I've seen this first hand on LOLchartz. Vicious little bunchNintendo fans may look like harmless furry soyboys, but they're actually vicious forum predators and will ban you before you even notice them
Is this you proving the study correct?Look who is talking.
964 people? That’s literally all the sample size they could get out of the millions of people who game? I swear science studies are becoming a joke. This study shows nothing other than what 964 people’s aggressive levels may possibly be and that’s assuming they answered accurately. Trying to categorise those results to show a trend is a laugh.
Surely these psychologists haven't checked neogaf, where Playstation players are the most aggressive when it comes to shitting on everyone outside the cult,and the most aggressive in worshipping a plastic box where some nerdy guy with glasses is their messiah.
You're talking about the fan niche here and ps also has most of the mass market.
OT use an average hiding his own personal behavior.
There are so many variables in this study a sample size of 1000 has an insanely huge potential for results that literally mean nothingHow to choose a sample size (for the statistically challenged) - tools4dev
One of the most common questions I get asked by people doing surveys in international development is “how big should my sample size be?”. While there are many sample size calculators and statistical guides available, those who never did statistics at university (or have forgotten it all) may...www.tools4dev.org
Sample Size: How Many Survey Participants Do I Need?
How to determine the correct sample size for a survey.www.sciencebuddies.org
Sample size: how many participants do I need in my research?
The importance of estimating sample sizes is rarely understood by researchers, when planning a study. This paper aims to highlight the centrality of sample size estimations in health research. Examples that help in understanding the basic concepts involved ...www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
~1000 is plenty and yields a small margin of error. Just because you don't agree with the study, doesn't mean the study has not validity.
That said, the study could be absolute bullshit for all I care, but your assumptions are wrong.
It just doesn't seem like a niche. Seems like there are as many cultists as Xbox players in general. But okay, also a vague comparison when PS4 sold ten times as much.
There are so many variables in this study a sample size of 1000 has an insanely huge potential for results that literally mean nothing
Also I never said I didn’t agree with the results but simply you can’t draw any conclusions from them due to the fact of the variables and the fact a questionnaire was used to determine aggressiveness.
Luckily no one's even seen an arcade in 20 years.Bullshit study. Arcade gamers will beat you up in real life.
PC masterrace has an aggression level beyond comparisonEhh... I guess they didn't research PC gamers much...
What? you can’t compare the validity of a vote and the validity of levels of aggression across multiple different games, this is not the same thing. Variable differences are hugePlease stop, really. A poll size of between 800 and 1200, if properly spread, can predict the results of the US election with a few % points: http://www.ncpp.org/?q=node/6#3
Edit: And before you talk about the variables, any person driving statistical data will agree that a 1000 poll size and a properly directed questionnaire will yield good results. Period. We're not reinventing the wheel here.
Do you know what wouldn't? Conducting this study in the US only, for example (Which is unspecified in the article).
What? you can’t compare the validity of a vote and the validity of levels of aggression across multiple different games, this is not the same thing. Variable differences are huge
edit: also you seem to be missing my point, the results cannot predict the mental state of millions of people reaction to certain video games based of 1000 people answering a questionnaire. Votes are more simple you just say simply who you are planning on voting for but for this study you have to record the mental state of people, results are obviously going to have less reliability.
This must me why they found that Xbox gamers were more aggressive, they have no games, only gamepass... So they are very aggressive!Past studies have shown that there is not necessarily a link between aggression and video game violence.
I noticed that, but I thought that it was confirmation bias and that I just was not seeing it from psx or Nintendo fans.According to the study, Xbox gamers are the most aggressive gamers, outranking PlayStation gamers surveyed in all four of the categories.
How to choose a sample size (for the statistically challenged) - tools4dev
One of the most common questions I get asked by people doing surveys in international development is “how big should my sample size be?”. While there are many sample size calculators and statistical guides available, those who never did statistics at university (or have forgotten it all) may...www.tools4dev.orgSample Size: How Many Survey Participants Do I Need?
How to determine the correct sample size for a survey.www.sciencebuddies.orgSample size: how many participants do I need in my research?
The importance of estimating sample sizes is rarely understood by researchers, when planning a study. This paper aims to highlight the centrality of sample size estimations in health research. Examples that help in understanding the basic concepts involved ...www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
~1000 is plenty and yields a small margin of error. Just because you don't agree with the study, doesn't mean the study has not validity.
Please stop, really. A poll size of between 800 and 1200, if properly spread, can predict the results of the US election with a few % points: http://www.ncpp.org/?q=node/6#3
Edit: And before you talk about the variables, any person driving statistical data will agree that a 1000 poll size and a properly directed questionnaire will yield good results. Period. We're not reinventing the wheel here.
well you seem to know what your talking about more than I do lol so I will leave the debate there! So yes the method I disagree with but the 1000 I will concede you are correct on and I focused too much on it. Just a recommendation though don’t tel people to stop debating as people often learn through this.Just so we are clear, here are a couple of peer reviewed studies using the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire and less than 1000 sample size. These are 29 questions, as it's not the short form version of 12 questions:
And since I'm a nice guy, please find here the actual study data. There's no formal study paper I can find, and the methodology seems shaky at best, but your assumptions are still wildly incorrect.
So you could have legitimate questions on the validity due to location, sample pool, whatever, since they seem to be unknown, but your concern about a 1000 sample pool is unfounded.
It’s good cause we learn, if no one refuted our points we would continue not knowingInteresting. I assume the finding of Xbox players being slightly more aggressive can be attributed to them gravitating to multiplayer online shooters, which are linked to higher levels of aggression.
Appreciate you guys refuting those points. I just shook my head but didn't want to bother. 1000 people is a good sample size, particularly in this area, where sample sizes are often more like 50 or 100. The key issue is not so much sample size but whether the sampling was random and representative. As for margin of error, you can't infer that just from sample size; it's heavily dependent on the statistical attributes of the measurement (i.e., standard error of measurement).
I agree with those who're saying the actual differences are pretty small, even if they're statistically significant. That often happens in research. Statistical significance doesn't equal practical significance. There is some difference, but it's pretty small.
well you seem to know what your talking about more than I do lol so I will leave the debate there! So yes the method I disagree with but the 1000 I will concede you are correct on and I focused too much on it. Just a recommendation though don’t tel people to stop debating as people often learn through this.
Appreciate you guys refuting those points. I just shook my head but didn't want to bother. 1000 people is a good sample size, particularly in this area, where sample sizes are often more like 50 or 100. The key issue is not so much sample size but whether the sampling was random and representative. As for margin of error, you can't infer that just from sample size; it's heavily dependent on the statistical attributes of the measurement (i.e., standard error of measurement).
I agree with those who're saying the actual differences are pretty small, even if they're statistically significant. That often happens in research. Statistical significance doesn't equal practical significance. There is some difference, but it's pretty small.
You take that back dip-shitDoes the study also include how many moms were fucked?
1. Some of my friends think I am a hothead. | |||||
2. If I have to resort to violence to protect my rights, I will. | |||||
3. When people are especially nice to me, I wonder what they want. | |||||
4. I tell my friends openly when I disagree with them. | |||||
5. I have become so mad that I have broken things. | |||||
6. I can’t help getting into arguments when people disagree with me. | |||||
7. I wonder why sometimes I feel so bitter about things. | |||||
8. Once in a while, I can’t control the urge to strike another person. | |||||
9. I am an even-tempered person. | |||||
10. I am suspicious of overly friendly strangers. |