virtual environment, used to develop adaptability within
team dynamics, looks very much
like a cave.
"You walk into a cave and you're bombarded by this totally
different, artificial world where there
may be intelligent avatars that you interact with to perform a
mission," Perez said. "These avatars
will act as teammates, so you, as an individual, will have to
interact with these avatars as a unit."
Perez said the ultimate goal is to blur the distinction between
training and operations.
"I think we're at the beginning of a new science of learning," he
said, "that will be the integration
of neuroscience with developmental psychology, with cognitive
science, and with artificial
intelligence."

The Office of Naval Research is sponsoring research in new
game theory and solvable games.
Those interested in more information on funding opportunities
can visit the Human-Machine
Adversarial Network topic (#16) in the office's 2010
Multidisciplinary University Research
Initiative.
(Bob Freeman works in the Office of the Oceanographer of the
Navy.)
rl.
Television: Destroying
i?':"it'il i: i.i'ii,: I
thildh**d
Rose Bochtel wrote this essoy for o College Composition I closs
in her first semester of college. Bosed on
this essoy, what does Bochtel think is voluoble? As you reod,
jot down your initiol ideos obout how you
might porticipote in this discussion, including how you might
expond on whot Bochtel soys or might offer

on olternote woy of seeing the problem.
fr
fr
ul
.J
E & / tren my grandparents were little, they
$ fuf, spent their free time riding bicyclesY € outside, playing
dolls or dress-up, or
curling up with a good book. Nowadays, my
younger siblings consume every free moment
they have in front of a television. "Times have
changed. It is just another form of entertain-
ment," some say. Should this obsession be han-
dled so lightly? Is there nothing wrong with
sitting in front of a television set all day? Of
course this poses a problem, especially where
children are concerned! They are at a vital
growing period in their lives and how they are
raised will play a strong role in who they will
become. Watching television will not work
any muscle groups, so a child will not get the
proper amount of exercise he or she needs. This
will lead to future health problems, whether it
be in the near future or years down the road.
Also, because TV does not demand effort or in-
teraction of the person watching it, children
who watch television frequently often become
lazy and expect that evefihing should come to
them instantaneously and without work. This
lowers a child's patience because he or she
wants instant gratification and will not engage
in activities or events that require time or com-

plicated components. These same children will
also experience a decline in creativity because
the television is creative for them. This is not
healthy because childhood is the most vital time
for stimulating a young person's mind and
forcing him or her to develop it.
r How can parents stop their children's bod-
ies and minds from eroding? My solution is
quite simple. Parents should not keep a televi-
sion in the home. It may sound a bit drastic at
first, but when analyzed, it makes sense. With-
out the convenience of a television, children are
forced to think of other forms of keeping them-
selves entertained. This would lead them to ex-
ercise more since most activities involve using
more muscle groups than are involved in stag-
nantly watching television. Also, since children
would be forced to seek out other forms of en-
tertainment, they would be, in turn, forced to
use their brains more and think creatively in or-
der to come up with something to do. They
would have to use their minds to search for in-
formation about their world instead of having it
handed to them by TV. Also, since a child is no
longer confined to inside ofthe house, he or she
can venture outside and explore nature while
getting fresh air and vitamin D from the sun's
rays. Another problem with TV is that many
television show producers feel that sex and vio-
lence sell, so consequently, many of today's
programs contain these elements. Since people
at a young age are very impressionable, they
pick up on these messages and are influenced
by them. Without a television set in the home,

children will be less exposed to sex and vio-
lence. Another benefit of my proposal is the
fact that parents do not have to worry about
monitoring the content of the television shows
their children watch if there is no TV set in the
home to begin with. Their kids will not be able
to watch unapproved shows when the parents
are not home to supervise.
Still, many people may feel apprehensive to-
wards this proposal because they have lived with
televisions for so long that they cannot imagine
'" 'Rieadrngs:
Bochtel
445
II
1
t
l
I
!
i
ry*""rin :'*.""l'n.;T ;l?il Xl' #i{:il: :F:} lili##i#;i:
{Tffi:'.J:ie,:::T,ri-yi!:Iri[i,'* nffi':*.,*.-,Li' .,
fifi*{fififingffi$i.*ffi'tJffiffi
m o re up -to - d ate
r n r o rm atl"': ill 1til',1 l, n t "-ilff ll.T;i?:;;Hiil: it'.'' is arso
the Inter-

[*i.ffiil*il*f*,.*'i,i'liffi k
that if there .is,nll^ lu,o'i'*oi'fr.. ,t*. on their
them, theY will have
#sid ;ri;'*t5;il$$#:i;;lli l+it,i,xr.l+idlq,i'$ll'ffi
*::i'.T';::f jT#: ru'' ::Y i1'.;;, il,o wa,lf *; #:itT*T,**l*ltij*i*:;
llr,:,l,.llil:ii:l ffi''l'll:illF;ilrlit:*: w 3i91
",**i'-i1='iil
:n*l llx:
:*ffifi, r'.; *lnl:llir:
q
if il: [i#,{'*'*{t ii','' ffi +** rt** J,i I i:,
[.T#i''ffitfrfi:''']1'ffi '#ffii14#$'.*ik*ltr'''ffi
il+#$*ffo+r*+'ffi r**fill'*$**ffi
Hffiil$.'ll',1;rut*-i{il[.:ig
H':"il: "' ll:'lil:n."n, rn. *'rs]l'l[ r*ctioned per-
iil'i$ :iHT+i*{:* rli*[.":','*-* ffi'5#iffit{{Hiiriff{i: ffi:1'J;iii d;
io't 'r he or she is consta'trr Jq' '- taining' *ti;T.T';t'd.":#,=J'
t*i.are hurting tire
il;i?jj[;rTany
relevision shows.ar-e
not moral has manY
h*ion''
ev e'ttilg^".1:ltilll;n,il:
H:tr;]11"#j$fd'#h*1.* Hff#fig,3i'-',gl'EililtrrhTlr*r;
time that could bet^;ffiil';*tO iuri be mini-

tnrouelr LrrLrr v!". J
activity' Sure' televtslolr
u)L Lver- J
How Facebook addiction is damaging your
child's brain: A leading neuroscientist's
chilling warning
By Baroness Susan Greenfield
Last updated at 1:26 AM on 23rd April 2009
Can you imagine a world without long-term relationships, where
people are unable to understand
the consequences of their actions or empathise with one
another?
Such conditions would not only hamper our happiness and
prosperity - they could threaten our
very survival.
Yet this imagined existence isn't as far away as it seems. It is a
plausible future. For we are
developing an ever deeper dependence on websites such as
Facebook, Twitter and Second Life -

and these technologies can alter the way our minds work.
We must take this issue of computers seriously because what
could be more important than the
brains of the next generation?
As a neuroscientist, I am aware of how susceptible our brains
are to change - and our
environment has changed drastically over the past decade. Most
people spend at least two hours
each day in front of a computer, and living this way will result
in minds very different from those
of past generations.
Our brains are changing in unprecedented ways. We know the
human brain is exquisitely
sensitive to the outside world - this so-called 'plasticity' is
famously illustrated by London taxi
drivers who need to remember all the streets of the city, and
whose part of the brain related to
memory is generally bigger than in the rest of us as a result.
Indeed, one of the most exciting concepts in neuroscience is
that all experience leaves its mark
on your brain.
But while adults' brains can change, it is children who are most

at risk, for their brains are still
growing - and may not have yet had a full range of experiences
in three dimensions.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authorname
f=Baroness+Susan+Greenfield
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
Yet 99 per cent of children and young people use the internet,
according to an Ofcom study. In
2005, the average time children spent online was 7.1 hours per
week. By 2007, it had almost
doubled to 13.8 hours. As an expert on the human brain, I am
speaking out as I feel we need to
protect the young.
Of course, this idea may not be welcomed - when someone first
linked smoking and lung cancer,
people didn't like that idea; some derided them because they
enjoyed smoking. But parallels
could well be drawn with this, and I believe similar
precautionary thinking should be set in train,
as in turn was needed for sunbathing and carbon emissions.
We must take this issue of computers seriously because what
could be more important than the
brains of the next generation?

Three areas of computing are likely to have the most marked
effect - social networking sites such
as Facebook, MySpace and Twitter, imagined online societies
such as Second Life, and
computer games.
Facebook turned five years old in February. Arguably, it marks
a milestone and a highly
significant change in our culture - millions of individuals
worldwide are signing up for friendship
through a screen.
Half of young people aged eight to 17 have their own profile on
a social networking site. But two
basic, brain-based questions still need to be addressed. First,
why are social networking sites
growing? Secondly, what features of the young mind, if any, are
threatened by them?
In modern life, the appeal of social networking sites to children
is easy to understand. As many
parents now consider playing outside too dangerous, a child
confined to the home can find at the
keyboard the kind of freedom of interaction that earlier
generations took for granted in the three-
dimensional world of the street.

Though to many children screen life is even more appealing.
Philip Hodson, a fellow of the
British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy,
suggests that: 'Building a Facebook
profile is one way that individuals can identify themselves,
making them feel important and
accepted.'
Social networking sites satisfy that basic human need to belong,
as well as the ability to
experience instant feedback and recognition from someone,
somewhere, 24 hours a day.
At the same time, this constant reassurance is coupled with a
distancing from the stress of face-
to-face, real-life conversation.
Real-life chatting is, after all, far more perilous than in the
cyber world as it occurs in real time,
with no opportunity to think up clever responses, and it requires
a sensitivity to voice tone, body
language and even to physical chemicals such as pheromones.
None of these skills is required when chatting on a networking
site. In fact, one user told me:

'You become less conscious of the individuals involved
(including yourself), less inhibited, less
embarrassed and less concerned about how you will be
evaluated.'
In other words, Facebook does not require the subtleties of
social skill we need in the real world.
Not only will this impair individuals' ability to communicate -
and build relationships - it could
completely change how conversation happens.
Maybe real conversation will give way to sanitised screen
dialogues, in much the same way as
killing, skinning and butchering an animal to eat has been
replaced by the convenience of
packages of meat on the supermarket shelf.
Perhaps future generations will recoil with similar horror at the
messiness, unpredictability and
personal involvement of real-time interaction.
Other aspects of brain development may also be in line for a
makeover. One is attention span. If
the young brain is exposed to a world of action and reaction, of
instant screen images, such rapid
interchange-might accustom the brain to operate over such
timescales.

It might be helpful to investigate whether the near total
submersion of our culture in screen
technologies over the past decade might in some way be linked
to the threefold increase over this
period in prescriptions for Methylphenidate, the drug prescribed
for ADHD.
A second difference in the young 21st-century mind might be a
marked preference for the here-
and-now, where the immediacy of an experience trumps any
regard for the consequences. After
all, when you play a computer game, everything you do is
reversible. You can switch it off or
start again. But the idea that actions don't have consequences is
a very bad lesson to learn, when
in life they always do.
And in games the emphasis is on the thrill of the moment. This
type of activity can be compared
with the thrill of compulsive gambling.
The third possible change is in empathy. This cannot develop
through social networking because
we are not aware of how other people are really feeling - we
cannot pick up on body language
when we are communicating through a screen.

As a result, people could become almost autistic. One teacher
wrote to me that she had witnessed
a change over the 30 years she had been teaching in the ability
of her pupils to understand other
people and their emotions.
She pointed out that previously, reading novels had been a good
way of learning about how
others feel and think.
We should therefore not be surprised that those within the
autism spectrum are comfortable in
the cyber world. We do not know whether the current increase
in autism is simply due to
improved diagnosis of autism, but we must consider whether it
can be linked to an increase
among people of spending time in screen relationships.
Finally, there is a fourth issue at stake: identity. One 16-year-
old summed it up as follows:
'Facebook makes you think about yourself differently when all
your private thoughts and feelings
can be posted on the internet for all to see. Are we perhaps
losing a sense of where we ourselves
finish and the outside world begins?'

Perhaps the next generation will define themselves by the
responses of others; hence the baffling
preoccupation with Twitter, where users post an almost
moment-by-moment, flood-of-
consciousness account of their thoughts and activities, however
banal.
It would be easy to test for physiological proof of the impact of
computer games - for example,
to see in scans if the frontal area is less active in players. This
is the most sophisticated part of
the brain which develops latest, so it is less active in children
and becomes maximally
operational only in our 20s.
Though its functions are many and far from clear, it seems an
important feature in humans,
whose frontal area is far larger than chimpanzees.
My view is that it works in conjunction with the rest of the
brain to enable you to escape from
the immediate moment.
People with an underactive pre-frontal cortex (hypofrontal),
perhaps because of brain damage,
are reckless, easily distracted and have short attention spans.

I am not against computers per se. I use them and appreciate the
benefits the internet has
brought. Ultimately, I believe that much like traditional sources
of instant gratification - sex,
drugs, drink - social networking sites tap into the basic brain
systems for delivering pleasurable
experience.
But these experiences are devoid of long-term significance. I
find it incredibly sad that people
choose to spend their time and money sitting alone playing
games with no consequence and no
meaning.
But beyond any frustration I feel is concern about the future our
screen culture might create. One
extreme situation could be a rise in psychiatric problems and
fewer babies born because people
can't form three-dimensional relationships.
By the middle of this century, our minds might have become
infantilised - characterised by short
attention spans, an inability to empathise and a shaky sense of
identity.
One effect, the fragmentation of our culture, is already

occurring: the violent videos posted on
YouTube.
Steps must be taken to stop this - to safeguard the mindset of
the next generation so that they
may realise their potential as adults.
We cannot turn back the clock, but the threat is growing
because technology is becoming more
seductive and powerful. We must start facing up not only to the
impact that computers are
having on ourselves and our children - but also to the wider
implications their use will have for
our society in the future.
● Baroness Susan Greenfield was key guest speaker at the
Women of the Year lecture at the
Royal Institute of Great Britain. Visit
www.womenoftheyear.co.uk
http://www.womenoftheyear.co.uk/
Permanent Address:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fact-or-
fiction-cell-

phones-can-cause-brain-cancer
Fact or Fiction?: Cell Phones Can Cause Brain Cancer
Should you be worried about that mobile plastered to your ear?
By Melinda Wenner | Friday, November 21, 2008
This summer, Ronald Herberman, director of the University of
Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, sent a
memo to staffers warning them to limit their cell phone use and
to use hands-free sets in the
wake of "growing evidence that we should reduce exposure" to
cell phone radiation. Among the
possible consequences: an increased risk of brain cancer.
Five months later, a top official at the National Cancer Institute
(NCI) told a congressional panel
that published scientific data indicates cell phones are safe.
So what's the deal? Do cell phones cause cancer—or not?
It depends on whom you ask: Herberman, Robert Hoover,
director of NCI's Epidemiology and
Biostatistics Program, and other health officials recently
clashed during a hearing before the

House Subcommittee on Domestic Policy held to determine
whether mobile phones are safe.
"Long term and frequent use of cell phones which receive and
emit radio frequency may be
associated with an increased risk of brain tumors," Herberman
told lawmakers. "I find the old
adage 'better to be safe than sorry' to be very apt to this
situation."
Hoover, on the other hand, insisted that the pervasive
technology was safe, testifying that "its
effect on the body appears to be insufficient to cause genetic
damage."
The debate became so heated at one point that Rep. Dennis
Kucinich (D–Ohio), who called the
hearing, snapped at Hoover for interrupting David Carpenter,
director of the Institute for Health
and the Environment at the University at Albany, State
University of New York, as he argued
there was enough evidence to warrant more scrutiny and a
government warning of potential
damage.

Cell phones use non-ionizing radiation, which differs from the
ionizing radiation of x-rays and
radioactive material in that it does not have enough energy to
knock around—or ionize—
electrons or particles in atoms. Cell phone radiation falls into
the same band of nonionizing radio
frequency as microwaves used to heat or cook food. But Jorn
Olsen, chair of epidemiology at the
fiction-cell-phones-can-cause-brain-cancer
fiction-cell-phones-can-cause-brain-cancer
http://www.scientificamerican.com/
University of California, Los Angeles, School of Public Health
says that unlike microwaves, cell
phones do not release enough radiation or energy to damage
DNA or genetic material, which can
lead to cancer.
Recent research suggests, however, that although short-term
exposure is harmless, long-term cell
phone use may be a different story. Three studies since 1999
indicate that people who have used
cell phones for more than a decade may have as much as three
times greater risk of developing

brain tumors on the side of the head against which they most
often hold their phone—an
argument for, at the least, shifting ears regularly or, even better,
using an earpiece or the
speakerphone feature while chatting.
"For people who've used their cell phones for more than 10
years and who use their phone on the
same side as the tumor, it appears there's an association,"
Lawrie Challis, emeritus physics
professor at the University of Nottingham in England and
former chairman of the U.K.'s Mobile
Telecommunications and Health Research program, told
ScientificAmerican.com during a recent
interview.
Worldwide, one in 29,000 men and one in 38,000 women on
average develop brain tumors each
year, with people in industrial nations twice as likely as those in
developing countries to be
diagnosed with one, according to the World Health
Organization's International Agency for
Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France. If cell phone use
does, in fact, triple the odds of

getting cancer, these stats would suggest that over 60 years a
man's risk of developing a brain
tumor from cell phone use increases from 0.206 percent to 0.621
percent, and a woman's from
0.156 percent to 0.468 percent.
IARC in 2000 launched a study called Interphone, funded by the
European Union, the
International Union against Cancer and other national and local
funding bodies. Interphone
compared surveyed cell phone use in 6,420 people with brain
tumors to that of 7,658 healthy
people in 13 developed countries—Australia, Canada, Denmark,
Finland, France, Germany,
Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden and the
U.K.—to try to determine whether
people with brain tumors had used their cell phones more than
healthy people, an association that
might suggest that cell phones caused the tumors.
The results are expected by the end of this year. "The
interpretation of the results is not simple
because of a number of potential biases which can affect the
results," says project leader

Elisabeth Cardis, a professor at the Center for Research in
Environmental Epidemiology at the
Barcelona Biomedical Research Park. "These analyses are
complex and have, unfortunately,
taken much time." Among factors that might skew the results:
failure of participants—especially
those with tumors—to accurately recall exactly how long and
often they talk on their cell phones.
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), the average time
between first exposure to a cancer-causing agent and clinical
recognition of the disease is 15 to
20 years or longer—and cell phone use in the U.S. has only
been popular for about a decade. (In
1996 there were 34 million U.S. cell phone users compared with
more than 200 million today,
according to CTIA–The Wireless Association, a Washington,
D.C.–based cell phone industry
group.)
Carpenter told the congressional panel that most of the studies
that have shown an increased risk

are from Scandinavia, where cell phones have been popular
since the early 1990s. Herberman
added that most of the research showing cell phones are safe is
based on surveys of consumers
who have used them for less than 10 years.
Despite a dearth of human studies, more than 400 experiments
have been done since the early
1970s to determine how cell phone radiation affects animals,
cells and DNA. They, too, have
produced conflicting results. Some suggest that cell phone
radiation damages DNA and/or nerve
cells, others do not. At the hearing, Carpenter suggested that
cell phones may increase the brain's
production of reactive forms of oxygen called free radicals,
which can interact with and damage
DNA.
Contradictory findings could be a sign of poor study quality,
according to NCI expert Hoover.
But Jerry Phillips, a biochemist who performed cell phone
research at U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs's Pettis VA Medical Center in Loma Linda,
Calif., in the 1990s, believes that

conflicting results are to be expected given the nature of the
radiation being scrutinized.
Phillips says, for instance, that sometimes the body will respond
to radiation by initiating a series
of intrinsic repair mechanisms designed to fix the harmful
effects. In other words, the effects
from radiation exposure may be different in different people.
And these varied responses may
help explain the contradictory results, says Phillips, who is now
director of the Science/Health
Science Learning Center at the University of Colorado at
Colorado Springs.
There is plenty of anecdotal evidence out there claiming a link
between cell phone use and
cancer: Keith Black, chairman of neurosurgery at Cedars-Sinai
Medical Center in Los Angeles,
says that the brain cancer (malignant glioma) that killed O. J.
Simpson's attorney, Johnnie
Cochran, was the result of frequent cell phone use, based on the
fact that the tumor developed on
the side of the head against which he held his phone. And in
May, a week after Massachusetts

Sen. Edward Kennedy was diagnosed with a glioma, The EMR
Policy Institute, a Marshfield,
Vt.–based nonprofit organization that supports research on the
effects of electromagnetic
radiation, released a statement linking his tumor to heavy cell
phone use. But the NCI maintains
that there is no definitive evidence that cell phones increase
cancer risk.
In other words, the verdict is still out. "We can't rule out the
possibility of risk," Nottingham's
Challis says. "There hadn't been as much work in this area as is
now demanded."
Culture Quake
Computer Games like Quake and Doom probably won't turn
your son into a killer. But what is
happening to kids raised on the most violent, interactive mass-
media entertainment ever
devised?
By Paul Keegan | November/December 1999 Issue

Walking down Figueroa Street toward the Los Angeles
Convention Center earlier this year, it
was impossible to miss the giant white face staring down from a
billboard, the eyes glowing
bright yellow-orange, the pupils twisted into black spirals. The
promotion for the Sega
Dreamcast, a new video-game console, was designed to psych
up game fans for the zoned-out
bliss awaiting them at E3 -- the Electronic Entertainment
Exposition trade show -- then getting
under way.
But because it appeared just three weeks after the school
shootings in Littleton, at a time when
video and computer games were emerging as a favorite target of
blame, the image suddenly took
on new meaning. It succinctly posed the biggest question
surrounding the mammoth, $6.3 billion
electronic-games industry, now poised to blow past Hollywood
in terms of both annual revenue
and cultural impact: What's going on behind those eyes?
Images of evil that are destroying our children's minds, cried
the critics immediately after it was
reported that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were avid players
of the popular shoot-'em-ups

Doom and Quake. CBS's "60 Minutes" broadcast a segment a
few days later asking, "Are Video
Games Turning Kids Into Killers?" Bills were introduced on
Capitol Hill to ban the sale of
violent video games to minors. In June, President Clinton
ordered the surgeon general to study
the effects of all violent media on children and young adults. He
singled out video games in
particular, pointing to research showing that half the electronic
games a typical seventh-grader
plays are violent. "What kind of values are we promoting,"
chimed in Hillary Clinton, "when a
child can walk into a store and find video games where you win
based on how many people you
can kill or how many places you can blow up?"
The industry launched a counteroffensive, arguing that the vast
majority of video games sold
today are not violent, and empha-sizing that no causal link has
ever been established between
aggressive behavior and prior exposure to violent media. "The
entertainment software industry
has no reason to run and hide," said Doug Lowenstein of the
Interactive Digital Software

Association (IDSA) at E3's opening press conference. He
insisted that the simple reason the
electronic-games industry is growing twice as fast as the movie
business, and four times faster
than the recording or book publishing industries, is that they
"offer some of the most compelling,
stimulating, and challenging entertainment available anywhere,
in any form."
And so the E3 love-in carried on as usual this year, with 50,000
people jammed into an
enormous exhibition space to sample the hottest new games. But
as I wandered through the
booths amid a constant roar of car crashes, monster screams,
gunfire, and deafening techno-pop
soundtracks, I wondered how this industry could have become
so wildly popular in some circles
and so utterly vilified in others. Is it true, as game developers
like to say, that future generations
will look back at today's controversy with the kind of
bemusement now reserved for those grainy
black-and-white images of crew-cutted right-wingers
denouncing comic books and rock 'n' roll
back in the 1950s? Or do critics have a point in saying that

today's media technology has become
so powerful and ubiquitous that a laissez-faire attitude toward
pop culture is naive and outdated,
if not outright dangerous?
Clues to the answers lie within a peculiar subculture of young,
white, American males who make
up the industry's technological vanguard. But to get a sense of
what's behind those swirling
eyeballs, first you have to play some games.
According to industry ethos, the coolest electronic titles are not
video games, which are played
on dumbed-down console units made by Sony, Nintendo, and
Sega, and account for nearly three-
quarters of all game sales. Rather, the cutting edge is occupied
by computer games -- the other
slice of the pie -- because they run best on souped-up PCs that
allow hardcore fans to customize
a game by tinkering with its programming code.
Leaving the noisy main hall at E3, I enter a hushed room full of
educational PC gaming titles and
stop at the Mindscape Entertainment booth to check out the
latest version of Myst , the best-
selling PC title of all time. Myst earned its widespread

popularity without benefit of rocket
launchers or flying body parts. It's a role-playing game that
takes place on a bucolic, forested
island surrounded by clouds and ocean. The images are
beautifully rendered: The forest mist is
finely textured, and even the crevices on the tree bark are crisp
and clear. The object of the game
is to figure out why a team of scientists who were doing
research on the island suddenly
disappeared.
The game has a stately pace as you click through the foggy
pathways and walkways, searching
for clues. It's like looking at a series of pretty pictures. But if
one thing is clear from spending
time at E3, it's that this industry is driven largely by the pursuit
of quite a different sensory
experience: raw speed. That's true across the board, for the
makers of PC games and video games
alike. Sony, Nintendo, and Sega -- all of which will introduce
superpowerful, 128-bit game
consoles to the market in the coming year -- are not spending
billions of dollars to create clever
story lines. They are competing madly with one another to
create the fastest video-game console

ever, each boasting more horsepower than some of the most
powerful supercomputers packed
just 10 years ago.
Researchers and marketers have known for decades that when it
comes to kids and their toys,
speed sells. Give a child a choice between a storybook and a
television set, and guess which one
will grab his attention. "'Sesame Street' learned in the '60s that
it's best to change the scene often,
move fast, keep the visual display constantly changing," says
Professor John Murray, a child
psychologist at Kansas State University who has studied the
effects of television violence for 30
years. "Very often just the act of playing the game, regardless
of content, is what is so engaging."
Myst is a storybook compared to the other games out in the
main exhibition hall. There, I could
lead a battalion of spaceships through the galaxy, make players
dunk basketballs and hit home
runs, and drive around a track in a race car. All of these games
draw the player's attention
because of that sense of moving through space; an appreciation

of the rules and subtleties of
gameplay come later.
But as thrilling as these games are, something's missing from all
of them -- something I can't
quite put my finger on until I come upon an enormous poster of
a guy who looks like an Aryan
Nation thug: blond crew cut, open vest, a gun in each hand.
Duke Nukem is one of the bad-boy "first-person shooter" games
that have brought such disrepute
to the industry. Though shooters represent less than seven
percent of overall sales, a recent
Time/CNN poll showed that 50 percent of teenagers between 13
and 17 who have played video
games have played them. Ten percent say they play regularly. A
breakthrough game will fly off
the shelves: Best-selling shooters Doom and Quake have had
combined sales of 4.2 million.
(Myst and its sequel, Riven, top the sales charts at 5.4 million.)
What makes these shooter games so compelling is the addition
of freedom of movement to the
sensation of speed. This is accomplished by the highly
sophisticated underlying technology,
called "real-time 3-D." Unlike the "pre-rendered" art of Myst --

Student 1 Random Student Mrs. Wilson Expository W.docx

Student 1 Random Student Mrs. Wilson Expository W.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from johniemcm5zt

More from johniemcm5zt (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Student 1 Random Student Mrs. Wilson Expository W.docx