Author: hevga
WASHINGTON, D.C. – February 26, 2018 – There is no evidence that video games cause school shootings or gun violence. As an organization whose researchers are dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge, free speech, and academic freedom, we certainly would accept and amplify the results of a sound study that does––yet, after decades of research on the issue and a case before the United States Supreme Court, no such causal connection has been established. Why, then, are politicians blaming video games again? Because they need a scapegoat. This must stop.
The scientific debate over video games and violence is effectively over, and has been for years, but took a notable turn in the public forum in 2011 when the Supreme Court wrote in its 7-2 decision in Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, “Psychological studies purporting to show a connection between exposure to violent video games and harmful effects on children do not prove that such exposure causes minors to act aggressively.”
Proponents of the connection in the real world often base their claims on several laboratory studies on aggression. However, any effects generated from these experiments and studies lasted for minutes and were comparable to the effects of watching cartoons, as noted by the high court, “the “effect sizes” of children’s exposure to violent video games are “about the same” as that produced by their exposure to violence on television . . . [T]he same effects have been found when children watch cartoons starring Bugs Bunny or the Road Runner, or when they play video games like Sonic the Hedgehog that are rated “E” (appropriate for all ages), or even when they “view a picture of a gun.”
Since the Supreme Court’s ruling, others have continued to refute connections between video games and violence. The American Psychological Association’s Media Psychology and Technology division’s report analyzing over two dozen studies writes that, “Scant evidence has emerged that makes any causal or correlational connection between playing violent video games and actually committing violent activities.” The Washington Post gathered data pointing out that consumption of video games does not correlate with gun violence. Journalists are well versed in the research and have written extensively on the topic in USA Today, The New York Times, Forbes, The Guardian, Fortune, BBC, and The Washington Post. All point again and again to the lack of evidence. And finally, the research of HEVGA members and others in the video game field, encompassing decades of work and thousands of peer-reviewed studies, provides overwhelming evidence that video games are vehicles for change, learning, empathy, and connectivity.
Former advisors at the White House in the Office of Science and Technology Policy, who started the effort to use games for impact at the federal level, also weighed in on this matter. Constance Steinkuehler, former HEVGA President and current professor at the University of California, Irvine, served as the first Senior Policy Analyst on games from 2011-2012 and briefed then Vice President Biden on the lack of supporting research following the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting. She ran a subsequent meeting and listening session that included Biden, key White House staff, industry leaders, and top games researchers. Mark DeLoura, who served as the Senior Policy Analyst on games from 2013-2014 following Steinkuehler, wrote on Twitter, “In the previous administration we looked into this and learned that the research does not support any such correlation.” The current administration has not filled a similar or related post.
If the research debate on video games and violence has been settled in the academy and by two branches of the federal government, then why––despite the Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association ruling, the voluminous research on the positive effects of games, the work in the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and even the megaphone of the popular press––are politicians still blaming video games as the cause of gun violence and shootings when it directly contradicts the overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
As Erik Kain stated in Forbes, “Shifting the focus to violent video games is just one of many strategies used to divide and distract rather than unite and problem solve.” The National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre, following Sandy Hook, blamed video games in a press conference, throwing their hat into the ring in what has now become an overused strategy for politicians and other stakeholders. The effect was loud and clear: you can still blame games, despite the recent evidence, and continue to use them as an easy scapegoat.
That is why we are issuing this statement: the core values of the university––the pursuit of knowledge, academic integrity, public and community engagement––demand it. When we observe politicians misrepresenting the facts for political purposes, scapegoating important issues, and quashing genuine public conversation, it is our responsibility to defend the truth. When we see them proposing games legislation based on unsound research in repeated attempts to avoid their own duty to directly address the core issue at hand, we must respond.
If Washington wants to enact legislation for positive change in America on the subject of gun violence, then it should do so, but it should leave video games out of the debate. They have no place there.
Proposed inclusion in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) stigmatizes billions of players worldwide, is based on little scholarly evidence, and proposes no treatment or prevention
WASHINGTON, D.C. – January 4, 2018 – It is with great dismay that during the holiday season we read about the proposal at the World Health Organization (WHO) to enact a new classification for a ‘gaming disorder’ in its International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Already, some of the popular press is reporting the proposed addition to the list of ‘mental diseases’, ‘mental health conditions’, and other similar phrasing and terminology. While WHO is careful to point out that the proposal is limited in characterizing the disorder as “recurrent” gaming behavior manifested by “impaired control over gaming,” and “escalation of gaming despite the occurrence of negative consequences”, it is nonetheless the case that an additional classification of gaming as an addictive disorder will do little to combat cases of abuse rooted in individual behavior, not symptomatic of a particular medium. Of particular concern is that classifying gaming as a disorder will broadly seek to stigmatize a pastime that billions of players enjoy without issue around the world, and will also warp continued research into the issue in ways that seek to confirm classification rather than allow for open and transparent research without bias. We do not support WHO in this classification scheme in the strongest possible terms.
While we strongly support the notion of responsible design, community engagement, and engaged citizenship on behalf of both the games community, the game development industry, and the scholarly and academic community studying both these media forms and their effects, we find very little scholarly evidence to support the classification as proposed. Instead, this effort seeks to create a distinction between engagement with this form of media and all other consumption where one may not exist (e.g., binge watching and other consumption patterns). Moreover, it confuses the context and terminology between ‘gaming’, which commonly refers to gambling, and the playing of digital video games. Perhaps most importantly, this classification proposes no prevention or treatment options.
We’ve seen this kind of scapegoating before with both games and other media forms for centuries. Prior to digital games, we saw similar claims made of chess, solitaire, pen-and-paper role-playing games, and other forms of media, entertainment, and broadcasting. In the 18th and 19th centuries, women were seen as incapable of distinguishing the fiction of novels from everyday life in attempts to maintain the status quo and gender inequities, much in the same way various demographics and market segments are today cast as microcosms of other hot topic societal ills. We’ve watched as games are repeatedly blamed in today’s world for violence, childhood obesity, failures in educational policy, and a host of other contemporary issues, despite both a lack of evidence and careful consideration of other, often far more powerful, systemic forces that contribute to societal behavior. Games are commonly referred to as ‘addictive’ despite numerous conflicting studies and a clear lack of consensus from the scientific and medical communities. Yet certain groups, and some of the press, seem intent on singling out this form of media and play as uniquely dangerous, regardless of the fact that games are enjoyed by over 2 billion gamers worldwide and have also had a positive effect on STEM education, as well as related fields in the humanities and social sciences.
To be sure, a classification may help with insurance and naming done properly can be of significant benefit, but instead of jumping to premature conclusions in ways that may be potentially damaging and could further alienate disparate parts of our societies, we first encourage everyone to continue to conduct the necessary research to study the ways that games affect our lives as a cultural and iconic form of media in this day and age. It is clear that the role of digital media in today’s world is of critical import–from our politics to how we educate the next generation. With careful, neutral study, non-biased reporting, and a critical eye towards sensationalism, we believe we can better understand the impact games have in our lives, and that includes caring for those among us whose behaviors during play may become damaging. But, in order to provide the best possible care to those truly in need, and to not cause harm through mis- or overdiagnosis, we must not needlessly stigmatize gaming as a disorder. Singling out a specific form of digital media based on the limited evidence presented to date is unwarranted, and does not advance either the care and treatment options for those in need, or our greater understanding of the role and impact of this media in matters of society and culture.
WASHINGTON, DC – November 17, 2017 – The Higher Education Video Game Alliance (HEVGA), a professional association of video game scholars and programs at universities, announced today Andy Phelps as President. Phelps is the founder and Director of the RIT Center for Media, Arts, Games, Interaction and Creativity (MAGIC), founder and former Director of the School of Interactive Games & Media at the Rochester Institute of Technology, and holds the rank of Professor at the Institute. Phelps brings decades of experience in games programming education to the Alliance and has been an essential leader in legitimizing and professionalizing the field. He was a founding member of the Alliance’s Board of Directors and has been integral in ensuring its success.
“Andy has a proven record of leadership and has demonstrated mastery in moving initiatives and organizations forward in truly impactful ways. His current and former work at RIT, collaboration with state and local government at MAGIC, and commitment to academics makes Andy the person best suited to next lead the Alliance,” said Drew Davidson, HEVGA’s Secretary.
Phelps succeeds Constance Steinkuehler, who served as president from the Alliance’s inception. “We owe Constance a deep debt, not just for championing the establishment of HEVGA, but for her fearless dedication to games in higher education from the very beginning, both within academics and at the federal level in the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) during the Obama administration,” said Phelps. Steinkuehler currently holds the rank of Professor at the University of California, Irvine and will continue to serve the Alliance as one of its founding fellows.
Phelps will build off the work of Steinkuehler and the other founding members of the Alliance’s Board of Directors, Drew Davidson, Katherine Isbister, and Tracy Fullerton, to expand member-driven processes and its role and service to the field. Jonathan Elmergreen, HEVGA’s Executive Director, said of Phelps’ plans, “In the near term, Andy and I will focus on filling two vacant seats on the Board of Directors, with a particular emphasis on candidates who can represent the field beyond the border of the United States and at two-year programs, community colleges, teaching universities, and trade programs. In addition, we plan to expand the Board of Directors, advisory board, membership, and establish councils composed of members to advise the executive committee on the unique needs of educations across the world. Research is an integral facet of our members’ daily lives, so Andy and I will also continue to grow the Alliance’s role in scholarly work through our surveys and supporting our members’ research, with a particular focus on gaining greater understanding of industry, its impacts, and important crossover with academics.”
“We are very excited to have Andy as the Alliance’s next president. His background, devotion, and integrity will serve our field well and continue to push us forward. HEVGA, the executive committee, and our members are lucky to have him. We look forward to serving under his leadership,” said Katherine Isbister, Communications & Outreach.
###
About HEVGA
HEVGA’s mission is to create a platform for higher education leaders which will underscore the cultural, scientific, and economic importance of video game programs in colleges and universities. The key is to create a robust network of resources – including unified advocacy, policymaker engagement, media coverage, and external funding – in order to incubate and harness the impact of this community in a 21st century learning environment. For more information, visit hevga.org, like HEVGA on Facebook, or follow @theHEVGA on Twitter.
WASHINGTON, DC – November 17, 2017 – The Higher Education Video Game Alliance (HEVGA), a professional association of video game scholars and programs at universities, announced today Andy Phelps as President. Phelps is the founder and Director of the RIT Center for Media, Arts, Games, Interaction and Creativity (MAGIC), founder and former Director of the School of Interactive Games & Media at the Rochester Institute of Technology, and holds the rank of Professor at the Institute. Phelps brings decades of experience in games programming education to the Alliance and has been an essential leader in legitimizing and professionalizing the field. He was a founding member of the Alliance’s Board of Directors and has been integral in ensuring its success.
“Andy has a proven record of leadership and has demonstrated mastery in moving initiatives and organizations forward in truly impactful ways. His current and former work at RIT, collaboration with state and local government at MAGIC, and commitment to academics makes Andy the person best suited to next lead the Alliance,” said Drew Davidson, HEVGA’s Secretary.
Phelps succeeds Constance Steinkuehler, who served as president from the Alliance’s inception. “We owe Constance a deep debt, not just for championing the establishment of HEVGA, but for her fearless dedication to games in higher education from the very beginning, both within academics and at the federal level in the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) during the Obama administration,” said Phelps. Steinkuehler currently holds the rank of Professor at the University of California, Irvine and will continue to serve the Alliance as one of its founding fellows.
Phelps will build off the work of Steinkuehler and the other founding members of the Alliance’s Board of Directors, Drew Davidson, Katherine Isbister, and Tracy Fullerton, to expand member-driven processes and its role and service to the field. Jonathan Elmergreen, HEVGA’s Executive Director, said of Phelps’ plans, “In the near term, Andy and I will focus on filling two vacant seats on the Board of Directors, with a particular emphasis on candidates who can represent the field beyond the border of the United States and at two-year programs, community colleges, teaching universities, and trade programs. In addition, we plan to expand the Board of Directors, advisory board, membership, and establish councils composed of members to advise the executive committee on the unique needs of educations across the world. Research is an integral facet of our members’ daily lives, so Andy and I will also continue to grow the Alliance’s role in scholarly work through our surveys and supporting our members’ research, with a particular focus on gaining greater understanding of industry, its impacts, and important crossover with academics.”
“We are very excited to have Andy as the Alliance’s next president. His background, devotion, and integrity will serve our field well and continue to push us forward. HEVGA, the executive committee, and our members are lucky to have him. We look forward to serving under his leadership,” said Katherine Isbister, Communications & Outreach.
Washington, DC – We unwaveringly support our LGBTQ faculty, students, and members and will always advocate for their right to be treated equally under the law and with respect in society. That is why the Higher Education Video Game Alliance resolutely opposes the Department of Justice’s latest amicus brief on Title VII aimed at restricting the rights of LGBTQ people to live and work.
LGBTQ people are integral to the games community and we would not have a booming field and industry without them. In order for our people to have opportunities to thrive, they must be protected from discrimination on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. Trans*, non-binary, gender fluid, and other non-cisgender people continue to have the least protections and face the most serious threats and acts of discrimination, particularly trans* women of color. The administration’s actions put existing federal protections at grave risk and seriously damages ongoing battles yet to be won.
The Department of Justice’s brief is in direct opposition to The Alliance’s mission to underscore the cultural, scientific, and economic importance of video games, as our universities and programs suffer when LGBTQ people are discriminated against based on their sexual orientation or gender identity or expression. We are committed to our LGBTQ members and will ensure their voices continue to be heard.
Washington, DC – We unwaveringly support our LGBTQ faculty, students, and members and will always advocate for their right to be treated equally under the law and with respect in society. That is why the Higher Education Video Game Alliance resolutely opposes the Department of Justice’s latest amicus brief on Title VII aimed at restricting the rights of LGBTQ people to live and work.
LGBTQ people are integral to the games community and we would not have a booming field and industry without them. In order for our people to have opportunities to thrive, they must be protected from discrimination on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. Trans*, non-binary, gender fluid, and other non-cisgender people continue to have the least protections and face the most serious threats and acts of discrimination, particularly trans* women of color. The administration’s actions put existing federal protections at grave risk and seriously damages ongoing battles yet to be won.
The Department of Justice’s brief is in direct opposition to The Alliance’s mission to underscore the cultural, scientific, and economic importance of video games, as our universities and programs suffer when LGBTQ people are discriminated against based on their sexual orientation or gender identity or expression. We are committed to our LGBTQ members and will ensure their voices continue to be heard.