Our sample includes 166 independent studies involving 124,236 participants, which yielded 321 independent effects. Using the General Aggression Model (Anderson & Bushman, 2002) as a theoretical framework, this meta-analytic review synthesizes the literature on the effects of sexualized media (both violent and nonviolent) on aggression-related thoughts, attitudes, and behaviors. Theoretically, media de-pictions of females as sex objects could lead to negative attitudes and even aggressive behavior toward them in the real world. Women are often depicted as sex objects rather than as human beings in the media (e.g., magazines, television programs, films, and video games). Thus, it seems that identification with video game character may play an important role in video games’ influence. Results showed that greater identification with video game character predicted stronger association between self-concept and masculinity but not with women’s objectification. We measured subsequently implicit association of self with masculinity, women’s objectification (measured with two different measurements in Study1 and 2) and identification with video game character. Participants (n study 1 = 69 (32 men, mean age = 20.83), n study 2 = 119 (61 men, mean age = 20.09)) played either a sexist or non-sexist video game. We examine whether identifying with a masculine character who objectified women can increase implicit association of self with masculinity, which in turn would increase objectification of women. representing women as sexual objects and men as hyper-masculine) on women’s objectification. This study concludes that video games impact on attitudes toward women and this, in part, due to its interactive nature.Īcross two experimental studies, we investigated the short-term effect of video games with sexist content (i.e. Concerning the perpetrator, video game sexualization did not influence responsibility, but partly influenced humanness. The results were partially consistent with these predictions: Playing a video game containing sexualized female characters increased rape victim blame when cognitive load was high, but did not predict degree of humanness accorded to the victim. Further, degree of humanness of the victim and the perpetrator was expected to mediate this relation.
Based on the General Aggression Model (GAM), it was hypothesized that playing the video game with a sexualized content would increase the responsibility assigned to the victim and diminish the responsibility assigned to the perpetrator. After gameplay, participants read a rape date story, and were then asked to judge the victim’s and the perpetrator’s degree of responsibility and humanness. Cognitive load was manipulated by setting the difficulty level of the game to low or high.
Participants ( N = 142) played a video game using sexualized or non-sexualized female characters. This study examined the consequences of sexualized video game content and cognitive load (moderator) on rape victim blame and rape perpetrator blame (used as a proxy of rape myth acceptance), and whether the degree of humanness of the victim and of the perpetrator mediated these effects. Therefore, it largely remains unclear whether sexualized video games can have an impact on attitudes toward women. Studies that have examined this issue are rare and contain a number of limitations. The potential negative impact of sexualized video games on attitudes toward women is an important issue. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the "Content") contained in the publications on our platform.