The Hand that Holds the Controller: The Moderating Effect of Personality on Violent Video Games...

The Hand that Holds the Controller:The Moderating Effect of Personality on

Violent Video Games

Interpersonal Research LabInterpersonalResearch.com

Patrick M. Markey & Charlotte N. Markey

Healthy Development LabHealtyDevelopmentLab.com

Past research suggests VVGs are linked to various negative behaviors and cognitions (e.g.,

Anderson et al., 2004; Bushman & Anderson, 2002; Gentile, Lynch, Linder, & Walsh, 2004; Sheese & Graziano, 2005).

However, a considerable number of studies have failed to find compelling links between VVGs and negative outcomes (e.g., Ferguson et al., 2008;

Weigman & van Schie, 1998; Williams & Skoric, 2005).

Why?Poor designInvalid measurementsPublication biases(Ferguson, 2007a, 2007b)

Personality traits moderate the effects of VVGs(Giumetti & Markey,2007; Markey & Scherer, 2009; Markey & Markey, 2010)

Psychoticism Aggression

Psychotocism

Individuals with high levels of psychoticism. . .

. . . experience less anxiety playing VVGs and are less disturbed and frightened by violent media.

. . . are more aggressive after playing VVGs and are more likely to express violent desires after exposure to violent media

(Lynn, Hampson, and Agahi, 1989 ; Zillman & Weaver, 1996; Barnes, Malamuth, & Check, 1984; Markey & Sherer, 2009).

Aggression

Individuals with high levels of aggression. . .

. . . feel more angry after viewing violent media

. . . after playing VVGs are more hostile (Giumett & Markey, 2007; Panee & Ballard, 2002; Arriaga et al., 2006)

Finding a Common Language

The Five Factor Model (FFM)

A useful coordinate system for categorizing various personality constructs within its five dimensions (Ozer & Reise, 1994).

By categorizing seemingly differing traits (e.g., psychoticism and aggression) under a few common dimensional labels, the FFM can be used to assimilate past research (Funder, 2007).

Psychoticism = low agreeableness + low conscientiousness (Costa & McCrae, 1995; Costa, McCrae, & Dye, 1991; Goldberg & Rosolack, 1994; McCrae & Costa, 1985).

Aggression = high neuroticism + low agreeableness (Sharpe & Desai, 2001).

high N + low A + low C =

=+ +

Markey & Markey (2006)

0o

90o

135o180o

225o

270o

315o

Agreeableness

Neuroticism

Conscientiousness

45o

Longitude

Conscientiousness

Agreeableness0o

45o

-45o

90o

-90o

Latitude

High Conscientiousness (C+)

Low Conscientiousness (C-)

High Agreeableness (A+)

Low Neuroticism (N-)

Easy-Going (N-A+)

Temperamental (N+ A-)

Overcontrolled (N+ C+)

Relaxed (N-C-) Undercontrolled (N+ C-)

Directed (N-C+) Effective Altruists (A+C+)

Undistinguished (A- C-)

Well-Intentioned (A+ C-)

Self-Promoters (A- C+)

N-A+C-

N+A-C+

Front Back

N-A+C+



High Neuroticism (N+)

Low Agreeableness (A-)

N+A-C-

Predictions

Λ 315 and Φ 35 Λ 135 and Φ -35

Method

118 participants (M age = 19.35 years; 42% female).

Study done in 3 phases

Phase 1

Completed the Big Five Inventory dimensions of neuroticism, agreeableness, and conscientiousness.

The three dimensions scores were forced to be orthogonal using a PC with varimax rotation• Resulting component scores were highly corrected to the

original scales (all r values > .90) while being orthogonal

Phase 2Video Game PlayParticipants were randomly assigned to play

either a VVG or a non-VVG for 20 min.

Tiger Woods Golf Manhunt 2

Phase 3

Current level of hostility

State Hostility Scale (Anderson, Deuser, & DeNeve, 1995).

– Particpants use 35 items to describe their current level of hostility

– ‘‘I feel furious.”– ‘‘I feel like banging on a table.”

Typical Analysis

Step 1 B SE B β Semi-Partial r

Violent Video Game (VVG) .24 .12 .18 .18*

Neuroticism (N) .17 .06 .26 .26**

Agreeableness (A) -.14 .06 -.21 -.21*

Conscientiousness (C) -.05 .06 -.08 -.08

Step 2

VVG x N .17 .12 .18 .12

VVG x A -.17 .12 -.19 -.12

VVG x C -.19 .12 -.21 -.14

* p < .05 ** p < .01 n = 118

Geometric Analysis

• Interaction effect

.



Neuroticism (N) .17 .06 .26 .26**

Agreeableness (A) -.14 .06 -.21 -.21*


Step 2

VVG x N .17 .12 .18 .12

VVG x A -.17 .12 -.19 -.12

VVG x C -.19 .12 -.21 -.14

* p < .05 ** p < .01 n = 118

Gurtman, 1992; Markey & Markey,2006; Markey & Markey, 2009

Geometric Analysis


.



Neuroticism (N) .17 .06 .26 .26**

Agreeableness (A) -.14 .06 -.21 -.21*


Step 2

VVG x N .17 .12 .18 .12

VVG x A -.17 .12 -.19 -.12

VVG x C -.19 .12 -.21 -.14

* p < .05 ** p < .01 n = 118 Longitude

Λ = arctangent (rneu/ ragr)Λ = 137o

Geometric Analysis


.



Neuroticism (N) .17 .06 .26 .26**

Agreeableness (A) -.14 .06 -.21 -.21*


Step 2

VVG x N .17 .12 .18 .12

VVG x A -.17 .12 -.19 -.12

VVG x C -.19 .12 -.21 -.14

* p < .05 ** p < .01 n = 118 Latitude

Φ = arctangent (rcon / rneu2+ ragr

2)1/2])Φ = -39o

Geometric Analysis


.



Neuroticism (N) .17 .06 .26 .26**

Agreeableness (A) -.14 .06 -.21 -.21*


Step 2

VVG x N .17 .12 .18 .12

VVG x A -.17 .12 -.19 -.12

VVG x C -.19 .12 -.21 -.14

* p < .05 ** p < .01 n = 118 Vector Length

VL = [(rneu)2+(ragr) 2+(rcon) 2] ½

VL = .22

Geometric Analysis

It is possible to compute the expected interaction effect (r-value) for any location on the sphere (Gurtman, 1992; Markey & Markey,2006;

Markey & Markey, 2009).

r = VL(cosθdiff)

cosθdiff = [cos(Ʌ)cos(λ)+sin(Ʌ)sin(λ)]cos(Ø)cos(ɸ)+sin(Ø)sin(ɸ)

Where:

Ʌ and Φ are the longitude and latitude location of the effect

λ and Ø are the longitude and latitude location of a given octant

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

C- C C+

Inte

ract

ion

Eff

ect

(r)

A-N- A- A-N+ N+ A+N+ A+ A+ N- N-

Interaction Effect

Interaction Effect





Easy-Going (N-A+)








N-A+C-

N+A-C+

Front Back

N-A+C+





N+A-C-

Least Effected Most Effected

Predicted Location: Λ 315 and Φ 35 Λ 135 and Φ -35Actual Location: Λ 317 and Φ 39 Λ 137 and Φ -39

Replication

N = 115 (M age =18.54; 52% female)

Video Games– 3 VVGs– 3 Non-VVGs

DV = Aggressive responses to story stems (Rule, Taylor, & Dobbs 1987; Bushman & Anderson,2002)

Interaction Effect





Easy-Going (N-A+)








N-A+C-

N+A-C+

Front Back

N-A+C+





N+A-C-

Least Effected Most Effected

Predicted Location: Λ 315 and Φ 35 Λ 135 and Φ -35Study 1: Λ 317 and Φ 39 Λ 137 and Φ -39Study 2: Λ 293 and Φ 40 Λ 113 and Φ -40

The notion that all, or even most, individuals who play VVGs will inevitably become aggressive may be unwarranted.

The “perfect storm” of FFM traits are:– high neuroticism– low agreeableness– low conscientiousness

Video Games and Peanut Butter“Why do some individuals appear to be affected by VVGs while others are

not?”

For VVGs it appears that many individuals who are adversely affected have a preexisting disposition (i.e., high neuroticism, low agreeableness and low conscientiousness) which causes them to be susceptible to such violent media.

The Hand that Holds the Controller: The Moderating Effect of Personality on Violent Video Games...

Documents

Transcript of The Hand that Holds the Controller: The Moderating Effect of Personality on Violent Video Games...