Meta-analyses disagree sharply; any link to real-world aggression is small and hotly debated.
What the evidence shows
After high-profile shootings, violent video games are often blamed for real-world aggression. The research community is genuinely split, and the two most cited meta-analyses reach opposite bottom lines.
Anderson et al. (2010) pooled many studies and concluded violent games were associated with small increases in aggressive thoughts and behaviour and decreases in empathy. Ferguson (2015), applying stricter controls for publication bias and better outcome measures, found effects so small as to be practically meaningless for aggression, mental health, or grades. Critics of Anderson cite lab measures of dubious real-world relevance; critics of Ferguson dispute his exclusions. Large registered studies since have mostly found little effect. The honest verdict is contested: if any causal effect on real aggression exists, it is small and unproven — far from the moral-panic version.
Sources
Anderson, C. A., Shibuya, A., Ihori, N., et al. (2010). Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in Eastern and Western countries: A meta-analytic review.
Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 151–173
Reported small but significant associations between violent game play and increased aggression and reduced empathy.
DOI: 10.1037/a0018251 →Ferguson, C. J. (2015). Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children's and adolescents' aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(5), 646–666
With stricter methods, video-game effects on aggression and other outcomes were negligible.
DOI: 10.1177/1745691615592234 →