Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T20:00:37.524Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Self-Regulation of Virtual Reality: Issues of Voluntary Compliance and Enforcement in the Video Game Industry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2014

Garry C. Gray  and
Tomas Nikolakakos
Garry C. Gray
Affiliation:
University of Toronto, Institute for Work and Health, 481 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2E9,ggray@iwh.on.ca
Tomas Nikolakakos
Affiliation:
University of Toronto, tomas.nikolakakos@utoronto.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The video and computer game industry now generates profits greater than Hollywood films and pornography, and ranks second in earnings only to the music industry. The most popular games are using more explicit representations of crime, drugs, sex, and extreme violence. Furthermore, with advancements in technology, the violent and sexual content of video games are becoming increasingly realistic and interactive. As a result, independent national debates have been taking place globally as to whether modern video games constitute a new social problem. In this study, we perform an interactive content analysis of the most popular video games and demonstrate that “socially questionable content” is just as prevalent as violent content in the most played video games. In addition, we examine “how” video games are rated by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) and issues of voluntary compliance regulation.

Résumé

L'industrie du jeu vidéo et d'ordinateur récolte des bénéfices supérieurs aux films d'Hollywood et à la l'industrie de la pornographie—seul l'industrie de la musique excède ses revenus. Les jeux les plus célèbres emploient des représentations encore plus explicites de la criminalité, des drogues, du sexe, et de la violence extrême. En outre, grâce au progrès technologique, le contenu violent et sexuel des jeux vidèo devient de plus en plus réaliste et interactif. En conséquence, des discussions nationales indépendantes ont eu lieu globalement afin de déterminer si les jeux vidéo modernes constituent un nouveau problème social. Dans cette étude, nous effectuons une analyse du contenu interactif des jeux vidéo les plus célèbres, et nous démontrons que le contenu socialement contestable est aussi prévalent que le contenu violent. En plus, nous examinons de quelle manière les jeux vidéo sont côtés par l'Agence américaine d'évaluation des logiciels, ainsi que certaines questions entourant la réglementation volontaire.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Law and Society / La Revue Canadienne Droit et Société , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , April 2007 , pp. 93 - 108
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Law and Society Association 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Budra, P., (2004) “American justice and the first-person shooter” 34:1Canadian Review of American Studies 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sider, D., “Virtual Vice? This holiday season, some games come wrapped in sex, gore and controversy” People Weekly 58:25 (2002) 79Google Scholar; Wolf, M., The Medium of the Video Game (Austin: University of Texas, 2001)Google Scholar.

2 In 2003 Sony unveiled an accessory for their PlayStation2 called the EyeToy. By plugging the device into the console and aiming it at one's self, an individual person will appear on the TV screen and will actually become the playable-character in the video game.

3 See Dibbel, J., “A rape in cyberspace; or how an evil clown, a Haitian trickster spirit, two wizards, and a cast of dozens turned a database into a society” in Ludlow, P., ed., High Noon on the Electronic Frontier: Conceptual Issues in Cyberspace (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1999) 375Google Scholar; Lessig, L., Code: And Other Laws of Cyberspace (New York, Basic Books, 1999)Google Scholar.

4 CNN, News Story (30 July 2004), online: <http://www.cnn.com>.

5 See online: <http://www.esrb.org>.

6 For a full list of content descriptors, see the Entertainment Software Ratings Board Rating Guide, ibid.

7 The ratings of movies are monitored by the Classification and Rating Administration (CARA) in the United States, and the Canadian Motion Picture Distributors Association (CMPDA) in Canada.

8 See U.S., Federal Trade Commission, Marketing violent entertainment to children: a review of self-regulation and industry practices in the motion picture, music recording and electronic game industries (2000), online: Federal Trade Commission Website <http://www.ftc.gov/reports/violence/vioreport.pdf>>Google Scholar.

9 See Beasley, B. & Standley, T., “Shirts vs. skins: clothing as an indicator of gender stereotyping in video games” (2002) 5:3Mass Communication & Society 279CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Surette, R., “Self-reported copycat crime among a population of serious and violent juvenile offenders” (2002) 48:1Crime and Delinquency 46CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bensley, L. & Van Eenwyk, J., “Video games and real-life aggression: review of the literature” (2001) 29:4Journal of Adolescent Health 244CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Anderson, C. & Bushman, B., “Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: a meta-analytic review of the scientific literature” (2001) 15:5Psychological Science 353CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sherry, J., “The effects of violent video games on aggression: a meta-analysis” (2001) 27:3Human Communication Research 409Google Scholar; Anderson, C. & Dill, K., “Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life” (2000) 79:4Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 772CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Griffiths, M., “Violent video games and aggression: a review of the literature” (1999) 4:2Aggression and Violent Behavior 203CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dietz, T., “An examination of violence and gender role portrayals in video games: implications for gender socialization and aggressive behavior” (1998) 38:5/6Sex Roles 425CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dill, K. & Dill, J., “Video game violence: a review of the empirical literature” (1998) 3 Aggression and Violent Behavior 407CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McCree, R., “Violence: a preliminary look at gangs in Trinidad and Tobago” (1998) 3:1/2Caribbean Journal of Criminology and Social Psychology 155–173Google Scholar; Gilmore, S. & Crissman, A., “Video games: analyzing gender identity and violence in this new virtual reality” (1997) 21 Studies in Symbolic Interaction 181Google Scholar; Irwin, A. & Gross, A., “Cognitive tempo, violent video games, and aggressive behavior in young boys” (1995) 10 Journal of Family Violence 337CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Advocates of stricter regulation often point to the Columbine Case where in April 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold murdered 13 students and wounded another 23 before turning their guns on themselves at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado. One of the many competing theories as to what pushed the boys to commit such a horrific act was their alleged love for violent video games. Harris and Klebold enjoyed playing the bloody, first-person-shooter game Doom, a game licensed by the U.S. military to train soldiers to kill effectively. Shortly after the massacre, a copy of Harris' website was found, with a downloadable version of Doom that he had customized. In his version there were two shooters (each with additional weapons and an unlimited supply of ammunition), and the enemy characters were altered so that they could not fight back.

11 See Shutte, N. et al. ,“Effects of playing video games on children's aggressive and other behaviors” (1988) 18 Journal of Applied Social-Psychology 451Google Scholar; Chambers, J. & Ascione, F., “The effects of prosocial and aggressive video games on children's donating and helping” (1987) 148 Journal of Genetic Psychology 499CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Winkel, M., Novak, D. & Hopson, H., “Personality Factors, Subject Gender and the Effects of Aggressive Video Games on Aggression in Adolescents” (1987) 21 Journal of Research in Personality 211CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Graybill, D., Kirsch, J., & Esselman, E., “Effects of playing violent versus nonviolent video games on the aggressive ideation on aggressive and nonaggressive children” (1985) 15 Child Study Journal 199Google Scholar.

12 See Siegel, L., Criminology (St. Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing Company, 1992)Google Scholar; Bandura, A., Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1986)Google Scholar; Bandura, A., Social Learning Theory (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1977)Google Scholar.

13 Sherry, supra note 9 at 412.

14 Griffiths, supra note 9. See Greenfield, P., Media and the Mind of the Child: From Print to Television, Video Games and Computers (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984)Google Scholar.

15 See Braun, C. & Giroux, J., “Arcade video games: proxemic, cognitive, and content analyses” (1989) 21:2Journal of Leisure Research 92 at 95CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Dietz, supra note 9.

17 Haninger, K. & Thompson, K., (2001) “Violence in E-rated video games” 286:5Journal of the American Medical Association 591 at 593Google Scholar.

18 Lachlan, K., Smith, S. & Tamborini, R., “Popular video games: quantifying the presentation of violence and its context” (2003) Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 58Google Scholar.

19 Sider, supra note 1.

20 Haninger & Thompson, supra note 17 at 593.

21 Glaser, B. & Strauss, A., The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research (New York: Aldine De Gruyter, 1967)Google Scholar.

22 Initially, we also planned to observe the role of the playable character as either a “good-guy” or a “bad-guy,” however we later modified the measure to reflect the characters' behavior as being either positive (e.g. for the benefit of society), or negative (e.g. for the detriment of society).

23 See Surette, supra note 9; Bensley & Van Eenwyk, supra note 9; Anderson & Bushman, supra note 9.

24 Lachlan et al., supra note 18.

25 ibid. at 63.

26 See Lachlan et al., supra note 18; Haninger & Thompson, supra note 17; Dietz, supra note 9; Braun & Giroux, supra note 15.

27 According to the United States Federal Trade Commission (2000), see online: FTC <http://www.ftc.gov>, the voluntary rating systems adopted by the entertainment software, film and music industries have been inadequate in regulating the sale of explicit materials intended for older consumers. The findings for the music industry were very similar to those of the entertainment software industry, in terms of compliance with self-regulation.

28 Sherry, supra note 9 at 410.