Manufacturing consensus in a diverse field of scholarly opinions: A comment on Bushman, Gollwitzer, and Cruz (2015).

Abstract

We appreciate the efforts of Bushman, Gollwitzer, and Cruz (2015) to provide new data describing parents' and professionals' opinions regarding effects of media violence. Unfortunately, we feel it is necessary to call attention to apparent errors and inaccuracies in the way those data are interpreted and represented in their article. The article includes flawed analyses, overstates the extent to which there is agreement that media violence has meaningful negative societal effects, and misrepresents the relevance of the study to an understanding of the effects of media violence on societal violence. In contrast, we call for a climate of research on media violence that better recognizes the diversity of findings and conclusions in an active and growing research agenda and eschews unwarranted insinuations about effects on criminal violence from research focused on aggression-related measures not assessing violent crime.

Understanding Why Scholars Hold Different Views on the Influences of Video Games on Public Health

“…To further add controversy, potential problems with the methodology of Bushman et al and its claims for consensus were also alleged soon after release. In one response article in the same journal, Ivory et al (; see Bushman, Gollwitzer, & Cruz, for reply) expressed the concern that the sampling methods used by Bushman et al were biased, some of the analyses incorrectly done, and the ultimate results ultimately illustrative more of disagreement than consensus. This exchange revealed that scholars were unable to come to a consensus on what was indicative of a consensus.…”

“…However, controversies over the original Bushman et al (2015) paper emerged earlier when the in press version was released to news media. Two psychological researchers reported that major statistical errors had been found in the manuscript (as reported by Ivory et al, ) during the comment/reply process, and Bushman et al were effectively allowed to mulligan a new set of analyses for the original paper (Etchells & Chambers, ). This raised concerns regarding the transparency of the editorial process for this article.…”

Violent Video Games, Sexist Video Games, and the Law: Why Can't We Find Effects?

“…One issue of contention is public resolution statements by professional guilds, such as the APA and AAP, which have linked VVGs to aggression or societal violence. Such statements have been criticized for citation bias issues (failing to acknowledge null studies conflicting with the resolution statements) and for appearing to stack the committees that develop them with known antimedia advocates (Ferguson & Beresin 2017, Hall et al 2011a, Kutner & Olson 2008. This has raised concerns for the integrity of these public statements, whether they misinform the public to promote the guild professions and damage the reputation of science in the process.…”

Violent Video Games in Virtual Reality

“…The link between violent video games and violent or aggressive tendencies in real-life has repeatedly been explored over the last two decades, often to entirely contradictory conclusions, and with no clear support (for in-depth summaries of this on-going debate, see [27,34,43,50]). Leading proponents of causal links between violent video games and violent behaviour such as Bushman et al [14] have been accused of manufacturing consensus [37] and sensationalism [49]. Markey and Ferguson called these efforts "The Grand Theft Fallacy" [39], and it has been noted that "scholarly opinions on video games may resemble moral panics" [26].…”