Addressing the Research Gap: The Differential Impact of Violent Versus Non-Violent Video Games on Empathy and Emotional Responsiveness in Female Adolescents

Introduction Video games were first introduced in the 1970s, and since then, they have been a source of entertainment for individuals of all ages, especially adolescents. Among various categories of video games, violent video games (VVGs) have gained significant attention, often stimulating debates about their effects on players (Anderson et al., 2007). The Entertainment Software Association reported that over 27.5% of video games sold in 2016 were shooter genres, especially among adolescents, causing negative media coverage of VVG effects on players (Daneels et al., 2018). While some researchers began investigating their potentially harmful effects in the 1980s, it was the series of school shootings in the late 1990s that caught the public’s attention (Anderson et al., 2007). 

Over the years, the engagement of children and adolescents with VVGs has risen significantly. Although boys still play more hours weekly than girls, the time spent on VVGs is increasing across all subgroups (Anderson et al., 2007).  As technological advancements progressed, video games transitioned from simplistic 2D graphics to immersive 3D environments. The gaming industry now ranks as the second largest entertainment after film (Khalil et al., 2019). 

VVGs have caused controversy among scholars and the media about the effects of VVGs on adolescents (Pellegrini, 2019). Pellegrini (2019), a Clinical Psychologist, highlights VVGs have been linked to mass shootings and have influenced public discourse, prompting announcements from organizations such as the American Psychological Association for a reduction in violence within games targeted at younger audiences. However, critics of existing research methodologies caution that these studies overlook crucial factors such as mental health and socio-economic status (Pellegrini, 2019).

Khalil et al. (2019) from Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College further explore this issue by examining the prevalence of VVGs among school children and their effects on behavior, academic performance, and peer relationships. Their findings suggest that exposure to violent content may correlate with reduced empathy and reduced emotional responsiveness. Wei et al. (2022), in Mental Health Education, support this view by stating VVGs contribution to problem behaviors in youth, highlighting the significance of peer influences in reconciling differences to these effects. 

Moreover, Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023) provide empirical evidence that VVGs can desensitize players to pain, particularly during the critical development period of adolescence when empathy is forming. 

Additionally, Goldbeck et al. (2018) state, “Although males spend more time than females playing VVGs, VVGs exposure can increase aggressive thoughts, behaviors, and feelings in both sexes.” Video gaming affects both genders, therefore, Cosquer et al. (2024), findings add on by highlighting female participants affected by VVGs more than male participants. 

In contrast, Emihovich et al. (2020), in Educational Technology emphasizes the positive potential of VVGs, which enhance cognitive and emotional skills, challenging the predominantly negative narrative surrounding gaming. Additionally, Lengersdorff et al. (2023) highlight that short-term and controlled exposure to VVGs does not impact empathy or responses to real-life violence. This exhibit shows that video games positively and negatively affect adolescents.

Literature review

The impact of VVGs on empathy levels and emotional responsiveness in adolescents has become a focal point of psychological research, particularly as gaming has grown into a dominant form of entertainment (Shao and Wang, 2019). Therefore, I am focusing particularly on female adolescents since fewer studies were conducted on female participants. This literature review unifies key findings from various peer-reviewed sources to ensure credibility, highlighting the mechanisms through which VVGs may influence aggression and emotional responsiveness, and identifying gaps in the current research. 

General Aggression Model (GAM) and Ferguson’s Catalyst Model (CM): Shao and Wang (2019) provide an overview of the game, positing that VVGs serve as a direct predecessor to aggressive behavior, primarily through mechanisms of social learning and desensitization. In contrast, Shao and Wang (2019) state CM suggests that VVGs act more as a catalyst, with individual predispositions and environmental factors playing a more crucial role in determining aggressive outcomes. This division underscores the complexity of the relationship, suggesting that both internal and external factors must be considered when evaluating the impact of VVGs on adolescents. 

Aggression and Emotional Responsiveness: 

Pellegrini (2019) discusses how exposure to VVGs is often linked to increased aggression, particularly in the context of mass shootings and public discourse. He argues that much of the research may overestimate the negative impact of VVGs by failing to account for external variables such as mental health and socio-economic status. Khalil et al. (2019) further collaborate this by examining the prevalence of VVGs among school children, noting their aggressiveness effects on behavior, academic performance, and peer relationships. The study indicates that VVGs may reduce empathy and emotional responsiveness, suggesting a direct connection between gameplay and behavioral outcomes. Wei et al. (2022) introduce Problem Behavior Theory, which connects to VVG exposure to a range of problem behaviors, including aggression and reduced empathy. They highlight that gender and age may moderate these effects, indicating a need for further exploration of demographic variables in understanding the impact of VVGs. 

Desensitization and Empathy: 

Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023) focus on the neuropsychological aspects of gameplay, revealing how chronic exposure to VVGs can lead to desensitization towards others’ pain. This study emphasizes the vulnerability of adolescents during critical developmental periods, suggesting that emotional regulation skills may be compromised due to violent content exposure. In contrast, Emihovich et al. (2020) explore the positive aspects of gameplay, arguing that video games can enhance problem-solving skills, challenging the negative narrative surrounding VVGs. This raises questions about the broader implications of gameplay content on emotional development. 

Effects on female adolescents: 

Despite most studies done on male participants recently female gamers were on sight in the current studies. Cosquer et al. (2024) at the University Hospital of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry focus on the effects of VVGs on adolescents of both genders. The research indicates a higher effect on female adolescents among VVGs revealed significant mental health issues, with 22.8% reporting suicide attempts and 22.3% indicating depression. This suggests a concerning association between violent video gaming and poorer mental health outcomes, particularly for females. 

Gaps in Research: 

Most existing research often relies on cross-sectional studies assessing empathy and emotional responsiveness at a single point. However, there is a need for longitudinal studies that track these variables over an extended period even though longitudinal studies are important for this research due to time constraints I won’t be able to conduct longitudinal research. Therefore, other methods that most studies lack are the diversity of samples, game content analysis, measurement techniques (self-reports and behavioral observation), and comparative studies. The relationship between VVGs and adolescents' aggression is complex and influenced by a multitude of internal and external factors. While existing studies provide valuable insights, significant gaps remain, particularly in the potential for positive outcomes from different types of gameplay mostly in female adolescents. To fill these gaps, employing research on female adolescents will be better to understand the impact of emotional and behavioral development since females were not thoroughly used in previous studies. This leads to the research question: “How do violent video games affect empathy levels and emotional responsiveness in female adolescents compared to non-violent video games?” This inquiry is particularly relevant to the ongoing debates regarding the psychological effects of violent media on youth. 

Hypothesis:

7 

I hypothesize that exposure to VVGs negatively impacts empathy levels and emotional responsiveness among female adolescents compared to their engagement with non-violent games. This aligns with the findings of various studies, indicating that VVGs may lead to increased aggression and desensitization.   

Methodology

Participants: The study targeted female adolescents aged 14 to 19 who were recruited through emails or social media platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, Reddit, etc. Participants require a moderate level of gaming experience, and adolescents under 18 required consent which was obtained from all participants and their legal guardians before any data collection commenced. 

Video Game Selection: 

To establish a clear comparison between the effectiveness of different genres of video games, two categories of games were selected: 

● Violent Video Game: PUBG (PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds) is an online multiplayer battle royale game that is classified as violent due to its combat-oriented, high-intensity gameplay, which involves gunfights and a survival-of-the-fittest concept. 

● Non-Violent Video Games: Word search and digital chess games are non-violent alternatives that focus on intellectual and puzzle-solving tasks rather than high-intensity gameplay. The selected games are similar in terms of complexity and engagement level to control for potential confounding variables (cognitive challenges). The sessions were brief but immersive enough to engage participants aiming for approximately VVG in PUBG there is a section called ‘classic’ which approximately requires 15 minutes of gameplay to complete the match and the longest classic being 40 minutes but if the participant gets eliminated early it ends by that time and NVVGs 10-15 mins per participant depends on how long it takes to finish the gameplay. 

Voice Call Setup: 

The study was conducted via video call to maintain social distancing protocols, it also allows participants to not feel anxious due to numerous individuals' involvement. Google Meets was used to observe participants’ reactions during gameplay along with the viewing of the gameplay. For privacy purposes faces won’t be shown, only voices and reactions were recorded. 

Pre-Study Data Collection and Emotional Responsiveness Measurement: ● Empathy Assessment: Before and after gameplay, participants are required to conduct empathy questionnaires to measure emotional empathy. This provided a baseline and post-game play data to assess shifts in empathy levels. 

Emotional Responsiveness: Emotional responsiveness was conducted using self reporting scales because facial expression analysis is not being used due to privacy concerns.

● Gaming Habits Survey: Participants reported their typical weekly gaming hours and listed the types of games they played most frequently, including an assessment of the perceived violence of these games on a scale from 1 (not violent) to 7 (extremely violent). This aided in classifying participants based on their gaming history and exposure to violent content. This method was previously used by Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023) which was effective in identifying the violent exposure the participants had before participating in the gameplay with Call of Duty. 

The participants were asked:

Gameplay sessions:  Each participant engaged in the chosen game session of their choice (violent or non-violent games). The gaming session lasted for VVGs 10-40 minutes and for non-violent games 5-15 minutes, following a 5-minute practice session in case they weren’t experiencing the gameplay (for non-violent gameplay only, since the chosen violent game requires experience any non-experience participants were excluded because the explanation of game-play was hard because it requires 5-7 years of gameplay to get skilled at PUBG so only players with approximately few months of experiences were used since they had a decent amount of knowledge about the gameplay). 

● The sessions were conducted in a quiet environment of the participant’s choice.

● Observers ensured that participants remained focused and engaged.  Post Game Survey:

The participants were asked the following questions directly after their gameplay by choosing one of the answers as their choice for question #1 but the rest will be used on a scale from 1-5 as an answer choice. 

Post-Game Interview: 

Immediately after the gaming session, participants completed a post-game survey or were interviewed depending on what comforts them, thus these questions were asked on a voice call.

● “How did the game make you feel?” 

● “Did the game evoke any particular emotions?” 

● “Did you find yourself caring about other players in the game” 

● “While playing, how often did you feel frustrated or upset by what happened in the game?” 

● “How did you feel about the violent or aggressive actions in the games?”  Analyzing data: 

● For empathy and emotional responsiveness scores: Pre- and post-game comparisons will be analyzed by observing the data such as the percentage of participants participating.

● Post-game survey: The questions will be asked before-game surveys and analyzed the same way.

Methodological Justification:  

This comprehensive methodology draws on various strengths noted in previous studies, such as those by Gabbiadini et al. (2022) in the Department of Psychology, Gao et al. (2017) at the Faculty of Psychology, López et al. (2020) Department of Basic and Clinical Psychology and Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023). 

Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023) conducted similar research about potential desensitization in empathic brain responses due to both habitual and short-term gaming exposure. The article by Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023) evaluates the connection between VVGs affecting empathy and emotional responsiveness by showing these games can reduce young players’ ability to feel

empathy for others’ pain. Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023) used questionnaires, surveys, along with gameplay for effective results. 

● Surveys: Surveys were used by previous researchers such as Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023) and Abbasi et al. (2022). Abbasi et al. (2022) discuss surveys that allow researchers to gather quantitative data from a large number of participants along with faster responses. For instance, surveys can assess the frequency of VVG play and self-reported aggressive behaviors among players. 

● Experimental Gameplay: Experimental gameplay involves controlled studies where participants engage with VVGs in a lab setting (in this case video calls). This method was previously used by Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023) and Abbasi et al. (2022) which was effective in their studies. This method allows researchers to manipulate variables and observe direct effects on behavior in real-time. 

● Interviews: After-game interviews can help identify whether players feel that their gameplay influences their real-world behavior. For instance, players might discuss feelings of aggression or desensitization after playing violent games, providing a direct link between gameplay and behavioral outcomes (Przybylski and Weinstein, 2019). 

The methodologies I included are experimental gameplay, surveys, and interviews, which offer immediate insights into the effects of VVGs, showcasing real-time behavioral changes. This controlled environment enables the manipulation of variables, providing clearer casual relationships than longitudinal studies might reveal. Additionally, combining quantitative and qualitative data enhances understanding, and allows for faster analysis and adaptation to new trends. Overall, this approach yielded more significant and timely findings than longitudinal studies.  Assigned Games: 

● PUBG- PUBG was used in a previous study by Hassan et al. (2023). The research conducted a recruitment process that involved identifying potential participants who were active players in PUBG on mobile devices. To identify if the participants were experienced in PUBG they were asked “Do you play the PUBG game on your cell phone?” Those that answered “Yes” were chosen for the study. Additionally, the study was effective in terms of the game. Therefore, I used a method similar to the study. 

● Chess- The game of chess was in a previous study by Nanu et al. (2023) in the Doctoral School of Social and Humanities Sciences, conducted the perspective of parents with questionnaires which resulted in an effective result, I conducted a similar game that was effective in previous studies for better results. 

● Word Search: Word search was used in previous research by Fitria (2023) at the Department of Institute Technology. The study done by her was effective which proved Word Search helped improve vocabulary words for school students. Therefore, I used Word Search as one of the NVVGs for effective results. 

Result 

Participants: 

A Google form survey was conveyed via social media. The form visualized the need for female adolescents for gameplay sessions regarding NVVGs and VVGs. Female adolescents

who decided to participate completed the questionnaire regarding their age, with a parental consent form for those under 18, their name, and their selection of games regarding the gameplay sessions. A total of 15 female adolescents ages 14-19 participated in the consent form questionnaire along with their designated game of their choice to participate in the gameplay. 4 out of 15 participated in the gameplay session. 2 of the participants are 16 years old (50%), 1 of the participants is 17 years old (25%), and 1 of the other participant is 18 years old (25%). Participant 1 selected Word Search (NVVG), participant 2 selected Word Search (NVVG), participant 3 selected PUBG (VVG), and participant 4 selected PUBG ( VVG) for the gameplay session. 

Pre-Game Survey: 

Quantitative data and Qualitative: 

Figure 1: Demographics 

Participants ages 16 (50%), 17 (25%), and 18 (25%) participated in the gameplay session. While participants were mostly from the USA, one of the participants was from the USA in Mauritius. Figure 2

The graph exhibits a questionnaire regarding their understanding of the thoughts and feelings of others. A scale of 1 to 5 was used. 1 demonstrates “never” and 5 demonstrates “most of the time.” The questionnaire describes the empathy thoughts of the participants for other individuals in their lives, which corresponds with the empathy levels of the female participants. Participants 2 and 4 (50%) respond with a 4 while participants 1 and 3 (50%) respond with a 5. None of the respondents selected 1, 2, or 3 therefore it was 0%. This demonstrates all the participants are strong towards assisting others.  Figure 3: How often do you find it easy to identify what someone else is feeling?

The questionnaire demonstrates if it's serene to recognize how another individual is feeling. This data showcases the empathy levels of their understanding towards others. Scale 1 exhibits “never” while 5 demonstrates “most of the time.” Participants 1 and 3 responded with a 4 (50%). Participant 2 responded with a 5 (25%) and Participant 4 responded with a 3 (25%), which is neutral. None of the participants selected 1 and 2 (0%). This questionnaire was examined for measuring empathy.  Figure 4

The questionnaire demonstrated the awareness of their own emotions. The scale of 1 

exhibits “none” while 5 exhibits “a lot.” Participants 1 and 4 (50%) selected 4, participant 2 (25%) selected 3, and participant 3 (25%) selected 5. These states are mostly aware of their own emotions. This questionnaire was implemented to evaluate emotional intelligence. It exhibits self-awareness in female adolescents. By reflecting on this relationship, I can gain insights into how gaming experiences shape empathy.  Figure 5: Do you feel the need to help others?

The graph demonstrates if the participants will assist others if they are on the verge of assistance. In the scale of the graph, 1 demonstrates “not at all” while 5 demonstrates “all the time.” Participants 2 and 4 choose 3 (50%) while Participants 1 and 3 selected 5 (50%). The questionnaire was implemented to analyze participants' necessity for assisting others and can 

reveal potential differences in emotional engagement and responsiveness shaped by the genres of video games played.  Figure 6: List three of your favorite video games (quantitative data).

This questionnaire was implemented to provide insights into the participant’s gaming preferences. By identifying specific games, I can analyze the content and themes of those games such as participant 1, 2, and 3’s favorite game selections are mostly non-violent while one of the game selections is mildly violent or violent. While Participant 4’s selection of games is mostly violent. This data highlights a mix of preferences among the participants, with some tending towards violent games like God of War and Pubg, while others prefer non-violent options. Analyzing these preferences can provide insights into how exposure to violent vs nonviolent may impact their empathy levels and emotional responsiveness.  Figure 7:

In analyzing the violence level of the favorite games played by the participants. A scale of 1 demonstrates “non-violent” and 7 demonstrates “violent.” Participant 1 (25%) selected 4 and implemented neutral, Participant 2 (25%) selected 2, and Participants 3 and 4 (50%) selected 7. The varied responses, with 2 of the participants choosing a high violent level and others lower levels, showcase the diversity in gaming experiences among adolescents. 

Gameplay Session:

Quantitative data: 

Figure 8: Participant 1 

During the gameplay, I was observing the participants. I noticed a lack of reaction; they were mostly silent while searching for words and did not express any emotion related to the gameplay.  Figure 9: Participant 2

This participant exhibited minimal reactions while playing, much like participant 1. Consequently, it can be concluded that this individual did not experience any emotions, such as frustration or anger, during the gameplay. Figure 10: Participant 3

While Participant 1 and 2 remained completely unresponsive while engaged in the 

gameplay, showing no signs of emotional involvement. In contrast, this participant consistently expressed frustration and anger, particularly during moments of eliminating an enemy or facing defeat, emphasizing the potential impact of such games on one’s emotional state and behavior. Figure 11: Participant 4

Unlike participant 3, who was able to communicate verbally during gameplay, this participant had their microphone off due to background noises. This limited their ability to express emotions on call effectively. As a result, their emotional responses may not be as visible making it difficult to measure their feelings in the moment. Therefore, the results will depend on the post-game survey. Post-Game Survey: 

Quantitative Data: 

Figure 12 

The data reflects the emotions of the participants after gameplay. Participants 1 and 2, who engaged in NVVGs, expressed different feelings: one felt indifferent or neutral, while the other felt energized and excited. In contrast, participants 3 and 4, who played VVG, both reported feeling energized and excited. However, the chart showcases 75% (n=3) selected energized and excited while 25% (n=1) selected indifferent or neutral. This could imply that exposure to VVG may influence emotional engagement differently than non-violent games, potentially impacting empathy levels among female players. Figure 13: Did the game make you feel more connected or distant from the characters or people in the game?

The game impacts if they feel more connected or distant towards the characters or 

individuals in the game. Participants rated their feelings on a scale from 1(much more connected) to 5 (much more distant). Among 4 participants, those who played NVVGs reported stronger connections, with Participant 1 rating a 2 (25%) and Participant 2 rated 1 (25%). In contrast, the two participants who participated in VVGs rated their experience as 3, indicating a neutral connection. This suggests that NVVGs may enhance feelings of empathy and emotional engagement compared to violent games. 

Figure 14

In assessing the emotional responses of the participants after gameplay, the questionnaire was implemented. Using a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 meant very strong feelings and 5 meant no feelings at all, Participants 1 and 2 (50%) selected 1, indicating a strong emotional connection to the characters. Participant 3 (25%), who played a VVG, rated their feelings as a 2, showing a moderate emotional response, while Participant 4 (25%) rated theirs as a 4, suggesting a considerable emotional distance from the characters. This questionnaire was crucial for assessing emotional connection, as it directly addresses the player’s ability to empathize with the character’s experiences. 

Figure 15: After playing the game, how likely are you to help someone in need or show care?

The questionnaire was implemented about the likeness of assisting someone in need or sharing care. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 exhibits “very unlikely” and 5 demonstrates “very likely.” Participant 1 selected a score of 5 and Participant 2 selected 4, showing a strong inclination to help after consuming NVVGs. In contrast, participants 3 and 4, who played the violent game, also selected high scores of 5 and 4. The data presents a 50% (n=2) for a scale of 5 and 50% (n=2) for a scale of 4. This questionnaire evaluates the potential influence of gameplay on prosocial behaviors, highlighting the implications of gaming experiences on real-life interactions.  Figure 16 

While exploring the participants’ feelings after gameplay regarding whether the game created a visual about the emotions or struggles of another individual in real life. A scale from 1 to 5, was selected where 1 indicated “not at all” and 5 indicated “a lot,” Participant 1 rated their experience a 3, while Participant 2 rated it a 2. In contrast, Participants 3 and 4, rated their experience as a 5 and a 2. These results suggest that non-violent games created a moderate level of emotional reflection in Participant 1, while Participant 2 felt less impacted. Conversely, Participant 3’s high score indicates a strong connection to the emotional themes of the games, while Participant 4’s aligns more closely with Participant 2’s. Overall these findings may indicate that NVVGs can evoke varying levels of empathy and emotional engagement, while violent games might extract a stronger emotional response in some players.  Figure 17: While playing, how often did you feel frustrated or upset by what happened in the game?

In examining the emotional responses of participants after gameplay, the following 

questionnaire was assigned regarding their emotions of frustration or distress. A scale of 1 to 5 was implemented, where 1 indicated “never” and 5 represented “very often,” the results showed that Participant 1, selected 1 indicating no frustration, while Participant 2, selected 3, suggesting moderate frustration. In contrast, Participants 3 and 4, reported higher levels of frustration, with Participant 3 selecting 3 and Participant 4 selecting 5. Asking about feelings of frustration or upset during gameplay provided insight into emotional responses to conflict.  Figure 18

In analyzing the participants’ feelings after gameplay regarding their emotions of calmness or relaxation while consuming the game. A scale ranging from 1 (very often) to 5 (never) was used. Participant 1 selected 1, indicating a high level of calmness, while Participant 2 chose 5, suggesting they felt no calmness at all. In contrast, participant 3 selected 1 indicating they felt very calm, while Participant 4 selected 3, suggesting a moderate level of calmness. The question regarding feelings of calm or relaxation sought to understand the overall emotional state during gameplay, revealing how different game types might impact stress levels. Figure 19: After playing the game, how easily could you relate to people in real life or understand their emotions?

In examining the feelings of participants regarding their ability to relate to individuals in real life or understand their emotions, the results revealed notable differences. A scale of 1 to 5 was implemented, with 1 being “very difficult” and 5 “very easy.” Participants 1 and 2 both selected a score of 3, while participants 3 and 4 chose 5 and 4. The responses imply the emotional engagement experienced by the participants in violent games may enhance their empathy or understanding of real-life emotional context. Figure 20 

This questionnaire demonstrated the emotions about the violent or aggressive actions in the game. A scale of 1 to 5 was conducted, where 1 being “very uncomfortable” and 5 “enjoyed them.” This questionnaire was crucial as it aimed to gauge the participants’ emotional reactions to the violence in gaming and understand if the exposure impacted their empathy. Participants 1 and 2 selected a score of 5, indicating enjoying the gameplay, while participants 3 and 4 chose 4, suggesting slight discomfort. This questionnaire was important to assess participants’ perceptions of violence and its potential desensitizing effects. Discussion of results 

The results of my study provide insights into the impact of VVGs on empathy levels and emotional responsiveness among female adolescents. While the sample size was limited to four participants (Figure 1), the findings align with existing literature that suggests exposure to VVGs can influence emotional engagement and empathy. 

Particularly, the results suggest that the participants who engaged with NVVGs reported stronger feelings of connection to characters and a greater inclination to help others compared to those who played VVGs, as shown in Figure 13. This is consistent with the findings of Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023), discussion regarding persistent exposure to VVGs can lead to desensitization toward others’ pain and a reduction in empathy while adolescents are in their developmental stage. Miedzobrodzka et al. (2023) research emphasized the neuropsychological consequences of VVG exposure during a critical developmental stage, reinforcing the concept that enhancing aggression and reducing emotional responsiveness are significant risks associated with such games. 

In my study, participants who played VVGs exhibited varied emotional responses, with two participants expressing frustration and anger during gameplay, as shown in Figure 17. This aligns with the General Aggression Model proposed by Shao and Wang (2019), which predicate that VVGs serve as a predecessor to aggressive behavior through mechanisms such as social learning and desensitization. Conversely, the NVVGs players demonstrated a more consistent emotional engagement (Figure 17), suggesting these games may foster greater empathy and emotional awareness, supporting the findings of Khalil et al. (2019) regarding the positive effects of non-violent gaming on emotional responsiveness. 

The results also highlight that both types of games did not appear to restrict participants’ willingness to assist others, suggesting that even in the context of VVGs, players can maintain some level of prosocial behavior. Overall, while the limited sample size restricts the concept of the findings, the results contribute to a subtle understanding of VVGs' impact on empathy and emotional responsiveness in female adolescents. 

Limitations

In my study, several limitations need to be acknowledged. First and foremost, the small sample size of only four participants significantly restricts the concepts of my findings. With such a limited number of subjects, it’s challenging to address broad conclusions about the effects of VVGs and NVVGs on empathy and emotional responsiveness among female adolescents. Additionally, the demographic similarity of the participants, primarily representing a single socio-economic and cultural background, further limits the applicability of the results to a more diverse population. This lack of diversity suggests that my study may not adequately address the varied experiences and responses of female adolescents from different backgrounds.  

Moreover, the reliance on self-reported questionnaires introduces potential biases. Furthermore, the focus on PUBG as the sole VVG in this study limited the broad implications of participant experiences and perspectives. This was due to not having much experience with other VVGs, potentially distorting the results, while the inherent potential for human error introduced additional variability that may affect the validity of the findings. 

Additionally, the presence of an observer during gameplay could have influenced participants' emotional reactions, as they may have adjusted their behavior knowing they were being recorded. Lastly, the qualitative self-report used in this study may not provide a fully reliable measure of emotional impact, suggesting that future research should incorporate more objective assessment methods. 

Future research 

For future research, I believe it is crucial to expand on these findings by utilizing larger and more diverse samples to enhance the concept of results. Longitudinal studies that assess the long-term effects of video game exposure on empathy and emotional responsiveness would provide deeper insights into the lasting impacts of gaming. Researchers should also consider a broader range of game genres and themes to understand how different gaming experiences influence emotional engagement. Incorporating physiological measures alongside self-reported data could yield a more objective assessment of emotional states during gameplay.  Furthermore, exploring the positive effects of gaming, such as cognitive development, problem-solving skills, and teamwork, would contribute to a more balanced view of the role of video games in adolescent development. Gender-specific gaming could illuminate differences in emotional engagement and responses to gaming, allowing for a more delicate understanding of how male and female adolescents interact with video game content.  Finally, behavioral observations during gameplay could enhance understanding of participants’ emotional reactions in real-time, providing additional context to the self-reported data. By pursuing these approaches, future researchers can significantly advance our understanding of the complex interactions between video game content and adolescent emotional development, ultimately contributing to more informed discussions around gaming and youth. 

Conclusion and Implications 

In conclusion, my research contributes to the ongoing discussion on the psychological effects of video games, particularly violent ones, on empathy and emotional responsiveness in female adolescents. My findings suggest that while VVGs may lead to increased frustration and varied emotional responses, NVVGs appear to stimulate greater emotional connections and empathy. 

Moreover, my analysis highlights that the impact of video games extends beyond immediate emotional reactions; it also influences long-term behavioral patterns and attitudes (Miedzobrodzka et al. 2023) For instance, players who engage with non-violent games often report enhanced social skills and a greater capacity for understanding diverse perspectives, which can be crucial in today’s interconnected world (Emihovich et al. 2020). These aspects of gaming can cultivate a sense of community and collaboration, qualities that are increasingly valuable in various career paths. 

However, both types of games did not universally inhibit prosocial behavior, indicating that the effects of gaming are not straightforward. Some players of violent games still exhibit empathy and engage in positive social interactions, suggesting that individual differences, such as personality traits and existing social environments, play a significant role in mediating these effects (López et al. 2020). This complexity underscores the importance of not categorically labeling video games as harmful or beneficial, but rather examining the variation of each player’s experience. 

These findings have significant implications for parents, educators, and policymakers as they navigate the complexities of video game content and its impact on youth development. Caregivers need to be involved in the gaming choices of adolescents, encouraging discussions about the narratives and themes present in the games they play. Understanding these dynamics can help inform guidelines for healthier gaming habits and promote the selection of games that stimulate positive emotional outcomes. By fostering an environment where thoughtful media consumption is emphasized, we can support young individuals' emotional and social development in a rapidly evolving digital landscape. References 

Abbasi, A. Z., Rehman, U., Hussain, K., Ting, D., Hlavacs, H., & Qummar, H. (2022). “The Effect of Three Violent Video Game Engagement States on Aggressive Behavior: A Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling Approach.” Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.918968 

Anderson, C. A., Gentile, D. A., & Buckley, K. E. (2007). “Violent video Games: background and overview.” In Oxford University Press eBooks (pp. 3–11). 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/300872804_Violent_Video_Games_Backgroun d_and_Overview 

Cosquer, M., Finck, C., Jousselme, C., & Lefebvre, A. (2024). “Violent video gaming among French adolescents: Impact on mental health by gender.” Science Direct. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.encep.2024.02.001 

Daneels, R., Malliet, S., Koeman, J., & Ribbens, W. (2018). “The enjoyment of shooting games: Exploring the role of perceived realism.” Computers in Human Behavior, 86, 330–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.053 

Emihovich, B., Roque, N., & Mason, J. (2020). “Can Video Gameplay Improve Undergraduates' Problem-Solving Skills?.” International Journal of Game-based Learning, 10(2), 21–38. Can Video Gameplay Improve Undergraduates’ Problem-Solving Skills? - PMC (nih.gov) 

Fitria, T. N., (2023). “The Effectiveness of Word Search Puzzles Game in Improving Student’s Vocabulary.” Pioneer: Journal of English Department, 15(1), 50–50. 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372572448

Gabbiadini, A., Riva, P., Andrighetto, L., Volpato, C., & Bushman, B. J. (2022). “Preliminary evidence of the effectiveness of a brief self‐control intervention on reducing the short‐term harmful consequences of violent video games on adolescents.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 52(4), 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12854 

Gao, X., Pan, W., Li, C., Weng, L., Yao, M., & Chen, A. (2017). “Long-Time Exposure to Violent Video Games Does Not Show Desensitization on Empathy for Pain: An fMRI Study.” Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00650 

Goldbeck, L., & Pew, A. (2018, March 27). “Violent Video Games and Aggression.” National Center for Health Research. 

https://www.center4research.org/violent-video-games-can-increase-aggression/ Hassan,

A., Shahzad, M., Muhammad Daniyal, Hafez, W., Syed Fahad Javaid, & Moien AB Khan. (2023). “Relationship between gaming disorder across various dimensions among PUBG players: a machine learning-based cross-sectional study.” Frontiers in Psychiatry, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1290206 

Khalil, S., Sultana, F. ., Muzammil, K., Alim, F. ., Nasir, N. ., Hassan, A. ul ., & Mahmood, S. E. . (2019). “Impact of Playing Violent Video Games Among School Going Children.” Indian Journal of Community Health, 31(3), 331–337. 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337680188_Impact_of_Playing_Violent_Video GamesAmong_School_Going_Children 

Lengersdorff, L. L., Wagner, I. C., Mittmann, G., Sastre-Yagüe, D., Lüttig, A., Olsson, A., Petrovic, P., & Lamm, C. (2023). “Neuroimaging and behavioral evidence that violent video games exert no negative effect on human empathy for pain and emotional reactivity to violence.” eLife, 12, e84951. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.84951

López-Fernández, F. J., Mezquita, L., Etkin, P., Griffiths, M. D., Ortet, G., & Ibáñez, M. I. (2020). “The Role of Violent Video Game Exposure, Personality, and Deviant Peers in Aggressive Behaviors Among Adolescents: A Two-Wave Longitudinal Study.” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 24(1). 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344862696 

Miedzobrodzka, E., van Hooff, J. C., Krabbendam, L., & Konijn, E. A. (2023). “Desensitized gamers? Violent video game exposure and empathy for pain in adolescents - an ERP study.” Social Neuroscience, 18(6), 365–381. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2023.2284999 

Nanu, C. C., Coman, C., Maria Cristina Bularca, Luiza Mesesan-Schmitz, Mihaela Gotea, Ioana Atudorei, Ioan Turcu, & Ion Negrila. (2023). “The Role of Chess in the Development of Children-Parents’ Perspectives.” Frontiers in Psychology, 14. 

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1210917 

Pellegrini, Sean. (2019). “And How Does That Make You Feel? A Psychological Approach to a Classic Game Studies Debate -Violent Video Games and Aggression.” Press Start, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 69–81, www.researchgate.net/publication/339726523. 

Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2019). “Violent Video Game Engagement is not Associated with Adolescents’ Aggressive Behaviour: Evidence from a Registered Report.” Royal Society Open Science, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.171474 

Shao, R., & Wang, Y. (2019). “The relation of violent video games to adolescent aggression: An examination of moderated mediation effect.” Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00384

Wei, M., Liu, Y., & Chen, S. (2022). “Violent Video Game Exposure and Problem Behaviors among Children and Adolescents: The Mediating Role of Deviant Peer Affiliation for Gender and Grade Differences.” International journal of environmental research and public health, 19(22), 15400. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192215400