Wyatt Fox’s Responces to Readings

Response to Web Space Where Religion and Social Networking Meet

 

      In this article by Katie Zezima, she speaks about people making friends on social networking sites like myspace.com and facebook.com.  She then informs the reader of religious social sites where people are also networking.  Hisholyspace.com and xianz.com are some of the more popular Christian social sites.  One xianz.com user said that “Xianz is like a big church, it is a place that I can come to have fellowship with friends.”

 

            One great attraction that these sites offer is that they have people patrolling the site to report inappropriate language and material.  The creator of Xianz.com said “I wanted to provide a safe alternative that was family friendly for the Christian demographic”.  Xianz.com says it currently has 30,000 members and is still growing.  These religious social networking groups are a great alternative to myspace and other similar sites for the fact that you can come here and talk about god’s word and learning about god.  These are safe family friendly ways to meet new people and to learn more about your faith.

 

 

 

Response to The Net That Binds

 

            In this article by Andrew Shapiro, he speaks about using cyberspace to create real communities.  He states that everything is constantly changing and that during times of change it is often difficult to understand just what it is that is changing.  New internet technologies are allowing us to do almost anything in the cyber world.  Shapiro states that, “It is not just change in how we compute or communicate. Rather, it is a potentially radical shirt in who is in control—of information, experience, and resources.”

 

            He goes on to say that the internet is allowing people to make decisions that once were made by “governments, corporations, and the media.” The internet gives us the choice of what entertainment and news we are exposed to, and even who we socialize with.  When you are online you are judged on what you say, so virtual communities have a softer social barrier than a real life community.  J.C.R. Licklider, an internet pioneer stated that “Life will be happier for the on-line individual because the people whom one interacts most strongly will be selected more by commonality of interests and goals than by accidents of proximity.” He believes that relationships and networks are structured by physical proximity.  He says that we meet people because they are our neighbors, co-workers, or classmates in some local organization. But when you are involved in an online community this structure is removed so you must judge people on what they say.

 

 

 

Response to The Future Shape of Religious Structures

 

            In this article by Richard Thieme he discusses where he thinks the shape of religious structures is going in the future.  He starts by giving us a little background information on where the shape of religious structures is now. Then he states that the religious structures of the near future will be determined by three defining realities.  1.“Religious structures will be shaped by the “space” created by a singular global economy.” 2.“The transformation of religious structures is driven by the same revolution in information technologies that drives the transformation of all organizations and institutions. The shape of religious structures will be determined by the shape of the virtual world.” 3.“Religious structures of the future will be determined by the dynamics of interplanetary culture.”  The author gave little explanation of these three realities other than just simply stating them, so it is a bit difficult to understand.

 

 

 

Response to Violent Video Games and Aggressive Behavior in Young Women

 

       This article is an overview of an experimental study that was performed by Craig Anderson and Christine Murphy.  The goal of the experiment as stated by Anderson was to conduct a conceptual replication of violent video games effects on aggression by young women. 90 female undergraduates enrolled in an intro to psychology class participated in the experiment for course credit. The 90 were split randomly into 3 groups. One group played a violent video game with a female protagonist, another group played a violent video game with a male protagonist, and the other group played a non violent video game.  They executed a TCRT or Taylor Competitive Reaction Time test which is a widely used and accepted measure of aggression.  As a result of this test is was concluded that participants who played the violent video game instead of the non violent video game reported significantly higher levels of aggressive motivation.  There was a tendency for those who played the violent game with the female protagonist instead of the male protagonist to report higher levels of aggressive motivation but this was not significant.  They concluded that the aggressive behavior of the video game is what drives the aggressive behavior within the person who is playing so there shouldn’t be much difference between the male and female protagonist.  Another observation made by the authors is that they believe that video game violence effects may be larger and have more of a negative effect on people compared to that of TV, because the video game is more of an engaging activity whereas TV you are just watching, you have no control over what happens.

 

Response to Video Game Violence and Public Policy 

This article by David Walsh he speaks about the growing concern for the protection of America’s youth from the violent video games available in today’s society.  He declares that there is evidence that shows a cause and effect relationship between virtual violence and aggression among the children and youths that view it.  He says that exposure to violent games; increases physiological arousal, aggressive thoughts, aggressive emotions, aggressive actions, while it decreases positive social actions. Each of the five has a solid explanation underneath them for easier comprehension of the topic.

 

Also discussed in this article is the Federal Trade Commission report from September of 2000.  This report talks about video gaming companies targeting children that are below the age rating for the games they are promoting.  The report concluded that of the violent games rated M (17 and over) that were selected for the study, 70 percent of them targeted children whose age was below the rating for the game.

 

 

 

Response to The effect of video game violence on physiological desensitization to real-life violence

 

            This article by Carnagey, Anderson, and Bushman talks about an experiment that was done about correlating aggression and violent video games.  The authors speak about the primary public and political concerns surrounding the effect of exposure to excessively violent games and young children.  The negative effects of violent media are also covered in this article. “Youths exposed to violent media tend to become more aggressive immediately after exposure and become more aggressive adults.” They go on to talk about desensitization and how being involved with violent video games actually reduces the emotions related to real-life violence for that user.  A great deal of scientific evidence is prevalent throughout the case. They used heart rate and galvanic skin response tests in this study in order to tell the emotional arousal that would come from watching or playing violence.  From the testing they conclude again that playing a violent video game before watching a violent film will actually allow you to get used to the violence and then the real violence would be less arousing for you. So this overview of this case study really just tells us that exposure to violent video games will only bring negative effects on today’s society and corrupt today’s youth into becoming aggressive, violent adults of tomorrow.

 

Response to Violent Video Games: Myths, Facts, and Unanswered Questions

           

This article was written by Craig Anderson, and as many of his works do, he speaks about the negative effects that violent video games can have on young adults and children alike.  Rewarding players for doing malicious and malice acts are one of the major concerns of Anderson’s.  There is then a section where he goes into 11 different myths about violence and video games and also has facts corresponding with the myths.

 

The last section of this article Anderson talks about some unanswered questions that need to be answered to further the research in this field.  He speaks of gaps in the violent video game literature. The link between habitual violent game exposure and later aggression, while controlling for earlier levels of aggression and other risk factors is a concern.  This is the last of the four major types of empirical studies that hasn’t been completed for video games.  Lastly, he speaks out that more research needs to be done comparing video game violence with that of TV. He believes that the repetitive learning present for gaming will turn out to be the reason why video gaming will prove to have a greater negative effect on its users in regards to violence.