Initially a considerable statement you presented in your article was that ‘GTA 5’ makes teens act more aggressively and be enraged. You would need to back this up by testing all the teens before, not just after playing ‘GTA 5’ as well as for at least three hours otherwise I cannot agree with the statement. Furthermore, you have tested only “130,000 …show more content…
It’s ridiculous, how you did a test, including multiple people (not even all teens) testing them to see the amount of sweets they ate, according to your results people playing GTA 5 ate three times more sweets as the teenagers that play the video game ‘Mini Golf 3D’. How? How did you know what the teens ate before your investigation? You never even mentioned in the article whether they were large eaters or not; or small eaters, or possibly allergic to the sweets you supplied to them. So why should I trust you again. On the other hand, I see possible reasons for why the teens playing GTA 5 ate more sweets. It’s a result of them being more involved into the game, enjoying themselves while subconsciously eating the food; furthermore teens would eat more sweets if they're hungry or not making your investigation invalid. I acknowledge the fact that ‘GTA 5’ possibly results in less self-control as personally when playing the game myself, I know it's caused by addiction to the game. This is fairly common with teens, but also common with every other game violence or not, for example Sims “mini gold 3D”. Consequently, this does affect their social life; school grades, appalling attitude, home chores and more. But your investigation doesn’t represent your statement correctly. Along the same idea you have implied that playing “GTA 5” could lead to more cheating. How can you test this, everyone is different therefore would