Cited by 228Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionDigital Games and MediaImpact of Technology on Adolescents

Violent video game engagement is not associated with adolescents' aggressive behaviour: evidence from a registered report

Open access
Przybylski, Andrew K., Weinstein, Netta·2019·Royal Society Open Science

Abstract

In this study, we investigated the extent to which adolescents who spend time playing violent video games exhibit higher levels of aggressive behaviour when compared with those who do not. A large sample of British adolescent participants ( n = 1004) aged 14 and 15 years and an equal number of their carers were interviewed. Young people provided reports of their recent gaming experiences. Further, the violent contents of these games were coded using official EU and US ratings, and carers provided evaluations of their adolescents' aggressive behaviours in the past month. Following a preregistered analysis plan, multiple regression analyses tested the hypothesis that recent violent game play is linearly and positively related to carer assessments of aggressive behaviour. Results did not support this prediction, nor did they support the idea that the relationship between these factors follows a nonlinear parabolic function. There was no evidence for a critical tipping point relating violent game engagement to aggressive behaviour. Sensitivity and exploratory analyses indicated these null effects extended across multiple operationalizations of violent game engagement and when the focus was on another behavioural outcome, namely, prosocial behaviour. The discussion presents an interpretation of this pattern of effects in terms of both the ongoing scientific and policy debates around violent video games, and emerging standards for robust evidence-based policy concerning young people's technology use.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In a preregistered study of 1004 British 14–15-year-olds and their carers, violent video game engagement was not associated with carer-rated aggressive behaviour. The null result held across linear, parabolic, sensitivity, and exploratory operationalizations.

Key findings

  • The primary regression found neither linear nor parabolic violent game engagement predicted carer-rated aggressive behaviour (text reports linear p = 0.402 and parabolic p = 0.624; Table 3 lists linear p = 0.688).
  • Equivalence testing showed the semi-partial effect was r = 0.01 (95% CI −0.08 to 0.10), which was inferior to the meta-analytic estimate of r = 0.21 (95% CI 0.20–0.22), indicating the observed effect was statistically and practically insignificant.
  • Sensitivity analysis using PEGI age ratings found no significant linear (p = 0.899) or parabolic (p = 0.851) effects; exploratory ESRB ratings also showed no significant linear (p = 0.98) or nonlinear (p = 0.07) effects, and prosocial behaviour showed no significant linear (p = 0.49) or nonlinear (p = 0.70) effects.
  • Participants devoted an average of 2.07 hours per typical day to violent games (SD = 2.30); 48.8% of female and 68.0% of male participants played at least one violent game in the past month.

Methods

  • Registered report using a cross-sectional survey of a nationally representative quota sample of British adolescents aged 14 and 15 years (n = 1004; 497 14-year-olds, 507 15-year-olds; 540 male, 461 female, 3 another gender orientation) and an equal number of their carers.
  • Violent game engagement was computed from self-reported top three games, play-time estimates, and blind coding of PEGI/ESRB violent content; the outcome was the carer-completed Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire conduct problems subscale (range 5–15, M = 6.93, SD = 2.20, α = 0.76).
  • Hierarchical regressions controlled for gender and adolescent trait aggression (Buss–Perry physical, verbal, anger, hostility facets) and tested linear and parabolic terms; equivalence testing used the two one-sided tests procedure against r = 0.21.

Limitations

  • Stated: the work is based entirely on self-report data; it is cross-sectional and cannot test enduring or compounding effects over time; and general population inferences may miss specific cohorts defined by factors such as carer educational attainment or material deprivation.
  • Evident: the sample was predominantly white (8.1% reported Black and other minority ethnicities), which limits generalizability; carer reports of aggression may not capture all relevant behavioural contexts.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsos.171474

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

9 of 38 cited sources checked · 3 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    Mischievous responding can introduce measurement noise that inflates relations that are logically incoherent or absurd to take at face value.

    “Mischievous responding can have the effect of introducing measurement noise that inflates relations that are logically incoherent or absurd to take at face value.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [39] Robinson-Cimpian JP 2014 Inaccurate estimation of disparities due to mischievous responders several suggestions to assess conclusions. Educ. Res. 43, 171– 185. (10.3102/0013189X14534297) source
    • cites [40] Furlong MJ, Fullchange A, Dowdy E 2017 Effects of mischievous responding on universal mental health screening: I love rum raisin ice cream, really I do! Sch. Psychol. 32, 320 (10.1037/spq0000168) 27441548 source
    • cites [41] Przybylski AK 2016 Mischievous responding in Internet gaming disorder research. PeerJ. 4, e2401 (10.7717/peerj.2401) 27672496 PMC5028771 source

      The Method (Participants and measures; page unavailable) uses a fictitious game to identify untruthful responses, and the Results (Confirmatory analyses; page unavailable) find that those respondents reported more Internet Gaming Disorder indicators. The Discussion says this can inflate IGD measurement, but the paper does not show that mischievous responding inflates logically incoherent relationships between variables. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    There is a high level of methodological flexibility in the ways that aggression outcomes and violent gaming are assessed in the literature.

    “our review of the literature made it clear that there is a high level of methodological flexibility in the ways that aggression outcomes and violent gaming are assessed [46,75]”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [46] Elson M, Ferguson CJ 2013 Twenty-five years of research on violence in digital games and aggression: empirical evidence, perspectives, and a debate gone astray. Eur. Psychol. 19, 33– 46. (10.1027/1016-9040/a000147) source
    • cites [75] Elson M, Mohseni MR, Breuer J, Scharkow M, Quandt T 2014 Press CRTT to measure aggressive behavior: the unstandardized use of the competitive reaction time task in aggression research. Psychol. Assess. 26, 419– 432. (10.1037/a0035569) 24447279 source

      The Standardization section describes inconsistent CRTT procedures and analyses for measuring aggression, and the Convergence of the different scores section shows that different aggression scores can yield substantially different results. The paper's Study 1 and Study 2 sections use different violent-game conditions, but the cited passages do not establish a high level of flexibility in how violent gaming itself is assessed across the literature. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Findingown data

    The semi-partial effect relating violent gaming to aggressive behaviour was r = 0.01.

    “The semi-partial effect relating violent gaming to aggressive behaviour was r = 0.01.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • Findingown data

    There was no evidence for a critical tipping point relating violent game engagement to aggressive behaviour.

    “There was no evidence for a critical tipping point relating violent game engagement to aggressive behaviour.”
    • Also stated in: § Confirmatory analyses · plain
      “These results did not support the idea that there is a critical amount of violent video game play which serves as a tipping point for aggressive behaviour.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • Findingown data

    The relationship between violent video game engagement and aggressive behaviour did not follow a nonlinear parabolic function in the study sample.

    “nor did they support the idea that the relationship between these factors follows a nonlinear parabolic function”
    • Also stated in: § Confirmatory analyses · plain
      “parabolic (p = 0.624) predictors were statistically significant”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • May combine two claims. 22
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 37
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The competitive reaction time task has been used in more than 125 published papers, and task scores have been quantified in more than 155 different ways.

    “the competitive reaction time task (CRTT; [34]), has been used in more than 125 published papers, and surprisingly, task scores have been quantified in more than 155 different ways in this literature [44].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [34] Gentile DA et al. 2009 The effects of prosocial video games on prosocial behaviors: international evidence from correlational, longitudinal, and experimental studies. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 35, 752– 763. (10.1177/0146167209333045) 19321812 PMC2678173 source

      In the citing sentence, this source is cited for identifying the competitive reaction time task; the claims about more than 125 papers and 155 scoring methods are attached to a different citation. Searches for the task and those numbers found no matching passage in our copy. Study 3 Methods instead describes a tangram-puzzle task, so this source does not verify the identification. (LLM, conf=0.76)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [44] Elson M 2017 FlexibleMeasures.com: competitive reaction time task (CRTT). [cited 3 August 2016]. See http://crtt.flexiblemeasures.com/index.php?menu=quantifications.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The present study examined the fundamental dynamic of concern through a purely confirmatory lens following a registered reports protocol.

    “the present study examined the fundamental dynamic of concern in this subfield through a purely confirmatory lens [47] following a registered reports protocol [48].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [47] McCarthy RJ, Coley SL, Wagner MF, Zengel B, Basham A 2016 Does playing video games with violent content temporarily increase aggressive inclinations? A pre-registered experimental study. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 67, 13– 19. (10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.009) source
    • cites [48] Munafò MR et al. 2017 A manifesto for reproducible science. Nat. Hum. Behav. 1, 0021 (10.1038/s41562-016-0021) PMC7610724 33954258 source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The conduct problems subscale of the SDQ was the study's outcome variable, as it has been extensively used to measure aggressive behaviour and interpersonal aggression across a wide range of cultures in community, academic and clinical settings.

    “The conduct problems subscale of the SDQ was the study's outcome variable, as it has been extensively used to measure aggressive behaviour and interpersonal aggression across a wide range of cultures in community [58], academic [59] and clinical [60] settings.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [58] Goodman R, Ford T, Simmons H, Gatward R, Meltzer H 2000 Using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) to screen for child psychiatric disorders in a community sample. Br. J. Psychiatry J. Ment. Sci. 177, 534– 539. (10.1192/bjp.177.6.534) 11102329 source

      Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [59] Matsuishi T et al. 2008 Scale properties of the Japanese version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): a study of infant and school children in community samples. Brain Dev. 30, 410– 415. (10.1016/j.braindev.2007.12.003) 18226867 source
    • cites [60] Becker A, Hagenberg N, Roessner V, Woerner W, Rothenberger A 2004 Evaluation of the self-reported SDQ in a clinical setting: do self-reports tell us more than ratings by adult informants? Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 13(Suppl. 2), II17– II24. 15243782 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Premisecitation

    Statistical significance does not necessitate a subjective state that humans can distinguish on a personal level.

    “Indeed, statistical significance does not necessitate a subjective state that humans can distinguish on a personal level [77,78].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [77] Miller GA 1956 The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63, 81– 97. (10.1037/h0043158) 13310704 source

      In the discussion of absolute judgments (p. 85), Miller describes limits on how many stimulus intensities people can discriminate. The passages found by searching for statistical significance and subjective distinguishability do not address whether a statistically significant result corresponds to a personally distinguishable subjective state. (LLM, conf=0.73)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [78] Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW 2003 Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med. Care 41, 582– 592. (10.1097/01.MLR.0000062554.74615.4C) 12719681 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Past research indicates that levels of daily video game play, violent game play and aggressive behaviour should all be higher in male adolescents.

    “Similarly, past research indicates that levels of daily video game play [2], violent game play [66] and aggressive behaviour should all be higher in male adolescents [58].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [2] Przybylski AK, Weinstein N 2017 A large-scale test of the goldilocks hypothesis: quantifying the relations between digital-screen use and the mental well-being of adolescents. Psychol. Sci. 28, 204– 215. (10.1177/0956797616678438) 28085574 source
    • cites [66] Kutner L, Olson CK 2008 Grand theft childhood: the surprising truth about violent video games and what parents can do. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
    • cites [58] Goodman R, Ford T, Simmons H, Gatward R, Meltzer H 2000 Using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) to screen for child psychiatric disorders in a community sample. Br. J. Psychiatry J. Ment. Sci. 177, 534– 539. (10.1192/bjp.177.6.534) 11102329 source

      The citation [58] is attached to the expectation that aggressive behaviour is higher in male adolescents. The Sample section reports the participants’ sex distribution, and Characteristics of ‘false positives’ says SDQ false positives were more likely to be male; neither compares aggressive behaviour by sex among adolescents. Searches for aggression and sex differences found no passage addressing that comparison. (LLM, conf=0.76)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    There is a growing literature on the links between gaming and prosocial behaviour.

    “There is a growing literature on the links between gaming and prosocial behaviour and we decided the current data could speak to this literature as well [29,73,74].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [29] Ferguson CJ 2015 Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children's and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10, 646– 666. (10.1177/1745691615592234) 26386002 source
    • cites [73] Breuer J, Velez J, Bowman N, Wulf T, Bente G 2017 ‘Drive the lane; together, hard!’: an examination of the effects of supportive coplaying and task difficulty on prosocial behavior. J. Media Psychol. 29, 31– 41. (10.1027/1864-1105/a000209) source
    • cites [74] Tear MJ, Nielsen M 2013 Failure to demonstrate that playing violent video games diminishes prosocial behavior. PLoS ONE 8, e68382 (10.1371/journal.pone.0068382) 23844191 PMC3700923 source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Adolescent boys showed higher levels of overall gaming, violent gaming and aggressive behaviour than adolescent girls.

    “we tested relations with gender, and observed higher levels of overall gaming, t764 = 3.71, p < 0.001, violent gaming, t764 = 4.09, p < 0.001 and aggressive behaviour, t999 = 2.98, p < 0.001, in adolescent boys as compared to adolescent girls.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Subjective game engagement was positively correlated with overall levels of game engagement, any violent game engagement and overall levels of violent game engagement (rs = 0.18-0.43).

    “subjective game engagement was positively correlated with overall levels of game engagement, any violent game engagement and overall levels of violent game engagement (rs = 0.18–0.43)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Aggressive behaviour was positively associated with all of the observed variables (|r|s = 0.08-0.62).

    “In line with expectations, aggressive behaviour was positively associated with all of the observed variables (|r|s = 0.08–0.62)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the primary regression analysis, neither the linear nor the parabolic predictor of violent video game engagement was statistically significant.

    “Results from this model showed that neither the linear (p = 0.402) nor the parabolic (p = 0.624) predictors were statistically significant.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Sensitivity and exploratory analyses indicated that the null effects extended across multiple operationalizations of violent game engagement and when the focus was on prosocial behaviour.

    “Sensitivity and exploratory analyses indicated these null effects extended across multiple operationalizations of violent game engagement and when the focus was on another behavioural outcome, namely, prosocial behaviour.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Responses to the subjective game engagement item were positively correlated with participant estimates of time spent playing violent games on a typical day, r768 = 0.47, p < 0.001.

    “We expected and found that responses to this item were positively correlated with participant estimates of the time they spent playing violent games on a typical day, r768 = 0.47, p < 0.001.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Participants were moderately engaged in violent games, devoting an average of two hours to them on a typical day (M = 2.07, s.d. = 2.30).

    “we found participants were moderately engaged in violent games, devoting an average of two hours to them on a typical day (M = 2.07, s.d. = 2.30).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the sensitivity analysis using PEGI age ratings to operationalize violent game content, neither the linear nor the parabolic predictor was statistically significant.

    “Results from this model, presented in table 3, indicated both the linear (p = 0.899) and parabolic (p = 0.851) predictors were not statistically significant.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Results from the ESRB-based exploratory analyses mirrored those observed in both the primary and sensitivity analyses.

    “Perhaps unsurprisingly then, results, presented in table 4, mirrored those observed in both the primary and sensitivity analyses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    The study did not have an empirical basis to calculate local extrema as planned because the parabolic term was not significant (p = 0.624).

    “This was not possible because the parabolic term was not significant (p = 0.624), and as such we did not have an empirical basis to calculate the local extrema as planned.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    The positive control check question, a simple 5-point Likert scale that asked participants to rate their own intensity of engagement with games, was positively correlated (r = 0.25) with aggressive behaviour.

    “For example, our positive control check question, a simple 5-point Likert scale that asked participants to rate their own intensity of engagement with games happened to be positively correlated (r = 0.25) to aggressive behaviour.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Participants' recent violent game time using PEGI and ESRB ratings were highly interrelated (r = 0.80, p < 0.001).

    “A correlation analysis showed that participants' recent violent game time, using PEGI and ESRB ratings, were highly interrelated (r = 0.80, p < 0.001).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    A total of 48.8% of female participants and 68.0% of males played at least one violent game in the past month.

    “A total of 48.8% of female participants and 68.0% of males played at least one violent game in the past month.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Using ESRB ratings, violent game engagement was not a statistically significant linear (p = 0.98) or nonlinear (p = 0.07) predictor of aggressive behaviour.

    “Violent game engagement was not a statistically significant linear (p = 0.98) or nonlinear (p = 0.07) predictor of aggressive behaviour.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The sample was recruited to be nationally representative of British adolescents aged 14 and 15 years using geographical and demographic quotas based on 2011 UK Census data.

    “A participant profile of adolescents aged 14 and 15 years living in England, Scotland and Wales was built using geographical and demographic factors based on 2011 United Kingdom Census data. Geographical region, household socioeconomic class, participant age and gender were considered for quotas to match the census data and sampling continued until these quotas were attained.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The study controlled for variability in gender in hypothesis testing as planned.

    “Given this, we controlled for variability in gender in our hypothesis testing as planned”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Upon adjusting for publication bias, the observed aggregate effect sizes relating gaming to aggression were smaller than those originally presented.

    “Upon adjusting for publication bias, the observed aggregate effect sizes relating gaming to aggression were smaller than those originally presented.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32] Hilgard J, Engelhardt CR, Rouder JN 2017 Overstated evidence for short-term effects of violent games on affect and behavior: a reanalysis of Anderson et al. 2010. Psychol. Bull. 143, 757– 774. (10.1037/bul0000074) 28639810 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Individuals' scores on the five-item conduct problems subscale of the SDQ ranged from 5 to 15 (M = 6.93, s.d. = 2.20, α = 0.76).

    “Individuals' scores on the five-item conduct problems subscale of the SDQ ranged from 5 to 15 (M = 6.93, s.d. = 2.20, α = 0.76)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    The study used a preregistered analysis plan.

    “Following a preregistered analysis plan, multiple regression analyses tested the hypothesis that recent violent game play is linearly and positively related to carer assessments of aggressive behaviour.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The study underwent ethical review and received approval from the Central University Ethics Committee of the University of Oxford (C1A17023).

    “The study underwent ethical review and received approval from the Central University Ethics Committee of the University of Oxford (C1A17023)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A handful of preregistered studies have rigorously tested the links between violent game play and human aggression and do not detect an effect of brief exposure to violent gaming on aggression in the laboratory.

    “A handful of preregistered studies have rigorously tested the links between violent game play and human aggression [47], and do not detect an effect of brief exposure to violent gaming on aggression in the laboratory.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [47] McCarthy RJ, Coley SL, Wagner MF, Zengel B, Basham A 2016 Does playing video games with violent content temporarily increase aggressive inclinations? A pre-registered experimental study. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 67, 13– 19. (10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.009) source
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Hilgard et al. re-analysed widely cited meta-analytic data and detected publication bias not uncovered in the original reporting.

    “Their analysis detected the presence of publication bias not uncovered in the original reporting of the data.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32] Hilgard J, Engelhardt CR, Rouder JN 2017 Overstated evidence for short-term effects of violent games on affect and behavior: a reanalysis of Anderson et al. 2010. Psychol. Bull. 143, 757– 774. (10.1037/bul0000074) 28639810 source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The explanatory variable, violent video game play, reflected the level of exposure young people have to violent games by combining objective assessments of both time spent playing and violent content (official game ratings) across a broad range of popular games.

    “Further, the explanatory variable, violent video game play, reflected the level of exposure young people have to violent games by combining objective assessments of both time spent playing and violent content (official game ratings) across a broad range of popular games.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The observed effect r = 0.01 did not overlap with and was clearly inferior to the meta-analytic estimate r = 0.21 (95% CI = 0.20-0.22).

    “Given this effect, r = 0.01 (95% CI = −0.08 to 0.10), did not overlap with, and was clearly inferior to, r = 0.21 (95% CI = 0.20–0.22)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32] Hilgard J, Engelhardt CR, Rouder JN 2017 Overstated evidence for short-term effects of violent games on affect and behavior: a reanalysis of Anderson et al. 2010. Psychol. Bull. 143, 757– 774. (10.1037/bul0000074) 28639810 source
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    All study materials are available for download on the Open Science Framework.

    “all study materials are available for download on the Open Science Framework [57].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [57] Przybylski AK, Weinstein N 2017 Study materials. See https://osf.io/rkw6z/.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    A coder who was blind to the purpose of the study coded the named games for violent content using PEGI ratings.

    “This information was then used by a coder who was blind to the purpose of the study to find the game's entry on the Pan European Game Information (PEGI) website for confirmatory hypothesis testing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Studies originally deemed to be following best practices showed particularly strong evidence of publication bias.

    “this analysis also suggested that studies originally deemed to be following best practices showed particularly strong evidence of publication bias.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32] Hilgard J, Engelhardt CR, Rouder JN 2017 Overstated evidence for short-term effects of violent games on affect and behavior: a reanalysis of Anderson et al. 2010. Psychol. Bull. 143, 757– 774. (10.1037/bul0000074) 28639810 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The naive and corrected estimated effect sizes relating violent video game play to self-reported aggression extracted from the meta-analysis across 37 studies (n = 29 113) were relatively consistent and small to medium (r = 0.21; 95% CI = 0.20-0.22).

    “the naive and corrected estimated effect sizes relating violent video game play to self-reported aggression extracted from this meta-analysis across a total of 37 studies (n = 29 113) were relatively consistent and small to medium [33] (r = 0.21; 95% CI = 0.20–0.22) in size.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33] Cohen J 1988 Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn Hillsdale, NJ: Routledge.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Measurement flexibility in how violent game play is operationalized increases the chance of false-positive results and reduces confidence in inferences linking gaming to aggression.

    “This flexibility, described as part of the ‘garden of forking paths problem’ increases the chance of false-positive results and serves to reduce our confidence in the inferences linking gaming to aggression [37,38].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [37] Simmons JP, Nelson LD, Simonsohn U 2011 False-positive psychology: undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychol. Sci. 22, 1359– 1366. (10.1177/0956797611417632) 22006061 source
    • cites [38] Gelman A, Loken E 2013 The garden of forking paths: why multiple comparisons can be a problem, even when there is no ‘fishing expedition’ or ‘p-hacking’ and the research hypothesis was posited ahead of time. New York, NY: Dep Stat Columbia Univ.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The observed effect relating violent gaming to aggressive behaviour was both statistically and practically insignificant.

    “we concluded this observed effect relating violent gaming to aggressive behaviour was both statistically and practically insignificant.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.
    • Rests on an assumption: PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    These standards were set for type 1 and 2 error control and the sample was sufficiently large for a fair and sensitive test of the null and alternative hypotheses.

    “Findings can be interpreted with greater confidence because these standards were set for type 1 and 2 error control and the sample was sufficiently large for a fair and sensitive test of the null and alternative hypotheses.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The five-item prosocial subscale had a mean of 12.08 (s.d. = 2.29) and internal consistency α = 0.77.

    “Scores on this five-item subscale were summed and ranged from 5 to 15 (M = 12.08, s.d. = 2.29, α = 0.77).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given

    In this study, we draw general inferences about gaming effects in a general way across the population as a whole.

    “Finally, in this study, we draw general inferences about gaming effects in a general way across the population as a whole.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    We prespecified how we would interpret effects larger, smaller or falling in the same range as estimates from meta-analysis.

    “because we prespecified how we would interpret effects larger, smaller or falling in the same range as estimates from meta-analysis [32]”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32] Hilgard J, Engelhardt CR, Rouder JN 2017 Overstated evidence for short-term effects of violent games on affect and behavior: a reanalysis of Anderson et al. 2010. Psychol. Bull. 143, 757– 774. (10.1037/bul0000074) 28639810 source
    • Rests on an assumption: All studies of violent video game effects encountered by the authors use statistical significance as a surrogate for determining if the effects of gaming are practically significant in real-world terms.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    We prespecified exactly how we would operationalize key variables before conducting the study.

    “Our study, then, contributes to this literature base, as we prespecified exactly how we would operationalize key variables before conducting the study.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The criterion variable was completed by carers, not adolescent participants.

    “our criterion variable—the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire—was completed by carers (not adolescent participants)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The current work is the second study in the area to set the number of observations based on an a priori power analysis, and the first to specify a minimum effect size of theoretical interest.

    “We believe the current work is the second study in the area to set the number of observations based on an a priori power analysis [47], and the first to specify a minimum effect size of theoretical interest.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [47] McCarthy RJ, Coley SL, Wagner MF, Zengel B, Basham A 2016 Does playing video games with violent content temporarily increase aggressive inclinations? A pre-registered experimental study. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 67, 13– 19. (10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.009) source
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The reliability of the SDQ scale was relatively high and in line with previous SDQ work.

    “Our data supported this decision, as the reliability of the scale was relatively high and in line with previous SDQ work [59].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [59] Matsuishi T et al. 2008 Scale properties of the Japanese version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): a study of infant and school children in community samples. Brain Dev. 30, 410– 415. (10.1016/j.braindev.2007.12.003) 18226867 source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Before conducting the study, we set both a criterion for statistical significance and an a priori threshold informed by the extant literature as a criterion for practical significance.

    “before conducting the study, we set both a criterion for statistical significance and an a priori threshold informed by the extant literature as a criterion for practical significance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: All studies of violent video game effects encountered by the authors use statistical significance as a surrogate for determining if the effects of gaming are practically significant in real-world terms.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Links reported in the literature might be influenced by publication bias, selective reporting, or an artefact of unobserved or hidden moderators.

    “This pattern of findings further suggests that links reported in the literature might be influenced by publication bias, selective reporting, or an artefact of unobserved or hidden moderators, as has been previously suspected [45,78].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [45] Anderson CA, Dill KE 2000 Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78, 772– 790. (10.1037/0022-3514.78.4.772) 10794380 source
    • cites [78] Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW 2003 Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med. Care 41, 582– 592. (10.1097/01.MLR.0000062554.74615.4C) 12719681 source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    The present study is based on cross-sectional data.

    “Second, the present study is based on cross-sectional data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    This is among the first studies to test the effects of violent gaming on human aggression using a preregistered hypothesis-testing framework and the first to do so following the registered reports protocol.

    “This is among the first studies to test the effects of violent gaming on human aggression using a preregistered hypothesis-testing framework and the first to do so following the registered reports protocol.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The scientific literature on the effects of violent video games is sharply divided.

    “a scientific literature sharply divided on the effects of violent video games [29]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [29] Ferguson CJ 2015 Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children's and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10, 646– 666. (10.1177/1745691615592234) 26386002 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Our work is based entirely on self-report data.

    “First, our work is based entirely on self-report data.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
50 of 50
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Adolescents accurately reported the games they played and the time they spent playing them.

    “This work depends on children and young people accurately reporting on their video game play, the level of violent content present in this play and their own trait- or state-level aggression”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    PEGI and ESRB violent-content ratings validly indicate the violent content of the games played.

    “We operationalized violent game contents using European Union [50] and North American media rating systems [51].”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Many researchers ask participants to estimate their own aggressive behaviours and provide subjective ratings of the violence present in the games they play.

    “First, we observed that many researchers ask participants not only to estimate their own aggressive behaviours but also to provide subjective ratings of the violence present in the games they play.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    All studies of violent video game effects encountered by the authors use statistical significance as a surrogate for determining if the effects of gaming are practically significant in real-world terms.

    “Finally, all studies of violent video game effects we have encountered use statistical significance as a surrogate for determining if the effects of gaming are practically significant in real-world terms.”
4 of 4

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Positive-association claim conflicts with the correlation table

    Minor

    The text says aggressive behaviour was positively associated with all observed variables, but the table reports a negative correlation with playing any violent games.

  • Play time is called objectively assessed despite being self-reported

    Minor

    The methods say adolescents reported their play frequency on a scale, but a later description calls the assessment of time spent playing objective.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 75 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Gelman A, 2013, The garden of forking paths: why multiple comparisons can be a problem, even when there is no ‘fishing expedition’ or ‘p-hacking’ and the research hypothesis was posited ahead of time

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
Przybylski, Andrew K.
Venue
Royal Society Open Science
Published
2019-02
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
171474
ISSN
2054-5703 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2914745182
Cited by
228
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 11
FWCI
40.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Royal Society Open Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
John Fell Fund, University of Oxford (163/079)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
violent video games, aggression, adolescents, game engagement, game ratings, prosocial behavior, carer assessment, video game effects

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-11.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-11.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review