What strikes me with all these threads about aggression and video games is that most people commenting simply don't understand what "aggression" really is. Since I wrote my bachelor's on aggression and violence, allow me to extrapolate:
Violence is the end result of aggression, it is what happens when we no longer wish or can control our aggression. Most aggression rarely result in violence though.
Aggression is not quite an emotion, but rather a catch-all term for emotions and vulnerabilities that makes us more prone to initiate (or join into) conflict and violence. Aggression is composed of aggressors, the things that increase our aggression level.
So, what is an aggressor? It can be a lot of things. The most basic aggressors are physical, things like being tired or fatigued, being hungry, being in pain or feeling other physical discomfort. Other aggressors can be our emotional state, anger, irritation and sadness are all aggressors. Yet more aggressors are learned, an aggressor for me is when people insult my job, for someone else it can be if someone doesn't shake their hand or when the car acts up in the morning etc., all the things that "ticks us off". Gaming falls under the types of aggressors that are "lived", recent experiences that impact how we feel and think about our surroundings. In the case of my bachelor's a common finding was that a potent aggressor was if patients had to sit in a waiting room at the ER for hours without staff regularly checking up on them or keeping them informed.
In essence, aggressors are many tiny things that all "prime" us for getting into conflict. This does not mean that a single aggressor will make us go on a violent rampage, nor that the number of aggressors needed to initiate conflict is the same for all people. It only means that if enough of these aggressors stack, we will eventually seek conflict. It is well known that performing a competitive sport is an aggressor, for example, but being forced to perform a task that's too hard for us is also one. So is it really hard to believe that gaming might also be one?
Let's take an example: You have had a shitty day at work, your manager chewed you out, customers yelled at you and your co-workers slacked off and forced you to do some of their stuff too. On the way home your car broke down and the tow guy was an asshole, the taxi didn't show up for 40 minutes and when you finally got home you realize that the steak you intended to bbq for dinner had spoiled, forcing you to eat some re-heated mac and cheese from three days ago. When you at least get a chance to unwind you decide to start up your favorite game, Civilization 5, to unwind with a new round. Just a turn before you are about to settle your second city in a sweet spot with both horses and iron and 3 luxury goods Ghandi swoops in and settles there instead however. Would anyone be surprised if you, at that point cursed the f#####g AI bonuses and how it cheapens the game?
That's how aggressors work. Had you not had a really shitty day, you could probably have dealt with Ghandi's expansion just fine, maybe even considering it a cool challenge. Most of the time, most of us can mitigate the aggressors present in games (frustration, failure etc.) but that doesn't mean they aren't there. They become really visible when other aggressors are already pushing us towards the breaking point though.
As a closing not, aggressors and aggression are not inherently bad. That something increases aggression does not make it dangerous or bad. Aggression is a natural reaction to stress and threats and properly dealing with aggression is a must in modern society. Better that you curse that freaking noob that keeps spawn camping you then that you go out and pick a fight at a bar, right?
Violence is the end result of aggression, it is what happens when we no longer wish or can control our aggression. Most aggression rarely result in violence though.
Aggression is not quite an emotion, but rather a catch-all term for emotions and vulnerabilities that makes us more prone to initiate (or join into) conflict and violence. Aggression is composed of aggressors, the things that increase our aggression level.
So, what is an aggressor? It can be a lot of things. The most basic aggressors are physical, things like being tired or fatigued, being hungry, being in pain or feeling other physical discomfort. Other aggressors can be our emotional state, anger, irritation and sadness are all aggressors. Yet more aggressors are learned, an aggressor for me is when people insult my job, for someone else it can be if someone doesn't shake their hand or when the car acts up in the morning etc., all the things that "ticks us off". Gaming falls under the types of aggressors that are "lived", recent experiences that impact how we feel and think about our surroundings. In the case of my bachelor's a common finding was that a potent aggressor was if patients had to sit in a waiting room at the ER for hours without staff regularly checking up on them or keeping them informed.
In essence, aggressors are many tiny things that all "prime" us for getting into conflict. This does not mean that a single aggressor will make us go on a violent rampage, nor that the number of aggressors needed to initiate conflict is the same for all people. It only means that if enough of these aggressors stack, we will eventually seek conflict. It is well known that performing a competitive sport is an aggressor, for example, but being forced to perform a task that's too hard for us is also one. So is it really hard to believe that gaming might also be one?
Let's take an example: You have had a shitty day at work, your manager chewed you out, customers yelled at you and your co-workers slacked off and forced you to do some of their stuff too. On the way home your car broke down and the tow guy was an asshole, the taxi didn't show up for 40 minutes and when you finally got home you realize that the steak you intended to bbq for dinner had spoiled, forcing you to eat some re-heated mac and cheese from three days ago. When you at least get a chance to unwind you decide to start up your favorite game, Civilization 5, to unwind with a new round. Just a turn before you are about to settle your second city in a sweet spot with both horses and iron and 3 luxury goods Ghandi swoops in and settles there instead however. Would anyone be surprised if you, at that point cursed the f#####g AI bonuses and how it cheapens the game?
That's how aggressors work. Had you not had a really shitty day, you could probably have dealt with Ghandi's expansion just fine, maybe even considering it a cool challenge. Most of the time, most of us can mitigate the aggressors present in games (frustration, failure etc.) but that doesn't mean they aren't there. They become really visible when other aggressors are already pushing us towards the breaking point though.
As a closing not, aggressors and aggression are not inherently bad. That something increases aggression does not make it dangerous or bad. Aggression is a natural reaction to stress and threats and properly dealing with aggression is a must in modern society. Better that you curse that freaking noob that keeps spawn camping you then that you go out and pick a fight at a bar, right?
