Abstract
After 60 years of research on media violence and aggression, the scientifically skeptical positions have evolved. This article examines some of the reasons why this issue continues to be a difficult one, and argues that, after examining the preponderance of data, the interesting skeptical questions are: (1) How can we put the pieces of the puzzle back together, given humans’ inherent complexity? (2) How do differing perspectives affect the interpretation of the data? Questions such as these may help to move past the polarizing rhetoric that has characterized much of the recent debate.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
