I am a veteran from the VG industry having worked in it for over two decades, and having played videogames for over 35 years. I am also the father of 3 grown children now who were exposed to a lot of videogames growing up. I know a little bit about the industry; I'm not Richard Garriott, nor Shiheru Miyamoto, nor Will Wright - but I've seen some stuff. I enjoy games and game design immensely and I have often been personally offended and defensive when Senators or the Media unfairly make blatant assertions about the woes of society being placed squarely on the VG industry. It's dumb. The Romans never had videogames. So what was their problem? Probably TV.

This book does an extraordinary job disecting with a critical eye the inner-workings of children, families, and the relationship videogames have in a family dynamic. How videogames might influence social structure or the underpinnings which make our children who they are; but most importantly, and this is key, it does so objectively. (The authors talk about that many of the staff involved with performing the study went into the study with differing perspectives and points-of-view; so all sides were represented)

Sometimes the book is rather dry with lots of statistics being thrown your way, but it's an easy read and not too difficult to get the general message. I like the book very much and recommend it to all my colleagues in the industry - because I think it provides some insight into the industry that until now was really being held victim to biased politicians looking for a spotlight. Or whackjobs appearing on night talk shows doing the same. About 99% of the time most of the idiots don't even play the game they're crucifying; a great example is Lieberman attacking Digital Pictures' "Night Trap" because young women are tortured and murdered by the player. In the game, actually the young women are being rescued by the player not killed - but whatever. We believe what we want to believe; to make whatever points or score whatever minutes of fame we desire. (The ESRB was a direct result of Mortal Kombat and Night Trap; the ESRB is a good thing (perhaps not perfectly executed - but can provide a service to parents) but also the people involved with coming up with the ratings - lets just say their "practices" could benefit from some redesign.)

This book simply provides unbiased analysis - or as close as you can come. I suggest reading it and deciding for yourself. Parents should read it before they make restrictions on how their child spends their time; why? The book points out why. You'll be surprised by their findings. I'm a parent, and the findings were very interesting to me. I don't think society's woes are because of Grand Theft Auto or other games like it. Parents should be parents, children know games are games, and some content is purely not intended for young children. Simply fact. The world is full of situations that we must monitor what the kids see - games are no different. But we often don't give the kids enough credit - as the book points out. And the politicians really should spend their time on bigger problems.

Violent, sexually explicit video games are corrupting today's youth! Our children are becoming desensitized, isolated, warmongering zombies and we need look no further than the game box for inciting influences behind such incidents as Columbine, Paducah, and Virginia Tech. Today's children are more aggressive, sexually active at younger ages, and even more foul-mouthed than ever before thanks to the rampant societal disintegration promoted in games like Grand Theft Auto, Vice City, and S.W.A.T.

Well...not exactly.

According to GRAND THEFT CHILDHOOD co-authors and social scientists, Lawrence Kutner and Cheryl K. Olson, there aren't enough up-to-date, clearly defined studies to make any determinations about the effects of graphic video games on children's behavior. Most data cited by public officials, watchdog organizations, and the media is at best inaccurate supposition which fans the flame of societal panic and ultimately diverts attention from the real issues.

Kutner and Olson give a thorough context to their study, laying out the details, methods of investigation, inherent shortcomings, and need for further research, all in an informative, straightforward manner. The information can be a little dense to slog through at times, with the authors packing quite a bit of information into one book. (Everything from a brief history regarding previous research studies -- or, rather, lack thereof; the attributes and flaws of the game industry's current rating system; to an in-depth recounting of their own study's results).

That being said, I am the first person to jump ship when it comes to dry recitations of scientific data, but not once did I consider abandoning GRAND THEFT CHILDHOOD. I found it an invaluable, thought-provoking treasure trove of information which any concerned parent or gaming teen would do well to read.

Reviewed by: Cat

As I scrolled the other reviews on this book, I had to check periodically to make sure the reviewers read the same book I read.

While the book thoroughly trounces the idea that political, and more importantly parental decisions should be made based on any existing research, it does not seem to give a pass to anyone (including the authors themselves.)

I did not read anything that offers a vindication of any sort to the 'anti-Thompsons' who believe that kids must play games in order to be better than their non-gaming classmates.

What I've taken from the book is that until much MUCH more research is conducted, the only research that I can trust is sitting with my own children, watching them play and discussing their reactions.

I guess my primary disconnect with most of the other reviews is the opinion that the authors 'really socked it to the politicos' and are giving the gaming industry some kind of free pass to make and market anything they desire to children.

That's not what I read.

I work in video games. There are a lot of books that purport to address the issue of whether violent video games are harmful, benign, neither, or all of the above. Grand Theft Childhood actually delivers. It contains summaries of research conducted by the authors as well as (very often) the data they compiled so you can satisfy yourself. Their positions are nuanced and a bit surprising - although they note that kids are able to distinguish between violent games and real life and that they're not induced to be violent because of them, they also note that the amount of cursing in violent games often makes kids uncomfortable because they know those are "bad words".

If you're interested in the space, this is an interesting read. If you work in the space, you should own this book.

Would you too like to turn some heads and sell a lot of books in the process? Well then, all you have to do is write about something that everyone knows but make the opposite conclusions so your book can serve as a force against those who have protested ill effects. There are millions of teens are happy to see a book like this published and thousands employed in the gaming industry who, you can bet will flood the market with this book, hoping to set parents at ease regarding the damaging effects of video games.

No, video games don't led to increased incidence of social dysfunction, violent behavior, and hinder normal childhood development. Just like having firearms in the home don't lead to increased homicides, both accidental and intentional. In fact, it's a great thing to play video games because it increases hand-eye coordination! Sorry, but hand-eye coordination is no longer a skill needed in America since all the factories are in Asia.

Kids don't just play video games for 10 minutes a day. They play them for hours, often leading to sleep deprivation and other forms of physiological neglect. Combined with other forms of docile activity such as Internet chatting, texting, and other crap that consumes children today, we are seeing the most obese teens in the history of earth. In fact, due to childhood and teenage obesity trends, this young generation currently risks a lower life span than its parents - the first time this has happened in the modern era. Wake Up People!

Playing video games is a form of mental programming and even behavioral conditioning. This is a fact. I would like to know how much money these bozos have received from the gaming industry (including Microsoft, Sony, software companies etc.) to conduct research. The irresponsible and blatant wrong assertions in this book should serve as sufficient cause to strip these clowns of their licenses.

The authors confirm what most people with common sense already know - psychologists are morons who are so unintelligent that the had to learn about human behavior from books written by people who have had little interaction with society, rather than learn it through life experiences as a perceptive intellect - the best way to learn about human behavior.

Drs. Olsen and Kutner tackle a controversial subject in a clear and thoughtful manner. In Grand Theft Childhood, they demystify the academic research that serves as the foundation for their book, making it readily accessible to parents who want -- and need -- the information. They do so while shattering myths about video game effects and providing thoughtful advice for concerned parents.

Academic research and its requisite statistics can appear daunting, but Olsen and Kutner guide the uninitiated through this maze. Chapter 3, "Science, Nonsense and Common Sense" could serve as a primer for an introductory research methods course (I may use it myself!).

If you're expecting a clear-cut condemnation of video games, you won't find it here. Nor will you find an unfettered endorsement. (So it's likely that neither critics nor supporters will be satisfied with this book.) What you will find: interesting and easily readable background information, some surprises, acknowledgment of the difficulties in drawing any blanket conclusions -- and of the remaining knowledge gaps, and well-reasoned suggestions for what to worry about (and what not to).

As a media researcher and parent of a teen-aged gamer, I heartily recommend this book.

This book does a great disservice to families and anyone trying to make sense of the effects of violent video games. Having conducted a survey and focus groups, asking kids what they think of the effects of violent video games on themselves, the authors dismiss a wealth of scientifically valid, peer-reviewed journal articles that have shown that violent video games contribute to users' becoming more hostile, more aggressive, and, yes, at times, more violent. The argument that there's hardly any research on violent video games is false, as is the suggestion that the research is inconclusive. The book smells a lot like Jonathan Freedman's book on media violence. Freedman, a psychologist who never conducted his own research on media violence, wrote a book in which he systematically tore apart every study that had been conducted to date, without regard to the validity of the studies. Freedman gratefully acknowledged funding from the Motion Picture Association of America for his book. It's hard to figure out why someone like Kutner, who has apparently dedicated his career to helping families, would confuse his audience by throwing out valid findings, and calling the research "irrelevant" and "muddleheaded." He is simply wrong.

As a video game violence researcher myself, I have grown accostomed to considerable hysteria surrounding video games (as I write this GTA IV is about to come out, to much fanfare). Unfortunately, much of the hysteria and bad information comes from psychology as a discipline where poor research methods have been "given a pass" in support of outdated dogma and social engineering. Thus it is refreshing to see a book such as Grand Theft Childhood, which deftly cuts through the politics and dogma, discusses the research in a way parents can understand, and offers concrete directions for the future.

Drs. Kutner and Olson do an excellent job of discussing the history of moral panics which consistently surround new media and how the recent controversy over video games fits into this historical context. Each new media, from novels, to movies, to comic books, to television, to jazz, rock and roll and rap, to Dungeons and Dragons and Harry Potter faces public hysteria, usually from "elders" unfamiliar with the new media. We look back on these past panics as just that...panics...yet somehow we never seem to learn the lesson. None of these media forms touched off a wave of violence...nor has video games. Violent crimes in the US, including among youth, have dropped to 1960s levels, even as violent video games become overwhelmingly popular. Are we worried about nothing?

Drs. Kutner and Olson do an excellent job discussing the research, pointing out the significant methodological flaws, related to poor definitions of "aggression" and "violence", to the use of invalid measures of aggression, to some scholars who "cherry pick" data to support their views. This section of the book is a must-read for anyone who hears "a study found that video games cause aggression" and actually think the study had anything to do with hitting, kicking, violentce, etc. Most don't.

The authors present their own research, funded through the DOJ, and largely correlational in nature. It's a nice although (as the authors admit themselves) imperfect study (I would have liked to see more measurement of family environment...in my own work controlling family violence typically negates any relationship between violent games and violent outcomes). Yet they find a complex relationship between game playing (they focus on M-rated games) and both positive and negative outcomes. Bottom line seems to be that most kids who play even M-rated games come out perfectly fine and may even see considerable benefits, whereas some kids who already have problems with violence may be best kept away from M-rated games. Their results generally question the conclusion that violent video games are setting off a wave of serious youth violence. Some kids even report using games to relax and vent aggression. This finding is likely to be controversial. Probably anti-game advocates will counter that kids don't necessarily have insight...yet as this argument is based on findings using invalid aggression measures it's simply hard to know whose right...the kids talking about themselves...or anti-game researchers who persist in using invalid measures of aggression.

The book is very pleasant to read and very informative. It's also very balanced, neither taking the side of the video game industry (which is itself at fault for some of the hysteria), nor indulging in anti-game hysterics. In short this is probably the most intelligent and most balanced book I've seen written on violent video games to date and I give it my highest recommendation.

Christopher J. Ferguson, Ph.D.
Texas A&M International University

I should first note that I am a researcher who has studied the effects of violent video games in the past. My research, however, focused on mitigating factors contained in violent video games (e.g. the presence of prosocial goals).

When I first opened this book, I was very impressed by the approach they took to scrutinizing the recent media frenzy concerning the link between violent video games and extremely violent behavior (e.g. Columbine). Although the research (including the research in the book) suggests that violent games are associated with aggression, the effects are relatively small. As such, this book may do well to allay concerns that parents have generated as the result of media hype. I agree with the authors that it is not wise to scapegoat video games for everything and that other risk factors should be considered. Unfortunately, I found little of value after this initial chapter.

Although it is good for parents to attend to other high risk factors, it is my opinion that the authors play down the effects of violent media too much. Even their own research suggests that children who play violent games are 1) more likely to engage in aggressive conflicts, 2) engage in delinquent behavior (e.g. property damage) for fun, and 3) receive poor grades on a report card. Seemingly games are associated with problematic behaviors. And even if the relationship is the reverse, such that children who are more likely to have these problems will turn to violent video games, then parents of children who play these games should remain concerned - as it is suggestive that their child may already be engaging in problematic and delinquent behavior.

[Incidentally, the other, more important risk factors that they point out for aggression are things such growing up in a violent and abusive environment and the presence of guns in the home. My guess is that the parents that pick up this book are at least very unlikely to be abusive to their children (given that they seem concerned enough about their child's welfare to buy a book about things that could harm their child). As such, for many of the readers of this book, violent video games may actually be one of the biggest concerns that they should have.]

I also found that the approach to criticizing previous research was not very even handed. There was a lot of picking and choosing of individual studies to make specific points about the failure of previous research. Any study, when considered individually, will have flaws. But other studies that have been conducted more recently have done well to rule out several of the flaws identified by the authors. These studies were not mentioned. Even the study reported in this book had a great deal of flaws (many of which were also never mentioned). For example, they relied entirely on self-report. People are often reluctant to respond truthfully to self-report questions, especially when the questions pertain to socially undesirable behavior such as aggression. This flaw is most likely to affect the interviews they held with children. The responses children gave seem incredibly insightful and intelligent. One might wonder, however, whether these children put as much thought into their behavior when they aren't being observed by adults. Heck, if an adult asked me these questions when I was a kid I'd be able to report back all the rules and lessons that my parents tried to teach me. I'd probably tell them whatever I thought they wanted to hear. This did not mean, however, that I actually followed these rules in my parent's absence.

Lastly, the authors suggest that violent video games may even confer some benefits to children who play them. They did find that children who played violent games were less likely to be bullied than those who didn't play violent games. Additionally they suggest that children may play violent games to relieve stress, achieve success at something, and that violent games confer social opportunities for children. Given the questionable nature of the study itself, however, these conclusions are speculative at best. It could be argued that there are a host of other activities that children could engage that confer the same benefits - activities that aren't associated with aggression, delinquent behavior, and school problems.

Overall I thought this book was alright. I think it is important for parents to understand that violent games need not be their only concern. The way the book is written, however, may leave many of the readers completely unconcerned with the way violent media may influence their children. I don't think this was the intention that the authors had, but unfortunately it may come across that way (I've seen some gamer's responses to this book, and unfortunately some seem to have taken it as evidence that they shouldn't be concerned at all about their violent game play). In the end, in my opinion the true values of this book are the first chapter concerning the misguided media frenzy and the suggestions they make to readers in later chapters about how to monitor your child's exposure to violent content.

For a book that claims to be fair and unbiased, I was surprised about the degree of bias in the writing in this book. It is incredibly critical of the research that has already been conducted on the relationship between violent video games and aggression (especially research that confirms the link). But the same level of scrutiny is not applied to their own work. Several major methodological and theoretical problems associated with the methods of the research reported within are either briefly glanced over or left completely unaddressed. This juxtaposition will likely leave a lay reader with the impression that the studies reported in the book are much more methodologically rigorous and sound than previous research (which they are not). Their reliance entirely upon self-report and a correlational design leaves them unable to establish any sense of causality and results in a susceptibility to subject bias in reporting. The design chosen for the studies reported in this book results in data that is easily interpreted in several ways. They chose to interpret it to suggest that games aren't a problem. Which is quite surprising, considering that even their findings lend support to the argument that violent games can cause some behavioral problems.

There is some merit in their findings pertaining to people's perceptions of how games influence their behavior (e.g. allows them to vent stress). Nevertheless, any conclusions drawn from these results are speculative at best (and much of their conclusions stand in direct contrast to other findings in the area of aggression). The reason someone says they do something is often very different than the actual reason that people do things. This is a standard in all psychological processes for all people whether talking about aggression or simple decison-making processes.

I was unimpressed by the poor quality of the writing in the book as well. Thoughts are often left unfinished - leaving the reader to infer the point that the authors are trying to make. Although the casual writing style employed by the authors makes the book more appropriate for a lay audience, it results in a lack of detail where such detail is necessary.

The authors encourage their readers to be skeptical of the research pertaining to video games. Surely, this is warranted. The research is not entirely clear as of yet and the suggestions made by the media are often overblown (of course the suggestions made by the video game industry are often overblown as well). But their approach to analyzing previous research has its own faults. And their interpretation of their and other's data is rather one sided and not well thought out. I suggest that anyone reading this book apply the same degree of skepticism to what the authors write as the authors encourage their readers to apply to other's research and writing.

The research done for this book was obviously well-done and carefully considered. Instead of drawing premature conclusions, the authors really explored true cause-and-effect relationships of video games, social interactions, parenting, and violence.

One of the most amazing parts was the research about kids that did NOT play video games at all. It showed how video games, especially in moderation, can help kids with social interactions and help them try out social and life situations in a non-threatening and low-risk environment. With today's games being simulations as much as they are games, it has really changed the impact that video games can have on people.

The section on parenting and video games was one of the most impressive and thought provoking. When situations are presented that allow a child or teen to teach their parents how to play games with them, it can really improve the child's social skills and relationship with their parents.

If you are looking for a source to back up either your love or hatred of video games, this may not be the right book. But if you're looking for an interesting, thought-provoking, and impartial look at video games and their real effect on children and teens, this is a great book.

I've been a gamer for about 19 of my 23 years of life. As such, I've grown more and more frustrated at the misguided and misleading attempts of religious groups, politicians, and "watchdog" groups that purportedly have the best interests of children at heart. Few people seemed to truly be interested in figuring out the truth behind violent video games and violence in general. Perhaps this is why I'm so shocked that Grand Theft Childhood seems to be the first one to try a really simple idea: why not talk to the gamers themselves? It was refreshing, for a change, to hear the opinions of young people who actually play games.

GTC goes more in-depth than that, though. The first chapter does an excellent job of tackling the myths from both sides of the issue. The book then goes on to make parallels between complaints about violent video games and complaints about violent media in general over the last several hundred years. It explains how little effective research has been done on the correlation, and more importantly, the causality, between violent media and violent behavior.

The book freely admits that its research merely scratches the surface: this should immediately cause anyone to be skeptical of claims of a definitive link or vindication of violent media. Gamers, you will find a lot here that confirms what you already believe. Parents, you will learn more about the world of your children and practical ways you can keep up with it. Skeptics, if this book encourages you to look at the issues more critically, then that's a win.

I can't recommend this book enough to anyone who plays games or is worried about games.