Re: [tips] Computer games to get cigarette-style health warnings - Times Online

[Don Allen]

It's this kind of junk science that really gets my goat. It is highly 
reminiscent of Frederick Wertham's "Seduction of the Innocent" which set 
off a frenzy for banning comic books because they were corrupting our 
children. For those of you who are too young to remember this era you 
can find a good discussion of it here:

http://art-bin.com/art/awertham.html

I have reviewed the literature that purports to show a causal link 
between media violence and violent behaviour in children and I remain 
highly unimpressed. Most of the studies are correlational and even there 
the correlations are weak (.20 to .30). The studies that actually 
attempt to manipulate exposure to violent media are all badly flawed. 
They merely compare children who watched a violent video (or played a 
violent video game) with children who watched a non-violent version. 
What's wrong with that? Well, for one thing the violent media were also 
action-packed while the non-violent comparitors were dull as dishwater. 
Since violence and action are confounded in these studies you need a 
third group (high action-no violence) to determine which component 
produces the effect. So far, I have been unable to find a properly 
controlled replicated studies that clearly establishes a causal link. 
Until I see one I'll remain in the skeptics corner.

-Don.

Christopher D. Green wrote:

>
> Check out this /Times/ (of London) article on British efforts to put 
> warning labels on video games.
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3628894.ece
>
> Chris Green
> York U.
> Toronto, Canada
>
>---
>To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
>Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>  
>

-- 
Don Allen
Department of Psychology
Langara College
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
V5Y 2Z6

604-323-5871


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] Computer games to get cigarette-style health warnings - Times Online

[Mark A. Casteel]

Hi Don. For a good study that (in my opinion) satisfies your 
requirement for a high-action no-violence group, take a look at 
Carnagey and Anderson (2005). Ps played either a violent version of 
Carmageddon 2, a version where violence was punished (points were 
lost for killing people/hitting objects, and a no-violence version 
(same game) where violence wasn't possible. Aggressive affect, 
cognition, and behavior all differed in the reward compared to the 
no-violence group, and aggressive cognition and behavior differed 
between the reward and the punishment groups.

Also, what about the meta-analysis done by Anderson and Bushman 
(2001), which found no gender diffs and no diffs as a function of 
experimental vs. correlation studies? Granted, the rs were all in the 
range of .16-.27, but as the authors note, the average effect size 
was the same as that between condom use and the prevention of HIV. Do 
we take that association seriously?

-- Mark

At 02:06 PM 3/27/2008, you wrote:


>It's this kind of junk science that really gets my goat. It is 
>highly reminiscent of Frederick Wertham's "Seduction of the 
>Innocent" which set off a frenzy for banning comic books because 
>they were corrupting our children. For those of you who are too 
>young to remember this era you can find a good discussion of it here:
>
>http://art-bin.com/art/awertham.html
>
>I have reviewed the literature that purports to show a causal link 
>between media violence and violent behaviour in children and I 
>remain highly unimpressed. Most of the studies are correlational and 
>even there the correlations are weak (.20 to .30). The studies that 
>actually attempt to manipulate exposure to violent media are all 
>badly flawed. They merely compare children who watched a violent 
>video (or played a violent video game) with children who watched a 
>non-violent version. What's wrong with that? Well, for one thing the 
>violent media were also action-packed while the non-violent 
>comparitors were dull as dishwater. Since violence and action are 
>confounded in these studies you need a third group (high action-no 
>violence) to determine which component produces the effect. So far, 
>I have been unable to find a properly controlled replicated studies 
>that clearly establishes a causal link. Until I see one I'll remain 
>in the skeptics corner.
>
>-Don.
>
>Christopher D. Green wrote:
>>
>>
>>Check out this Times (of London) article on British efforts to put 
>>warning labels on video games.
>>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3628894.ece
>>
>>Chris Green
>>York U.
>>Toronto, Canada
>>
>>
>>---
>>To make changes to your subscription contact:
>>
>>Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>>
>
>
>--
>Don Allen
>Department of Psychology
>Langara College
>Vancouver, B.C., Canada
>V5Y 2Z6
>
>604-323-5871
>
>
>---
>To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
>Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])


*
Mark A. Casteel, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Psychology
Penn State York
1031 Edgecomb Ave.
York, PA  17403
(717) 771-4028
* 
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] Computer games to get cigarette-style health warnings - Times Online

[Christopher D. Green]

It just so happens (synchronicity?) that there is an article by Louis 
Menand about Wertham in the upcoming issue of the New Yorker. Turns out 
that Wertham (whatever you might think of his psychological claims) 
didn't want to ban comic books. He just wanted sex & violence warning 
labels.
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2008/03/31/080331crbo_books_menand 

-- 
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
phone: 416-736-2100 ext. 66164
fax: 416-736-5814


Don Allen wrote:
>
>
> It's this kind of junk science that really gets my goat. It is highly 
> reminiscent of Frederick Wertham's "Seduction of the Innocent" which 
> set off a frenzy for banning comic books because they were corrupting 
> our children. For those of you who are too young to remember this era 
> you can find a good discussion of it here:
>
> http://art-bin.com/art/awertham.html
>
> I have reviewed the literature that purports to show a causal link 
> between media violence and violent behaviour in children and I remain 
> highly unimpressed. Most of the studies are correlational and even 
> there the correlations are weak (.20 to .30). The studies that 
> actually attempt to manipulate exposure to violent media are all badly 
> flawed. They merely compare children who watched a violent video (or 
> played a violent video game) with children who watched a non-violent 
> version. What's wrong with that? Well, for one thing the violent media 
> were also action-packed while the non-violent comparitors were dull as 
> dishwater. Since violence and action are confounded in these studies 
> you need a third group (high action-no violence) to determine which 
> component produces the effect. So far, I have been unable to find a 
> properly controlled replicated studies that clearly establishes a 
> causal link. Until I see one I'll remain in the skeptics corner.
>
> -Don.
>


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

[tips] question about paper assignments

[DeVolder Carol L]

I'm curious about typical paper assignments for a 300-level course. What do you 
all do in terms of length, number of references, etc.? 

Thanks for your help as always,
Carol



Carol L. DeVolder, Ph.D. 
Professor of Psychology
Chair, Department of Psychology 
St. Ambrose University 
518 West Locust Street 
Davenport, Iowa 52803 

Phone: 563-333-6482 
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
web: http://web.sau.edu/psychology/psychfaculty/cdevolder.htm 

The contents of this message are confidential and may not be shared with anyone 
without permission of the sender.


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])<>

Re: [tips] question about paper assignments

[David Wasieleski]

Carol:
In recent years I have significantly changed my approach to written 
assignments. I have gone to shorter assignments of greater frequency. 
Most are 2-3 page, double spaced reaction papers designed to 
emphasize critical thinking. I also have gone to a "4 of 6" approach 
where there are six assignments, and students must turn in 4 of them 
(that way I tell them I can not accept late papers at all!). If they 
turn in MORE than 4, I keep the four highest grades and drop the 1 or 
2 lowest. I end up with fewer assignments to grade at any one time, 
and the papers are less painfully long to read for me and to write for them.
David


At 03:37 PM 3/27/2008, you wrote:
>I'm curious about typical paper assignments for a 300-level course. 
>What do you all do in terms of length, number of references, etc.?
>
>Thanks for your help as always,
>Carol
>
>
>
>Carol L. DeVolder, Ph.D.
>Professor of Psychology
>Chair, Department of Psychology
>St. Ambrose University
>518 West Locust Street
>Davenport, Iowa 52803
>
>Phone: 563-333-6482
>e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>web: http://web.sau.edu/psychology/psychfaculty/cdevolder.htm
>
>The contents of this message are confidential and may not be shared 
>with anyone without permission of the sender.
>
>
>---
>To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
>Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

David T. Wasieleski, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Psychology and Counseling
Valdosta State University
Valdosta, GA 31698
229-333-5620
http://chiron.valdosta.edu/dtwasieleski

"The only thing that ever made sense in my life
is the sound of my little girl laughing through the window on a summer night...
Just the sound of my little girl laughing
makes me happy just to be alive..."
--Everclear
"Song from an American Movie"  

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

RE:[tips] question about paper assignments

[Marc Carter]

Hi, Carol  --

My 300-level courses almost all involve labs; they are cognitive, S&P,
learning, and physio (although we're probably going to take physio out
of the lineup and make it a 200-level course).

In these courses students write several lab reports (5-8, depending on
the course and the lengths of the projects) that focus almost
exclusively on method, results, and discussion (I let them write quick
and dirty intro sections).  These are usually around 5-8 pages (not
including tables and figures), and I require few references (just enough
to motivate the hypothesis, and a few to expand on the results in the
discussion).  They also write a longer research paper which is supposed
to lead to an hypothesis (like the intro section of a research article);
this paper should have 8 references at minimum and should be in the
range of 12-15 pages, but again, it depends on the hypothesis the
student invents -- some are longer.  The latter paper is the result of a
long, agonizing iterative process of starting with ideas, preliminary
research, expanding to outlines, and two drafts -- each of the
iterations comes with a conference and feedback.

But those are 6-hour-per-week (4 credit hours) courses, so I have time.
I also typically have fewer than 12 students.

The one non-lab 300-level course I teach is our Contemporary Issues
course, which is a combination of practice in reading research (we read
papers and discuss them), and culminates in a 20-25 page policy paper
(much like the Psychological Science in the Public Interest papers).

Course size for that class is rarely above 20, and is almost always
team-taught (we feel the contrast in perspective is critical for that
course).

So I'm not sure how helpful this is, given that we are incredibly lucky
to have such small classes and be able to spend the sort of time we can
with the students.  I'm not sure this generalizes.

I can say, though, that our students can really write by the time they
get out of here!

m

--
"[F]aculty have an obligation to the students collectively to prescribe
a required course of study designed specifically for liberal education
that is comprehensive, coherent, and rigorous."
--
Jerry L. Martin

-Original Message-
From: DeVolder Carol L [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 1:38 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: question about paper assignments

I'm curious about typical paper assignments for a 300-level course. What
do you all do in terms of length, number of references, etc.? 

Thanks for your help as always,
Carol



Carol L. DeVolder, Ph.D. 
Professor of Psychology
Chair, Department of Psychology
St. Ambrose University
518 West Locust Street
Davenport, Iowa 52803 

Phone: 563-333-6482
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: http://web.sau.edu/psychology/psychfaculty/cdevolder.htm 

The contents of this message are confidential and may not be shared with
anyone without permission of the sender.


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] Computer games to get cigarette-style health warnings - Times Online

[Don Allen]

Hi Mark-

I just re-read the Carnagey and Anderson  paper and I'm still not 
impressed. In the Method section re Exp. 2 they say, " The participant 
also rated the video game on various dimensions 
(difficult,absorbing,action-packed, arousing, boring, enjoyable, 
entertaining, exciting, frustrating, fun, involving, stimulating, 
violent, and addicting)." However in the Results section they merely 
say, "Note that the effect of violence was obtained even though the 
violent and nonviolent games were equally arousing and all games were 
competitive." without providing any data whatever. A strange omission 
don't you think? Then in Exp. 3 they say, "Also,several video-game 
ratings (absorbing,
boring, enjoyable, entertaining, exciting, fun, involving, stimulating, 
addicting) predicted aggressive behavior, Fs(1, 134) = 4.75, ps <.05". 
Doesn't that just make my case?  Even if this one study did stand up it 
has not (to my knowledge) been replicated by an independent lab. The 
studies on the Mozart Effect looked good on their own, but replication 
proved to be a problem.

As far as the Anderson and Bushman study; it's just the old "bundle of 
sticks" argument. Each study may be too weak on its own to prove the 
case, but if we take them all together then they must constitute a 
proof. As far as I'm concerned a bunch of weak studies is just that; a 
bunch of weak studies.

More importantly, even if all of Anderson's assertions were true he is 
still only accounting for less than 10% of the variance. If you are 
really concerned about violence then focus on important issues like 
economic disparity and prevelence of handguns.

I still remain in the skeptics corner.

-Don.



Mark A. Casteel wrote:

>
> Hi Don. For a good study that (in my opinion) satisfies your 
> requirement for a high-action no-violence group, take a look at 
> Carnagey and Anderson (2005). Ps played either a violent version of 
> Carmageddon 2, a version where violence was punished (points were lost 
> for killing people/hitting objects, and a no-violence version (same 
> game) where violence wasn't possible. Aggressive affect, cognition, 
> and behavior all differed in the reward compared to the no-violence 
> group, and aggressive cognition and behavior differed between the 
> reward and the punishment groups.
>
> Also, what about the meta-analysis done by Anderson and Bushman 
> (2001), which found no gender diffs and no diffs as a function of 
> experimental vs. correlation studies? Granted, the /r/s were all in 
> the range of .16-.27, but as the authors note, the average effect size 
> was the same as that between condom use and the prevention of HIV. Do 
> we take that association seriously?
>
> -- Mark
>
> At 02:06 PM 3/27/2008, you wrote:
>
>
>> It's this kind of junk science that really gets my goat. It is highly 
>> reminiscent of Frederick Wertham's "Seduction of the Innocent" which 
>> set off a frenzy for banning comic books because they were corrupting 
>> our children. For those of you who are too young to remember this era 
>> you can find a good discussion of it here:
>>
>> http://art-bin.com/art/awertham.html
>>
>> I have reviewed the literature that purports to show a causal link 
>> between media violence and violent behaviour in children and I remain 
>> highly unimpressed. Most of the studies are correlational and even 
>> there the correlations are weak (.20 to .30). The studies that 
>> actually attempt to manipulate exposure to violent media are all 
>> badly flawed. They merely compare children who watched a violent 
>> video (or played a violent video game) with children who watched a 
>> non-violent version. What's wrong with that? Well, for one thing the 
>> violent media were also action-packed while the non-violent 
>> comparitors were dull as dishwater. Since violence and action are 
>> confounded in these studies you need a third group (high action-no 
>> violence) to determine which component produces the effect. So far, I 
>> have been unable to find a properly controlled replicated studies 
>> that clearly establishes a causal link. Until I see one I'll remain 
>> in the skeptics corner.
>>
>> -Don.
>>
>> Christopher D. Green wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Check out this /Times/ (of London) article on British efforts to put 
>>> warning labels on video games.
>>> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3628894.ece
>>>
>>> Chris Green
>>> York U.
>>> Toronto, Canada
>>>
>>>
>>>---
>>>To make changes to your subscription contact:
>>>
>>>Bill Southerly
>>>([EMAIL PROTECTED] )
>>> 
>>>  
>>>
>>
>>
>>-- 
>>Don Allen
>>Department of Psychology
>>Langara College
>>Vancouver, B.C., Canada
>>V5Y 2Z6
>>
>>604-323-5871
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>---
>>To make changes to your subscription contact:
>>
>>Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>>
>>
>
> *
> Mark A. Casteel, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor of Psychology
> Penn State York
> 1031 Edgecomb Ave.
> York, P

Re: [tips] question about paper assignments

[taylor]

4-6 articles, min/max 15-20 pages, for a survey course such as Cog Psych. Must 
integrate at least 2 "classic" papers with more recent publications on the 
topic.

Annette


Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
University of San Diego
5998 Alcala Park
San Diego, CA 92110
619-260-4006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


 Original message 
>Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 14:37:51 -0500
>From: "DeVolder Carol L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
>Subject: [tips] question about paper assignments  
>To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
>
>I'm curious about typical paper assignments for a 300-level course. What do 
>you all do in terms of length, number of references, etc.? 
>
>Thanks for your help as always,
>Carol
>
>
>
>Carol L. DeVolder, Ph.D. 
>Professor of Psychology
>Chair, Department of Psychology 
>St. Ambrose University 
>518 West Locust Street 
>Davenport, Iowa 52803 
>
>Phone: 563-333-6482 
>e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>web: http://web.sau.edu/psychology/psychfaculty/cdevolder.htm 
>
>The contents of this message are confidential and may not be shared with 
>anyone without permission of the sender.
>
>
>---
>To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
>Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
>TNEF21513.rtf (1k bytes)

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] question about paper assignments

[taylor]

Interesting point David--I've gone back and forth on this in both my mind and 
in the assignments--more short papers versus one long paper.

Here is the trade off I keep coming back to: with the long paper students need 
to learn to integrate information and to transition between and connect their 
thoughts. No matter how much I emphasize the critical thinking in the short 
papers, I don't think they learn the other skill of integration and connection. 
On the other hand, the longer papers do tend to show somewhat less critical 
evaluation of single papers. AND they are easier to grade ;)

Annette

Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
University of San Diego
5998 Alcala Park
San Diego, CA 92110
619-260-4006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


 Original message 
>Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:41:36 -0400
>From: David Wasieleski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
>Subject: Re: [tips] question about paper assignments  
>To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
>
>   Carol:
>   In recent years I have significantly changed my
>   approach to written assignments. I have gone to
>   shorter assignments of greater frequency. Most are
>   2-3 page, double spaced reaction papers designed to
>   emphasize critical thinking. I also have gone to a
>   "4 of 6" approach where there are six assignments,
>   and students must turn in 4 of them (that way I tell
>   them I can not accept late papers at all!). If they
>   turn in MORE than 4, I keep the four highest grades
>   and drop the 1 or 2 lowest. I end up with fewer
>   assignments to grade at any one time, and the papers
>   are less painfully long to read for me and to write
>   for them.
>   David
>
>   At 03:37 PM 3/27/2008, you wrote:
>
> I'm curious about typical paper assignments for a
> 300-level course. What do you all do in terms of
> length, number of references, etc.?
>
> Thanks for your help as always,
> Carol
>
> Carol L. DeVolder, Ph.D.
> Professor of Psychology
> Chair, Department of Psychology
> St. Ambrose University
> 518 West Locust Street
> Davenport, Iowa 52803
>
> Phone: 563-333-6482
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> web:
> http://web.sau.edu/psychology/psychfaculty/cdevolder.htm
>
> The contents of this message are confidential and
> may not be shared with anyone without permission
> of the sender.
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
>   David T. Wasieleski, Ph.D.
>   Professor
>   Department of Psychology and Counseling
>   Valdosta State University
>   Valdosta, GA 31698
>   229-333-5620
>   http://chiron.valdosta.edu/dtwasieleski
>
>   "The only thing that ever made sense in my life
>   is the sound of my little girl laughing through the
>   window on a summer night...
>   Just the sound of my little girl laughing
>   makes me happy just to be alive..."
>   --Everclear
>  "Song from an American Movie"
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

RE: [tips] Computer games to get cigarette-style health warnings - Times Online

[Shearon, Tim]

Don Allen said:
"As far as I'm concerned a bunch of weak studies is just that; a bunch of weak 
studies."

Don- 
"Be still my heart!!" :) Perhaps one could rephrase that to make your point 
even more obvious. A whole bunch of weak or small effects from studies means 
that it is very likely there is a very weak or small effect!!! Suddenly that 
seems less newsworthy. 
Tim


___
Timothy O. Shearon, PhD
Professor and Chair Department of Psychology
The College of Idaho
Caldwell, ID 83605
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

teaching: intro to neuropsychology; psychopharmacology; general; history and 
systems

"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." Dorothy Parker



-Original Message-
From: Don Allen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 3/27/2008 3:11 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: Re: [tips] Computer games to get cigarette-style health warnings - 
Times Online
 
Hi Mark-

I just re-read the Carnagey and Anderson  paper and I'm still not 
impressed. In the Method section re Exp. 2 they say, " The participant 
also rated the video game on various dimensions 
(difficult,absorbing,action-packed, arousing, boring, enjoyable, 
entertaining, exciting, frustrating, fun, involving, stimulating, 
violent, and addicting)." However in the Results section they merely 
say, "Note that the effect of violence was obtained even though the 
violent and nonviolent games were equally arousing and all games were 
competitive." without providing any data whatever. A strange omission 
don't you think? Then in Exp. 3 they say, "Also,several video-game 
ratings (absorbing,
boring, enjoyable, entertaining, exciting, fun, involving, stimulating, 
addicting) predicted aggressive behavior, Fs(1, 134) = 4.75, ps <.05". 
Doesn't that just make my case?  Even if this one study did stand up it 
has not (to my knowledge) been replicated by an independent lab. The 
studies on the Mozart Effect looked good on their own, but replication 
proved to be a problem.

As far as the Anderson and Bushman study; it's just the old "bundle of 
sticks" argument. Each study may be too weak on its own to prove the 
case, but if we take them all together then they must constitute a 
proof. As far as I'm concerned a bunch of weak studies is just that; a 
bunch of weak studies.

More importantly, even if all of Anderson's assertions were true he is 
still only accounting for less than 10% of the variance. If you are 
really concerned about violence then focus on important issues like 
economic disparity and prevelence of handguns.

I still remain in the skeptics corner.

-Don.

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])<>

RE: [tips] Computer games to get cigarette-style health warnings - Times Online

[Bourgeois, Dr. Martin]

I'd be curious to hear why you think that any single cause of violent behavior, 
which is obviously multiply determined (as is virtually everything we study), 
would account for more than 10% of the variance. And as far as the "less than 
10% of the variance" criticism, I'll adapt an example from Rosenthal and 
Rosnow: imagine a design in which a researcher compared kids who played violent 
vs. nonviolent video games to see whether they became school shooters, and 
found the following results:

   nonviolent games  
violent games
did not become shooters66   34
became shooters34   66

What percent of the variance do you thnk playing video games accounted for~ If 
you said 9%, you're right (r = .30). Is this a trivial effect~



From: Don Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 5:11 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: Re: [tips] Computer games to get cigarette-style health warnings - 
Times Online


Hi Mark-

I just re-read the Carnagey and Anderson  paper and I'm still not impressed. In 
the Method section re Exp. 2 they say, " The participant also rated the video 
game on various dimensions (difficult,absorbing,action-packed, arousing, 
boring, enjoyable, entertaining, exciting, frustrating, fun, involving, 
stimulating, violent, and addicting)." However in the Results section they 
merely say, "Note that the effect of violence was obtained even though the 
violent and nonviolent games were equally arousing and all games were 
competitive." without providing any data whatever. A strange omission don't you 
think? Then in Exp. 3 they say, "Also,several video-game ratings (absorbing,
boring, enjoyable, entertaining, exciting, fun, involving, stimulating, 
addicting) predicted aggressive behavior, Fs(1, 134) = 4.75, ps <.05". Doesn't 
that just make my case?  Even if this one study did stand up it has not (to my 
knowledge) been replicated by an independent lab. The studies on the Mozart 
Effect looked good on their own, but replication proved to be a problem.

As far as the Anderson and Bushman study; it's just the old "bundle of sticks" 
argument. Each study may be too weak on its own to prove the case, but if we 
take them all together then they must constitute a proof. As far as I'm 
concerned a bunch of weak studies is just that; a bunch of weak studies.

More importantly, even if all of Anderson's assertions were true he is still 
only accounting for less than 10% of the variance. If you are really concerned 
about violence then focus on important issues like economic disparity and 
prevelence of handguns.

I still remain in the skeptics corner.

-Don.



Mark A. Casteel wrote:

Hi Don. For a good study that (in my opinion) satisfies your requirement for a 
high-action no-violence group, take a look at Carnagey and Anderson (2005). Ps 
played either a violent version of Carmageddon 2, a version where violence was 
punished (points were lost for killing people/hitting objects, and a 
no-violence version (same game) where violence wasn't possible. Aggressive 
affect, cognition, and behavior all differed in the reward compared to the 
no-violence group, and aggressive cognition and behavior differed between the 
reward and the punishment groups.

Also, what about the meta-analysis done by Anderson and Bushman (2001), which 
found no gender diffs and no diffs as a function of experimental vs. 
correlation studies? Granted, the rs were all in the range of .16-.27, but as 
the authors note, the average effect size was the same as that between condom 
use and the prevention of HIV. Do we take that association seriously?

-- Mark

At 02:06 PM 3/27/2008, you wrote:


It's this kind of junk science that really gets my goat. It is highly 
reminiscent of Frederick Wertham's "Seduction of the Innocent" which set off a 
frenzy for banning comic books because they were corrupting our children. For 
those of you who are too young to remember this era you can find a good 
discussion of it here:

http://art-bin.com/art/awertham.html

I have reviewed the literature that purports to show a causal link between 
media violence and violent behaviour in children and I remain highly 
unimpressed. Most of the studies are correlational and even there the 
correlations are weak (.20 to .30). The studies that actually attempt to 
manipulate exposure to violent media are all badly flawed. They merely compare 
children who watched a violent video (or played a violent video game) with 
children who watched a non-violent version. What's wrong with that? Well, for 
one thing the violent media were also action-packed while the non-violent 
comparitors were dull as dishwater. Since violence and action are confounded in 
these studies you need a third group (high action-no violence) to determine 
which component produces the e

[tips] TheStar.com | Earth Hour | Someone get the lights

[Christopher D. Green]

The "Earth Hour" initiative has become a big deal in Canada, but I've 
heard nothing about it on U.S. news shows, and it seems that very few US 
cities have signed on. Has anyone on this list from the US heard about it?

http://www.thestar.com/SpecialSections/EarthHour/article/350711

Chris Green
York U.
Toronto, Canada

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] TheStar.com | Earth Hour | Someone get the lights

[Don Allen]

Chris-

I hadn't heard about it here in BC, but then we're very far from Toronto :-)

Christopher D. Green wrote:

The "Earth Hour" initiative has become a big deal in Canada, but I've 
heard nothing about it on U.S. news shows, and it seems that very few 
US cities have signed on. Has anyone on this list from the US heard 
about it?

http://www.thestar.com/SpecialSections/EarthHour/article/350711

Chris Green
York U.
Toronto, Canada

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])



--
Don Allen
Department of Psychology
Langara College
Vancouver, B.C., Canada
V5Y 2Z6

604-323-5871


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [tips] question about paper assignments

[Ken Steele]

David Wasieleski wrote:




Carol:
In recent years I have significantly changed my approach to written 
assignments. I have gone to shorter assignments of greater frequency. 
Most are 2-3 page, double spaced reaction papers designed to emphasize 
critical thinking. I also have gone to a "4 of 6" approach where there 
are six assignments, and students must turn in 4 of them (that way I 
tell them I can not accept late papers at all!). If they turn in MORE 
than 4, I keep the four highest grades and drop the 1 or 2 lowest. I end 
up with fewer assignments to grade at any one time, and the papers are 
less painfully long to read for me and to write for them.

David




I have also gone to shorter papers because I can make more 
detailed comments and discuss/explain the issues to students.  I 
find that they are more likely to attempt to deal with the 
writing issues if they are not worried about hitting page minima.


Ken



---
Kenneth M. Steele, Ph.D.  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Professor
Department of Psychology  http://www.psych.appstate.edu
Appalachian State University
Boone, NC 28608
USA
---


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])