Category: Problems

A video game is an electronic game that involves interaction with a user interface to generate visual feedback on two- or three-dimensional video display devices such as a TV screen, virtual reality headset, or computer monitor. They are impressive feats of art, computer science, programming, music, motion capture, voice acting, and other various disciplines. Video games came into existence during the 1950s when computer scientists developed them as simulations for research purposes and were widely popularized during the 1980s when consoles, arcades, and joysticks were available to the public. Since then, after the advancement of video game development, an interesting controversy sparked into existence regarding the effects of video games containing violent subject matter on its player base mostly concerning young children and teens. This debate took root during the 1970s when video games were criticized by the general public regarding the inclusion of rock and roll alongside the occult, viewed as stigmas back then, believed by parents to negatively influence the highly impressionable minds of youngsters. Recently, the debate has shifted directly towards the violent and crude subject matter present in widely played video games. So, the purpose of this controversy analysis paper is to determine the strength of the correlation between playing violent video games and exhibiting violent behavior by means of conditioning through these video games.

In the light of recently occurring, two mass shootings that took place in August 2019 in El Paso, Texas, Ohio, and Dayton, the question was put forward regarding how video games may shape and impact our society as a whole. In his ‘Manifesto’ the shooter mentioned his adoration and admiration for the widely popular video game, ‘Call of Duty which allows someone to take the role of a military soldier and even terrorists to engage in violent gunplay and claim victory. Due to the mention of this video game, the president of the United States, Donald Trump was able to place blame upon this mode of entertainment regarding the motives of the shooter being inspired by this game. Trump’s remarks in accordance with assigning the blame for mass shootings to video games were widely validated by other lawmakers and politicians. It’s a decision that major media outlets and retailers have also undertaken late; ESPN itself recently opted to delay broadcasting an Esports championship due to the shootings — a decision that seems to suggest that the network believes in a connection between gaming and real-world crime. And Walmart made a controversial decision to temporarily remove all video game displays from its stores, even as it continues to openly sell guns. This leads the discussion toward the claim by a group of people (mainly governments and news media outlets) who blame the “Gruesome and grisly video games” for the “Glorification of violence in our society”, as quoted by American president Donald Trump from the White House after massacres in Ohio, Dayton, Texas and El Paso resulted in a death toll of 31. Even before this major tragedy occurred, this entire controversy has been permeating to several other international governments; Russia banned most video games containing high-impact gory violence such as Call of duty: Modern Warfare, The Dead Rising series, Crackdown, and so on, and Pakistan banning Postal 2 for the glorification of violence against Muslims and Saudi Arabia banning the widely selling, Grand theft Auto games. This is a clear indication that governments and highly influential politicians consider video game subject matter to directly influence the youth that is playing said violent video games and this is to be considered a value claim due to the inclusion of influential ethics by being exposed to the violent subject matter and the socio-ethical implications it would have if violent crimes are committed by those gamers. Although a diverse amount of research has been conducted by several different organizations to test the correlation between the mass consumption of violent video games and the occurrence of a mass shooting or other violent crimes in context to the video game scenes depicted in them, there have yet to be concrete research results obtained which would confirm a positive correlation to this issue and most researchers are of the factual claim which is that extensive research does not provide substantial evidence regarding video games inducing violent behavior in its player base.

Kira Bailey conducted research published in the journal, Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, concerning a sample of high gamers (gamers exposed to high-impact violent video games) and low gamers (gamers not exposed to high-impact violent video games) to be subjected to a test regarding facial expressions and the perception of the sample towards the test questions presented as a picture rating task and the results would be measured out on an emotion scale to assess the violent tendencies of the gamers and if the violent behavior they exhibited was due to them playing those video games or not. The difference in the magnitude of the brain scores for negative and violent pictures was smaller in high gamers than in low gamers, possibly indicative of desensitization to violence in the high gamers. For the pleasantness-rating task, the pattern of brain scores was similar for high and low gamers. In contrast, for the other tasks, the contribution of negative pictures in the low gamers varied with task demands. Therefore, it was concluded after reviewing all other results that, there was no positive correlation between playing video games and exhibiting violent behavior.

Although there have yet to be conclusive test results regarding video games inducing violent behavior which further leads to committing a violent crime, some studies have found a weak positive correlation between playing video games and inducing short-term aggression. In regards to these findings, Dr. Chris Ferguson, a Psychology professor at Stetson University states, “The data on bananas causing suicide is about as conclusive.” In fact, in 2017, the American Psychological Association issued a statement discouraging politicians and journalists from trying to connect video games and mass shootings precisely because they feared that this rhetoric would distract from factors that we know contribute to real-life violence and this may be considered to be a value claim. Max Fisher provides substantial statistics in the Washington Post, 17th December 2012 that Japan has approximately two times the availability of violent video games than the U.S but in Japan, they have 96 times fewer gun homicides occur. Moreover, the U.S. Secret Service and U.S. department of education conducted an investigation in 2004, regarding mass shooters and their link to them playing violent video games and found out that school shooters consume significantly less amount of screen time for violent video games than the average gamer.

The research design which will be used in which the hypothesis to be tested will be, “There is a strong negative correlation between playing violent video games and exhibiting real-life violence”. An instrument that will be used to test this hypothesis will be an online questionnaire consisting of 10 questions of which 5 will be using the dichotomous scale, 4 will use the rating scale and 1 will be an open-ended question. The sample used will be 15 online users identifying as gamers who have subscribed to a gamer subreddit and an experimental group of 15 non-gamers from a general subreddit.

In conclusion, it can be determined that this controversy has been a widely debated one and the research conducted regarding this is also substantial, abundant, and diverse in nature ranging from governmental surveys and investigations to findings of private and independent organizations regarding statistics of the controversy and tests conducted in controlled settings by different institutions monitoring the effects of external media such as video games on overt behavior exhibited by the sample groups. In the light of the research results reviewed, it can be determined that there is a negligible positive correlation between playing video games and committing violent crimes in real life.

Transportation is important in the sense that it allows people to take part in human activities. The classical transportation problem can be described in a special case of linear programming problem and its models are applied to determine an optimal solution of the transportation problem required for deterministic of how many units of commodity to be shipped from each origin to various destinations where the objectives have to optimize (minimize or maximize) cost or time. The basic transportation problem is developed by F.L. Hitchcock in 1941. Transportation problem further developed by T.C. Koopmans in 1949 and G.B. Dantzing in 1951. Single objective i.e minimization of cost or time focused by Hitchcock, Koopmans and Dantzing in their studies. Before the seventieth century study of transportation problem by researchers were focuses upon optimizing the single objective. In the techniques of optimizing single objective transportation problem are not suitable when optimizing two or more than two objectives are given in transportation problem. When there is the situation of two or more than two objectives in transportation problem, then such types of problems are called as multi-objective transportation problem. Multi-objective transportation problem is the special extension of the transportation problem.

Optimization is a kind of the decision making, in which decision has to be taken to optimize one or more objective under some prescribed set of circumstances. These problems may be a single or multi-objective and are to be optimized (maximized or minimized) under a specified set of constraints. The constraints usually are in the form of inequalities or equalities. Such problems, which often arise as a result of mathematical modeling of many real-life situations, are called optimization problems. Multi-objective optimization or multi-objective programming is the process of simultaneously optimizing more than one objective subject to certain constraints. Applications of multi-objective optimization problems were found in the fields: product and process design, finance, aircraft design, the oil and gas industry, automobile design and many more.

Goal Programming Problem Technique

Various techniques have been developed to solve MOTP by various researchers one of these is goal programming problem approach. Goal programming technique is used for solving multi-objective optimization problem that balance exchange as a compromise in conflict objective. In goal programming, there is a need to establish a hierarchy of importance among goals so that the lower order goals are considered only after the higher order goal are satisfied. Goal programming technique helps in complete the satisfactory level of all objectives. Goal programming methods have been frequently used to solve multi-objective transportation problem.

Sang Moon Lee is a pioneer of the solution technique of multi-objective transportation problem which is solved by using goal programming techniques in 1972. Almost all techniques for transportation problem have focused upon the optimization of a single objective condition, namely the minimization of total transportation costs used before seventeen century. They have generally neglected the multiple objectives, i.e various environmental constraints, unique organizational values of the firm, and bureaucratic decision structures involved in the problem. But in reality, these are important factors which greatly control the decision in organization. They studied these entire situations, and then developed new technique to solve MOTP by using goal programming.

A. Baidya et al. are used goal programming to solve an interval valued multi-item solid transportation problem with safety measures. They are introducing a new concept ‘safety factor’ in transportation problem. When items are transported from origins to destinations through different conveyances, there are some risks to transport the items due to bad road or some routes especially in developing countries. Due to this reason total safety factor is important in transportation and depending upon the nature of safety factor. They also formulate five models without and with safety factor, where this factor may be crisp, fuzzy, interval, stochastic in nature and solve all mathematical problems by using LINGO 12.0 Software. Multi item solid transportation problem with safety measure gives an idea about this new factor safety measure to transport commodities from some sources to some destinations by the means of different conveyances. The corresponding multi-objective transportation problem is formulated using ‘mean and width’ technique. Then the problem is converted to a single objective transportation problem taking convex combination of the objectives according to their weights. They are suggested as models can be extended to include the additional amount to be spent to increase the safety measures along different routes keeping extra securities, using very fast vehicle etc.

Wuttinum Nunkaew and Busaba Phruksaphantrat are developed relationship between customer to customer in a conventional transportation problem. Lexicographic goal programming is used to solve the MOTP with a minimization of the total transportation cost and the overall independence value. They also obtain the efficient reasonable solution that satisfied both consideration of depot to customer and customer to customer relationship that means the lowest total transportation cost and nearest locality of customer are determined. Also, each customer can be served by only one depot if the capacity of the depot is sufficient, these advantages are more compatible to the reality than the conventional transportation model.

Waiel F. El-Wahed and Sang M. Lee developed iterative fuzzy goal programming problem (IFGP) to solve MOTP. The approach controls the search direction via updating both upper bounds and aspiration level of each objective function. The solution results provide a preferred compromise solution which is more realistic from the decision maker (DM) view. The approach is a powerful method to determine appropriate aspiration levels of the objective functions. The performance of the suggested approach was evaluated by using a set of metric distance functions with respect to the two previously developed methods. They, also suggested combination of goal programming, fuzzy programming, and interactive programming in one methodology is a powerful tool for solving MOTP and other multi-objective optimization problems.

H. R. Maleki and S. Khodaparasti are developed to solve a special mathematical model of non-linear multi-objective transportation problem by using a fuzzy goal programming approach. In goal programming models, absolute deviations are obtained in the optimal solution. Another advantage of the models based on goal programming is the minimum changes required for sensitively analysis. Fuzzy goal programming is used when a decision maker is unable to specify accurate objective levels and hence changes of acceptable violations may frequently occur. The other methods can be affected by these changes more than goal programming methods.

M. Zangiabadi & H.R. Maleki proposed three special types of membership functions have been used to solve the multi-objective transportation problem. The optimal compromise solution does not change, when compared with the solution obtained by the linear membership function. But they used the exponential membership function, with different values of parameters, and then the optimal compromise solution does not change significantly. They also compare with the solution obtained by the linear membership function. Further, they conclude that for a multi-objective probabilistic transportation problem if the demand parameters are gamma random variables, then the deterministic problem becomes non-linear.

Lohgaonkar M.H. et al. introduced fuzzy goal programming approach to unbalanced transportation problem with additive multiple fuzzy goals, when the goals are considered to be of equal importance. But, in reality, all goals may not be of equal importance. They also discussed two different ways of assigning weights to additional model described in the paper. The direct weights are used in fuzzy goal programming model for unbalanced multi-objective transportation problem.

Surapati Pramanik et al. proposed an alternative solution approach for multi-objective quadratic programming problem (MOQPP). They first transform MOQPP in to equivalent multi-objective linear programming problem by first order Taylor series approximation. Then fuzzy goal programming approach is used to solve the problem by minimizing negative deviational variables. Also, proposed concept to collection problems, decentralized bi-level and multi-level quadratic programming problem.

Genetic Algorithm Approach

Genetic algorithm (GA) is a method for solving both constrained and unconstrained optimization problems based on a natural selection process that mimics biological evolution. The algorithm has repeatedly modified a population of individual solutions. Genetic algorithms belong to the larger class of evolutionary algorithms (EA), which generate solutions to optimization problems using techniques inspired by natural evolution. Genetic algorithm method is another frequently used to solving multi-objective transportation problem.

Mistuo Gen et al. proposed new approach by using spanning tree based genetic algorithm (GA) to solved MOTP. Spanning tree-based encoding was implemented with decoding from which an infeasible chromosome (i.e. Prufer number) and adopted to represent of balanced transportation solution. In case of small-scale problem, there is no great difference on the computing result, this type of problem solved by genetic algorithm approach. Also, when large scale problem, spanning tree-based GA approach can get the Pareto solution with less time than the matrix GA approach and most of the results are not dominated by those obtained in the matrix-based GA approach. Therefore, in the sense of Pareto optimality, this spanning tree-based GA approach is more effective than the matrix-based GA. They also say that spanning tree-based GA approach much more efficient than the matrix-based GA on the transportation problem.

A.A Mousa et al. presented an efficient evolutionary algorithm for solving multi objective transportation problem. Also they proposed some approaches such as, effectively applied to solve the MOTP with no limitation in handling higher dimensional problems, conclude that integration of GA and local search technique has improved the quality of founded solution, where the computational time grows with the number of achieved solution and simulation results verify and advantage of the proposed approach.

Sayed A. Zaki et al. presented improved algorithm for solving MOTP was presented. They Firstly, the algorithm is an iterative multi-objective genetic algorithm with an external population of Pareto optimal solutions that best conform a Pareto front. Secondly the algorithm implements GA to provide the initial set (close to the Pareto set as possible) followed by local search method to improve the quality of the solutions. They also concluded that integration of GA and local search technique has improved the solution’s quality and avoid an awesome number of solutions clustering algorithm saves the most representative solutions, which gets iteratively updated in the presence of new solutions.

H.C.W. Lau et al. presented multi-objective vehicle routing problem with multiple depots, multiple customers, and multiple products has been studied. The objective has been to simultaneously minimize both the total traveling distance and the total traveling time. A multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (MOEA) called fuzzy logic guided non dominated sorting genetic algorithm 2 (FL-NSGA2) was proposed to solve this multi-objective optimization problem. The role of fuzzy logic is to dynamically adjust the crossover rate and mutation rate after ten consecutive generations.

Anthony Chen et al. presented two mean-variance models for determining the optimal toll and capacity of a build-operate-transfer (BOT) project under demand uncertainty. These two models were formulated as a stochastic bi-level mathematical program with multiple objectives, which is difficult to solve using traditional optimization methods. A simulation-based multi-objective genetic algorithm (SMOGA) procedure that integrates stochastic simulation, a traffic assignment algorithm, a distance-based method, and a genetic algorithm was developed to solve. They verified the feasibility of using the SMOGA procedure by solving a BOT project in China as a case study and found that the proposed procedure is robust in generating good non-dominated solutions with respect to different GA’s parameters, and performs better than the weighted-sum method.

Zhang Hong-Wei et al. presented a new genetic algorithm based on the theory of Lamarckian evolution (Lam-GA) to solve multi-objective transportation optimization problem. The algorithm carries through some local transformation according to certain rules after distributing transportation counts on the fuzzy rule basis, which can increase the strength for searching better solution. Experimental data shows that after strengthening the mutation locally, the new algorithm can get better Pareto front and Pareto optimal solutions in solving large-scale transport problems, so that Lam-GA is more effective than Fuzzy-GA, st-GA and m-GA.

Conclusion

Transportation problem (TP) is a special case of linear programming problem (LPP) in which cost optimization has been made on the base of demand and resources. Combining of two or more than two objectives in T.P. then this type of problem is called as multi-objective transportation problem (MOTP). Different approached methods for solving MOTP by various authors. In the present paper, we are comparing between goal programming technique and genetic algorithm technique used to solve MOTP. We made an attempt to collect possible work on goal programming (GP) technique and genetic algorithm (GA) technique used to solve MOTP in various situations.

GP model have been applied to solve large-scale multi-criteria decision-making problems, analytical structure that a decision maker can use to provide optimal solutions to multiple and conflicting objectives, many objectives while the decision making is looking for the best solution from among a set of feasible solutions etc.

Genetic algorithm (GA) is a method for solving both constrained and unconstrained optimization problems based on a natural selection process that mimics biological evolution. The algorithm has repeatedly modified a population of individual solutions. Genetic algorithms belong to the larger class of evolutionary algorithms (EA), which generate solutions to optimization problems using techniques inspired by natural evolution. Genetic algorithm method is another frequently used to solving multi-objective transportation problem. This will be helpful to new researchers for their initial level studies in goal programming and genetic algorithm used in MOTP.

References

1. A. Baidya et al., (2013) ‘Solution of Multi-Item Interval Valued Solid Transportation Problem with Safety Measure Using Different Method’, Operation Research Society of India, 51 (1): 1-22.
2. A.A. Mous et al., (2010) ‘Efficient Evolutionary Algorithm for Solving Multi-Objective Transportation Problem’, Jr. of Natural Sciences and mathematics, Vol.4, pp.77-102.
3. Anthony Chen et al., (2003) ‘A Simulation-Based Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm(Smoga) for Transportation Network Design Problem’, IEEE computer society, ISBN: 0-7695-1997-0 pp: 373.
4. F.L. Hitchcock (1941) ‘The Distribution of a Product from Several Sources to Numerous Localities’, Journal of Mathematics and Physics, vol.20, pp.224-230.
5. George B. Dantzing (1951) ‘Application of the Simplex Method to the Transportation Problem’. Activity Analysis of Production and Allocation, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp.359-373.
6. H.C.W. Lau et al., (2009) ‘A Fuzzy Guided Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm Model for Solving Transportation Problem’, Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 36, Issue 4, pp. 8255 – 8268.
7. H.R. Maleki and S. Khodaparasti (2008) ‘Non-Linear Multi Objective Transportation Problem a Fuzzy Goal Programming Approach’, WSEAS Int. Conference on Urban Planning & Transportation, vol. 67, ISSN:1790-2769.
8. Lohgaonkar M.H. et al. (2010) ‘Additive Fuzzy Multiple Goal Programming Model for Unbalanced Multi-Objectives Transportation Problem’, International Journal of Machine Intelligence, ISSN: 0975-2927, vol.2, Issue.1, pp-29-34.
9. M. Zangiabadi and H. R. Maleki (2007), ‘Fuzzy Goal Programming for Multi-Objective Transportation Problems’, J. Appl. Math. & computing, vol.24, pp. 449 – 460.
10. Mistuo Gen et al., (1999), ‘Solving Multi-Objective Transportation Problem by Spanning Tree Based Genetic Algorithm’, IEICE Trans. Fundamentals, vol.E82-A No.12 pp.2802-2810.
11. Sang Moon Lee (1972), ‘Optimizing Transportation Problems with Multiple Objectives’, AIIE Transactions, vol.5, No.4, pp.333-338.
12. Sayed A. Zaki et al. (2011) ‘Efficient Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm for Solving Transportation, Assignment and Transshipment Problems’, Applied Mathematics, vol.3, pp.92-99.
13. Surapati Pramanik et al. (2015) ‘Multi-Objective Chance Constrained Transportation Problem with Fuzzy Parameters’, Global Journal of Advanced Research, vol-2, Issue.1 PP.49-63.
14. T.C. Koopmans (1951) ‘Optimum Utilization of the Transportation System’, The Econometric Society, vol.117, pp.136-146.
15. Waiel F. Abd E1-Waheda and Sang M. Lee (2006), ‘Interactive Fuzzy Goal Programming for Multi-Objective Transportation Problem’, Omega, vol.34, Issue.2, PP. 158-166.
16. Wuttinum Nunkaew and Busaba Phruksaphantrat (2009), ‘A Multi-Objective Programming for Transportation Problem with the Consideration of Both Depot to Customer to Customer Relationships’, Int. multi conference of Engineering and Computer scientist, Vol.2.
17. Zhang Hong-wei et al (2009) ‘Multi-Objective Transportation Optimization Based on lam-Genetic Algorithm’, IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Intelligent System, (ICIS 2009).

Do video games increase the level of violence in a person?

Do video games affect people’s behavior? Does the level of violence in a game determine the level of violence in a person? In this day and age, video games are extremely popular. It is considered rare that you would walk into a household with one or more children and not see a video game system, but can playing a video game have negative effects on you and your actions?

Surveyed among a number of peers, the results have shown that video games do not have a negative effect on people. Even the most gruesome games like “Call of Duty” and “Mortal Kombat” cannot be used as an excuse for negative behavior. These games include killing, blood, bone breaking, and more. At the end of the day, these are still just video games.

A lot of people tend to look at and blame video games for crimes committed in today’s society. Crimes such as robbery, grand theft, and even murder. They say that since most video games contain violence, which is true, and that so many people play them, that could be the cause of the crime today. In most video games, there is usually a good incentive for completing a task or mission. That task would most likely contain violence.

“Thursday, February 22nd, 2018, President Donald Trump said during a White House meeting that video games influence violence in young kids’ minds.” www.cnn.com/2016 “On June 27, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that video games were covered under the first amendment and video game content could not be regulated by governments.” www.psychologytoday.com/us “Video game advocates argue that violent video games may provide a safe outlet for aggressive and angry feelings and may reduce crime.” www.videogames.procon.org “There is no clear evidence to support the assumption that playing video games (violent) results in more lethal violence or other criminal behavior.” www.center4research.org “Nicolas Cruz, the 19-year-old accused of gunning down 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida on February 14, reportedly played video games for up to 15 hours a day. But that anecdote, as troubling as it might sound, is not scientific proof of Cruz’s propensity to commit acts of violence, according to many researchers.” www.nbcnews.com/news These biased statements made by multiple resources have stirred up an extremely important controversy in today’s society.

Now back to what CNN told us about what this most wonderful president of ours had to say. He said that video games do influence violence in young kids’ minds. He also stated that “The level of violence on video games is really shaping young people’s thoughts.” A lot of people, including me of course, would disagree with this statement. As I stated before, the man behind the horrific high school shooting in early 2018, Nicolas Cruz, played video games for an innumerable amount of time. Some days spend up to 15 hours in front of the television with a controller in hand. Yet, a survivor from that very shooting, Chris Grady, who also plays video games disagrees with the president. He said, “I grew up playing video games… first-person shooter games, and I would never, ever dream about taking the lives of my peers.” This is a survivor of the mass school shooting that some people are trying to blame video games the cause of. I completely agree with Grady. He and I feel the same way. In Germany, an 18-year-old gunman who killed 9 people in July 2016 was also a fan of playing first-person shooter games. This does not change my opinion simply because of the fact that so many people play video games.

www.videogames.procon.org provides a lot of statistics concerning video games. According to the site, 97% of U.S. kids ages 12-17 play video games. I, as well as numerous of my peers, are a part of this statistic. The video game industry is worth $21.53 billion. That is more than the net worth of Oprah, Jay-Z, P. Diddy, Dr. Dre, Tyler Perry, Mariah Carey, Beyonce, and LeBron James put together! This is part of the reason I am on the side that I am on. Just as many people there are in the world that commits a crime and play video games, there are just as many people who play video games and never committed a crime a day in their life. People do not buy games and throw them away when they get home, do they? The video game industry is rich. These games that are being sold are being played. More than half of the 50 top-selling video games contain violence. As I informed you earlier, video game advocates argue that violent video games may provide a safe outlet for aggressive and angry feelings and may reduce crime. I agree with this statement also. The tremendous combined time gamers spent inside playing can be substituted for doing more productive activities like reading, writing, and even getting active outside. It can also be used for more negative activities like shooting, robbing, and raping. So instead of just looking at the positive things we could be doing instead of playing video games, consider the negative things we could be doing also. Maybe that will change your mind. Violent video games can be traced back to 1976 when a video game named “Death Race” was released. The objective of the game was to run over screaming “gremlins.” The problem was that the gremlins resembled stick-figure humans. After protestors dragged Death Race machines out of arcades into the parking lot and burned them, production of the game ceased. But, Death Race did not start crime. Protestors’ successful mission to stop the production of Death Race surely did not stop it. This raises the question: Was Death Race really to blame?

“On June 27, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that video games were covered under the First Amendment and video game content could not be regulated by governments,” www.psychologytoday.com/us informs us. The U.S. supreme court, aka the highest court in the court system, said this. The First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Part of the court ruling was that psychological research linking violent games and violence was “unpersuasive”. According to “Psychology Today”, the link between media violence and violent behavior in children has never been reliably demonstrated. In 1994, the Educational Software Rating Board (ESRB) was created. In the case of every video game, you can see in the bottom right corner on the front and the back the rating of the game given by the ESRB. There is also a little booklet inside the case that displays the ESRB rating. At the end of every commercial advertisement for a video game, you’ll hear something like “Rated E for everyone” or “Rated M for Mature”. The classifications for this rating system are as follows: “E for Everyone”, “E for everyone age 10+”, “T for Teen”, and the most profitable, “M for Mature (17+)”. There is also an extremely rare one named “A for Adults 18+)”, but it is unlikely that you would ever see any of these as they would just gravitate toward the more popular, “M for Mature” rating. In my opinion, the grading scale is appropriately accurate. “E for Everyone” games: “Content is generally suitable for all ages. May contain minimal cartoon, fantasy or mild violence and/or infrequent use of mild language.” “E for Everyone 10+” games: “Content is generally suitable for ages 10 and up. May contain more cartoon, fantasy or mild violence, mild language and/or minimal suggestive themes.” “T for Teen” games: “Content is generally suitable for ages 13 and up. May contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling and/or infrequent use of strong language.” “M for Mature” games: “Content is generally suitable for ages 17 and up. May contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.” “A for Adults” games: “Content suitable only for adults ages 18 and up. May include prolonged scenes of intense violence, graphic sexual content and/or gambling with real currency.” Some examples of games that coincide with these ratings are: “Madden NFL” and “NBA2k”, the 2 most popular sports games, are both rated “E for Everyone”. “NHL”, the go-to video game for hockey lovers, is rated “E for Everyone 10+”, probably because of the increased violence in hockey. Games like “Spider-Man” and “WWE” are rated “T for Teen”. But the top-selling games like “Grand Theft Auto” and “Call of Duty” are rated “M for Mature” Hats off to the ESRB for providing background info on games before we buy them. Even though most people, including parents, do not care about the rating of a game. Parents still buy these blood and gore games for their children so if video games were the problem, why would parents continue to fulfill their children’s wish lists every year with these games?

“Studies have shown that playing violent video games can increase aggressive thoughts, behaviors and feelings,” per www.center4research.org “Aggressive behavior is measured by scientists in a number of ways; from hitting and pushing to how an individual reacts to playing a video game.” Even though, “Few studies have been completed on violent video game exposure and aggression in children under the age of 20.” In reality, there has probably been a high amount of studies completed, but since so many people play games, it seems like only a few. “There is no clear evidence to support the assumption that playing video games (violent) results in more lethal violence or other criminal behavior. The Task Force recommends that further research must be done using delinquency, violence, and criminal behavior as outcomes to determine whether or not violent video games are linked to violence.” A lot more research in my opinion. Blaming video games for crimes is like blaming hoodies for crimes. They are too common in the current time period.

Mitt Romney, the republican the wonderful Barack Obama handled back in 2012, once blamed The Virginia Tech and Columbine massacres on “pornography and violence” in music, movies, TV shows, and of course, video games. Let’s ask a professional. “It’s hard to attribute video games to any kind of violence in society,” said Christopher Ferguson, a psychology professor at Stetson University in Florida. “We’re not able to find any evidence to support this idea,” he continued. Ferguson is joined in that view by Whitney DeCamp, a professor of sociology at Western Michigan University, who says “The relationship between video games and violent behavior is insignificant and trivial.” The number of researchers who support the theory that there is no evidence of a link is growing. It is not a coincidence.

Theconversation.com has a detailed article composed by Ferguson himself, titled “It’s Time to End the Debate About Video Games and Violence.” He opens by saying, “In the wake of Valentine’s Day shooting at a Broward County, Florida high school, a familiar trope has reemerged: Often, when a young man is a shooter, people try to blame the tragedy on violent video games and other forms of media. Florida lawmaker Jared Moskowitz made the connection the day after the shooting, saying the gunman, ‘was prepared to pick off students like it’s a video game.” Ferguson then proceeds into the next paragraph by saying, “In January, after 2 students were killed and many others wounded by a 15-year-old shooter in Benton, Kentucky, the state’s governor criticized popular culture, telling reporters, ‘We can’t celebrate death in video games, celebrate death in TV shows, celebrate death in movies, celebrate death in musical lyrics and remove any sense of morality and sense of higher authority and then expect that things like this are not going to happen.” Sounds like my point is getting proven wrong right? In paragraph 3 Ferguson shows us his genius thinking. “But, speaking as a researcher who has studied violent video games for 15 years,” he says, “I can state there is no evidence to support these claims that violent media and real-world violence are connected.” Criminologists who study mass shootings specifically refer to those sorts of connections as a “myth.” He closes his complete introduction by adding, “And in 2017, the media Psychology and Technology division of the American Psychological Association released a statement that I helped craft, suggesting reporters and policymakers cease linking mass shootings to violent media, given the lack of evidence for a link.” Ferguson’s name has appeared on multiple websites concerning this topic. I wouldn’t continue to doubt him.

“The latest in the long-standing debate over violent video games: They do cause players to become physically aggressive,” www.usatoday.com/story states its opinion. Yet another victim to this insane statement. “An international study looking at more than 17,000 adolescents, ages 9 to 19, from 2010 to 2017, found playing violent video games led to increased physical aggression over time. The analysis of 24 studies from countries including the U.S., Canada, Germany, and Japan found those who played violent games such as “Grand Theft Auto”, “Call of Duty”, and “Manhunt” were more likely to exhibit behavior such as being sent to the principal’s office for fighting or hitting a non-family member.” This means nothing. They provided no results. Just conclusions made by them. They studied 17,000 people. For all, we know it was probably no more than a couple hundred in their favor. “Although no single research project is definitive, our research aims to provide the most current and compelling responses to key criticism on this topic,” said Jay Hull, lead author of the study published Monday in the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. “Based on our findings, we feel it is associated with subsequent increases in physical aggression.” This article was unconvincing in my opinion. As Hull stated, “No single research project is definitive.”

“Researchers at the University of York have found no evidence to support the theory that video games make players more violent,” sciencedaily.com/releases joins the debate. “The dominant model of learning in games is built on the idea that exposing players to concepts, such as violence in a game, makes those concepts easier to use in ‘real life. This is known as ‘priming’, and is thought to lead to changes in behavior. Previous experiments on this effect, however, have so far provided mixed conclusions.” So ‘priming’ as it relates to this topic is the idea that portraying some concept makes reactions to related concepts in real life easier. Priming does not happen in video games. “In a series of experiments, with more than 3,000 participants, the team demonstrated that video game concepts do not ‘prime’ players to behave in certain ways and that increasing the realism of violent video games does not necessarily increase aggression in game players.” Well, that was interesting. “Dr. David Zendle, from the University’s Department of Computer Science said: ‘The findings suggest that there is no link between these kinds of realism in games and the kind of effects that video games are commonly thought to have on their players.”

www.nature.com/articles conducted its experiment concerning the topic. “Our participants played the violent video game Grand Theft Auto V, the non-violent video game The Sims 3, or no game at all for 2 months on a daily basis. No significant changes were observed, neither when comparing the group playing a violent game to a group playing a non-violent game nor to a passive control group. Also, no effects were observed between baseline and post-test directly after the intervention period had ended. The present results thus provide strong evidence against the frequently debated negative effects of playing violent video games in adults and will therefore help to communicate a more realistic scientific perspective on the effects of violent video gaming.” Notice the enthralling word usage in the article. Instead of using words like “little” and “few”, they used the word “no”. The said, “No significant changes were observed” and “No effects were observed”. On the flip side to that, the article continues, “It has been suggested that the effects of studies focusing on consequences of short-term video gameplay are mainly the result of priming effects, meaning that exposure to violent video content increases the accessibility of aggressive thoughts and affect when participants are in the immediate situation.” Now while this may be eye-opening, the text clearly states: “Consequences of short-term”. Short-term meaning we do not have to focus too hard on this statement. “We think that priming effects are interesting and worthwhile exploring, but our reading of the literature is that priming effects are short-lived (suggested to last for Last to state their opinion is www.learnliberty.org/blog. “As it turns out, Death Race would be the predecessor of a growing and an increasingly realistic class of video games famous for their violence. Upon seeing a copy of the (now classic) fighting game Mortal Kombat, senator Joe Lieberman announced his intention to introduce legislation that would prohibit the sale of such games to minors.” The creation of the ESRB would be coming soon. “Regulation never materialized, and the game industry would begin placing age recommendations on its products.” In other words, the ESRB was created. “Yes, many shooters play violent games extensively. However, the number of people who commit mass shootings is so small that this data point is uninformative.” That is on top of the fact that the number of people who already play video games is huge. “Moreover, the vast majority of people who regularly play violent video games will refrain from engaging in any real physical violence – let alone commit mass murder.”

In conclusion, video games are not to blame for the increase in violence today. I am not going to point the finger at any other forms of entertainment either. That includes video games, TV shows, movies, songs, social media, and all the other common trends in today’s society. We are humans. We know what is right and we know what is wrong. No matter what our favorite artist raps or sings in the studio, nor what our favorite actors and actresses portray in our favorite movies, we as humans know what decisions we are making when we are making them. No matter how real the gun looks on “Call of Duty”, we will forever be able to tell the difference between that one and the one in our hand. We know that if we pull the trigger in real life we will not be receiving points or positive rewards. I believe it is a psychological issue in a person that makes them do such acts as commit mass shootings and robberies and things of that sort. Yes, a lot of negative metaphorical referrals to video games have been made and will continue to be made, but as long as the game is selling, violence in video games will only popularize more. So what if this mass shooting in real life has certain similarities to the ones in video games? That does not mean that the video game is at a fault. I believe whether or not those criminals who did these horrific acts played or did not play violent video games, would have still happened. Video games do not increase the level of violence in a person.

1. Introduction

In this essay I will be discussing ‘The Sociological Imagination and the Problems of University Students in African Countries.’ Firstly, I will be defining the term ‘sociological imagination’ as well as defining personal problems and social issues and how they differentiate from one another. I will further discuss suicide within the youth and how it is a personal problem as well as a social issue.

2. The Sociological Imagination

The sociological imagination is a form of critical thinking, it is a term coined by C Wright Mills (1959) to describe the approach by which people could discern what affects them adversely in life which links the two poles of social understanding and analysis -the individual and society. It allows us to view somebody else’s society as an outsider would, rather than from our own experience and cultural biases, it allows us to differentiate between personal problems and public issues.

2.1. Personal and Public Issues

A personal problem is when an individual is experiencing problems themselves, it affects the individual and could affect the small group of people that surround that individual daily. A public problem is when large numbers of people are experiencing issues that are caused by the societal structure. A personal problem may become a public issue if a large number of people are affected by the same problem.

3. A Personal Problem Faced by Adam Seef

Adam Seef was a 19-year-old boy who matriculated from King David Linksfield. He was a prefect in matric with honours in academics, he had many friends and was loved by all of his peers. Once Adam had finished school, he went on to study medicine at the University of Witswatersrand. To all of us who knew Adam, he was one of the happiest people we could come across. This was until he was on his winter vacation on a program with friends in Israel when he tragically decided to take his own life. It was then that we all found out that he was struggling with extreme anxiety and depression. He was a perfectionist. He wanted the ‘perfect’ life, to have a wife and kids, the ‘perfect’ job – being a doctor. However, he could not come to terms with the fact that he was confused about his sexuality. He knew if he came to terms with this, he would not have a life that was considered perfect in the eyes of everyone else. Adam was dealing with all of these thoughts on his own. Nobody knew that he was severely depressed and suffering from immense anxiety. He kept it a secret from everyone. He kept these personal problems of depression, sexuality, anxiety and extreme pressure from society to act a certain way and achieve certain things to himself. Ultimately leading to his suicide. Suicide in the youth is a very big issue both personally and publicly.

4. The Social Aspect Leading to Suicide

There are many personal factors that lead to suicide, such as depression, bullying, the pressure of society or even life at home. Everyone struggles with one of these factors, these issues often result to suicide, which is a huge issue around the world. Social pressure has one of the biggest impacts on our mental health. The pressure to act a certain way in front of certain people, to like certain things that you may not usually enjoy, even the pressure that heterosexuality is the norm and being part of LGBTQ+ is seen as different. “The South African Depression and Anxiety Group (SADAG) states that nine percent of all teenage deaths are due to suicide in the age bracket of 15-24.” (Byrone Athman, 2020) The numbers are high and because there are so many people affected, this is no longer only a personal problem, it is a public issue as well. The problem with suicide is that often it is out of the persons control, their depression is so terrible, the pain they are feeling is so excruciating, they feel so alone that they think the only way to take it all away is to take their own life, they don’t think that there are any solutions to their issues, this is the only way out in their eyes.

“Depression is mankind’s oldest known brain disorder” (Yong-Ku Kim, 2018). Depression is one of the biggest problems faced by the youth of today’s society, it is not surprising that the most common motivation for suicide (70%) is to escape painful life circumstances, such as physical or psychological illness. Many people who commit suicide write notes for their loved ones to read, giving them an explanation as to why they did what they did, why they felt their life was not worth living, why they did not want to be alive anymore. “The predominant emotion expressed in the notes was love, but they also expressed a myriad of other emotions. Given the large percentage of note writers who were depressed, it was not surprisingly to find emotions expressed in the notes that were hallmarks of depression. Common emotions were feeling like a failure (17%), or feeling tired (12%), sad (9%), hopeless (7%), guilty (7%), or ashamed (5%).” (Cheryl L. Meyer, Taronish H. Irani, Katherine A. Hermes, Betty Yung, 2017). There are many solutions to these problems and ways to prevent suicide from happening.

5. Solutions to the Problems that Lead to Suicide

There needs to be more healthy awareness about mental health, often people are made to feel inferior when they are feeling unstable. Why should something so common be seen as something so taboo? Mental health is extremely important, and people should feel that it is okay not to be okay. By creating a safe place where people can be open; may it be in your home, in a school or work place, or even online, many people will feel more comfortable speaking about what is going through their minds if everyone learns how to care for these people. We will be more capable of helping these people and may even be able to save their lives. Knowing someone will listen and help you through the darkest of times without any judgement, with open arms and a caring heart, will makes it easier for people to speak about certain things, especially those surrounding mental health. A possible solution would be to provide platforms and procedures that allow for a more comfortable environment to be yourself – such as anonymous chat rooms. Having someone to talk to that is closer to your age and can relate to today’s times, as they have changed so much since our parent’s university days. We also need to be aware of the warning signs. “About 75% of those who die by suicide exhibit some form of suicide warning signs. It follows that we need to be aware of what exactly these suicide warning signs are and try to spot them in people, in order to be more proactive, as opposed to reactive, to the signs of suicide.” (Caruso, 2020)

6. Conclusion

Thus, suicide is a major problem facing university students in South Africa. this is evidently so due to the statistics of the youth of today that are facing severe mental health issues as well as that they are too scared or embarrassed to express their true state of mind. However, there are solutions to assist in these issues. With the help of utilizing the platforms already in place for members of the youth to express themselves but something of more vital importance is to create an environment in society where having mental health issues is not seen as a disability as opposed to the standard of what society has become, the sociological imagination helps us to see all of this.

During 1914 through to 1918, World War One took place in Europe and trenches were recently introduced into the strategy of war. Being quite new as a form of warfare during a world war, the art of trench warfare significantly developed new weapons and ways of attack and defence. Trench warfare was a land-based warfare that consisted of building deep or shallow trenches as a defence against the enemy. They work by providing soldiers with shelter from enemy fire and continue to dig forward during the night. 5 main factors of world war ones trench warfare was how it was used during the start of the war (1914), how life in the trenches were for the soldier, how trench weapons developed during the war, how trench tactics and strategies developed during the war and how the chemical warfare was introduced into the war.

In the beginning of World War One, the first instance of trench warfare began on the Western Front in France. By the end of 1914, both sides (the allied powers and the central powers) had built trenches spanning from the North Sea and through Belgium and France. Trench warfare started after the Battle of Marne in September 1914, when the Germans were forced to retreat to the River Aisne. Both sides had battled each other to a standstill and the German commander, General Erich von Falkenhayn, chose to dig trenches. These trenches would not only provide protection from advancing soldiers, but also hold their position that they currently held in France and Belgium. The British and French troops quickly learnt that they couldn’t break through the defensive structure and also began to dig trenches. These were the first ‘real’ trenches dug by The Allies and The Central Powers on September 16th (N.m., 2014, n.p.). This fight shaped how the countries who were a part of World War One mainly fought on ground and led to many casualties on both sides and extended the length of the war to such great lengths.

Life in the trenches were rampant with deadly diseases and ‘shell shocked’ soldiers. Fighting in such unsanitary conditions caused many infectious diseases to spread rapidly and the use of chemical warfare, made the trenches an even deadlier place to live and fight. Most trenches were ridden with pests, including mice, rats, lice and frogs. These pests became a problem when they started to eat the soldier’s rations and the rats started to eat the soldiers themselves while they slept. Trenches were usually dug only a few feet above sea level, because of this, most trenches were waterlogged at the base of the trench (see Appendix B). Historian Dunleavy explained that due to the constant exposure to wetness, soldiers developed trench foot, which was a condition where dead tissue on the feet spread and in worse cases required amputation. Days in the trenches could result is permanent traumatization and life-changing damage to the veterans of war. Richard Fredrick, a lance corporal who was enlisted in WWI, quoted “…we had a most awful time” and “…I can assure you it was an experience I could never forget.” (Frederick,1908, n.p.) He had also commented that they were under seven days of bombardment by the enemy and suffered more than 200 casualties those seven days. This must have been a dreadful time within the trenches suffering many casualties a day and being bombarded by artillery for days at a time, resulting in such a costly and lengthy war.

Trench weapons became a vital component of the war, causing many more casualties within the war with the deadly firepower, or the speed and stealth of the weapon. Notable Historian, Stéphane Audoin-Rouzeau described that “Massive bombing became the main tactical answer to the stalemate. Various forms of firing pursued various tactical objectives: …, destruction or annihilation fire, adjustment fire, barrage or box barrage fire, harassing fire, and so on – not to mention the firing of shrapnel which exploded high up with devastating consequences, and the firing of toxic grenades which became ever more important as the conflict wore on”( Audoin-Rouzeau, 2014, n.p.). Although, this was a result in quicker battles, the number of casualties grew due to the fact that the weapons became deadlier. It also did not resolve stalemates very efficiently, losing hundreds and thousands of men each battle resulting in an immense human cost and a lengthy war.

Trenching methods and tactics during ground warfare was a fundamental part of moving forwards and gaining more ground than the opposition. All of the trenches in WWI weren’t dug in straight lines, they were built as a system, in a zigzag pattern with different levels among the lines (This was so that the soldiers could move between levels with ease. Most trenches were dug by soldiers, in which they dug in three different ways. Sometimes the soldiers would use the method of entrenching, which was when they dug straight into the ground. This was the quickest method, but they were well exposed to enemy fire. Another way of digging was by extending the trench from one end. This was called sapping and was much safer but became very painstaking and tedious. The final and safest way of making ground was tunnelling. This method was to dig a tunnel and remove the roof when the trench was complete, this was rarely used as it was very time consuming and the most difficult one to perform. These trench tactics led to the slow-moving tactical ground warfare in World War One, sacrificing hundreds of men just to gain a few metres at times and resulting in such a lengthy and costly war.

Chemical warfare was an extremely deadly weapon that could wipe out entire trenches within hours and force the enemy to retreat hundreds of metres (See Appendix A). This weapon had caused more than 1.3million casualties in WWI and around 100,000 fatalities, mainly from phosgene. (Everts,2015, n.p.). Notable scholar Sarah Everts explains that there were 3 main gases used within WWI, each deadlier than the next. The first was chlorine gas, used on the infamous day of April 22nd, 1915. At high enough doses a human can die. The gas responsible for 85% of chemical fatalities in WWI was phosgene. It was six times deadlier than chlorine gas and was also colourless, which made it extremely stealthy and caused soldiers to die a slow and agonizing death. The supposed ‘King of the Battle Gases’ was called mustard gas. Its effects were not immediate, but it was extremely deadly as even at low doses death would be imminent. It caused the greatest number of casualties from chemical weapons; some would estimate more than 120,000. . These statistics are harrowing, the number of men injured and killed made the war so costly in humans and also the amount of time and money researchers invested to create deadlier gases. It also created the war to become so lengthy, hospitalising many men affected by the poisonous fumes leading to such a costly and lengthy war.

World War One was a time of incredible technological advancements, sacrificing many men through war of the world. Trench warfare was a major component of this war and contributed to many casualties and fatalities of ground warfare. Its defensive structure, added to the slow movement of war, causing a supposed six to eight-week war, to an entire four-year war. The sheer number of men killed by trench warfare is devastating and abhorrent. Its cost of humans and financial supplies caused the ‘Great War’ to be filled with incredible weaponry advancements and defence structure. The main factors of trench warfare becoming such a considerable warfare within WWI was the life within the trenches, how trench warfare started out, the development of trench weapons and the deadliness of chemical warfare.

Stress. Stress. Stress. Stressing about this and stress about that. We stress about every single thing and go crazy because of it. Everyone has experienced stress at least once in their lives; that is what we all have in common. What do we define stress as? The psychological definition of stress is that it is a feeling of strain and pressure. Managing stress is what everyone needs to learn to do. Some may think that from all the stress people have, they won’t know how to cope with it and manage it accordingly. Stress can be both good and bad. To be able to manage stress, one must know what is stressing them out. Those stressing or trying to manage stress must take responsibility for what is going on and not blame others for it. Stressing is an everyday portion of our lives. The world is becoming really difficult to live in and stress will only be repetitive in our daily lives. We are defined by how we handle our stressors and what steps we take to overcome that stress. We may not necessarily be in control of the situation which usually causes us stress. Being under a lot of tension makes us seem like we aren’t in control; however, it is our life. Therefore, having the power and authority over our own lives is the foundation of stress management.

Two methods of coping with stress are problem-focused and emotion-focused. Problem-focused is that we change our behavior or take some type of action that can possibly solve the problem. Emotion-focused is directing our attention to something else, avoiding thinking about the situation, engaging in positive thinking, or putting some distance between us and the situation. The article, “Problem-Focused Coping: Definition, Strategies & Examples”, states that time management, avoiding the problem, and asking for support are ways one can employ problem-focused coping (“Problem-Focused Coping: Definition, Strategies & Examples” 2019). Time management won’t work if there are a million things to do in a short amount of time. Time management consists of making lists of priorities with the date they need to be done by. The next example is avoiding the problem. Keeping stress away is by avoiding that there is too much to get done. Most will think avoidance is bad, but the amount that we can accomplish is the amount that we can take on. Lastly, asking for help. Communication is the first step when asking for support on anything. Bringing up the courage to ask for help when you are trying to manage stress is the first process. After that, everything will come easy. Some positive emotion-focused coping methods include meditation, praying, listening to music, etc. An article called, “An Overview of Meditation” by Elizabeth Scott, it mentions “Longer meditation sessions tend to bring greater benefits, but it is usually best to start slowly so you can maintain the practice long-term” (Scott, 2019). Meditation helps to isolate oneself from their thoughts when they are thinking about stress. You can relax your body with meditation and not worry about stress responses. When continuously performing this strategy, it can become a routine that’ll help expand the stress. Stress triggers one’s body to be worried and overwhelmed all the time while meditation does the exact opposite. It is a calming state to the body to help the body take a break. Another way to manage stress is by praying. Praying is like direct communication with God himself. Praying to God can be a great stress reliever and one doesn’t always have to believe in God or be religious. Difficult, stressful times will lead someone in the right direction when in need of help. When requesting help from God, you must know that He is always listening and will always be there to help whether you believe in Him or not. The article, “Managing Stress with Prayer” by David Tomasilli asserts that “No matter how hopeless your situation may be, have a belief that miracles can and do happen. This ultimately gives you hope and the strength to carry on in your time of need” (Tomasilli, n.d.). Praying gives everyone hope and makes them feel stronger. It motivates them to keep going and never give up. You can stress about anything and anyone. You can possibly stress someone else and their situation. When you pray, you pray for yourself or others. You can pray for guidance, well-being, or strength. The last method of emotion-focused coping is listening to music. Music eases the mind and assists with any mood. In the article, “Stress Management Techniques” by Patrycja Miedziun and Jan Czesław Czabała, states “The study showed that the most common technique of dealing with stress are: listening to music” (Miedziun & Czabała, 2015). The technique of listening to music for stress management shows statistics that 74% use this technique. Music is a way of shutting out any negativity. In another article, “The Power of Music to Reduce Stress” Jane Collingwood says “Productivity increases when stress is reduced” (Collingwood, 2018). Music is seen as a strong tool for stress management.

Although managing stress can have its advantages, it can also be a pretty negative thing. Stressing in general is pretty bothering and unbelieving. From too much strain or pressure, physiological and psychological problems may occur; as well as addicting habits as a way of preventing or getting rid of stress. Some stress symptoms affect one’s body, behavior, and feelings. Stressing can involve one’s heart pounding really fast, biting nails, or even having some type of anxiety. While the best ways of coping with stress have been discussed, there are worse ways as well. The article, “Best and Worst Ways to Cope With Stress” by Lauren A. Greene, affirms that there are five worst ways of coping with stress (Greene, 2013). Those ways are drinking/smoking, staying inside for a long period of time, taking no notice of the problem, hanging onto the negative, and eating away feelings. Each of these ways will be thoroughly explained.

To begin with, the first worst way of coping with stress is drinking and/or smoking. Some people tend to drown themselves in their problems hoping they’ll all go away like that. Unfortunately, that isn’t how things work. It may seem that at the moment things will be better when we drink but that is not always the case. Smoking or drinking will cause a cycle of continuous stress since it is causing a negative impact on the body. The second worst way is hibernation. It sounds amazing to be curled up into a ball and be in a comfy bed all day, but doing so will not solve any problems. The number one cause of stress is stability. The process of being able to have things done on time and as soon as possible sounds great, but one must actually get up and do something about it. As stated by, “Best and Worst Ways to Cope With Stress”, it claims that “Research shows that the more you sleep, the more tired you actually feel” (Greene, 2013). We may think that sleeping will help us rest and finally be able to have the sleep we need, but we can still be tired seconds after just waking up. Oversleeping can also cause health problems, adding on more stress rather than removing it.

The third way is ignoring the problem. Most of us try to take our mind off the bad that is going on in our lives, and sooner or later we won’t pay any attention to our problem which can be bad because it is much easier to fix the problem in the beginning. It is important to process everything that is being dealt with. Pushing off problems will only make them get bigger. It isn’t bad to take a mental time out and forget about stress temporarily because everyone does it, but after a temporary time of the situation needs to be resolved one way or another. Residing on the negative is the fourth bad way of coping with stress. Overthinking is a huge factor that leads right to stress. The thought is that if we make one little mistake, our lives are over. If we say something wrong or unpleasant, our relationship with someone is over, or if we forget to pass out the payroll at work so we think we might lose our job. It is normal to think of negative scenarios when associating with tensity, but the more we do it the more of a habit it becomes. The last worst way is eating up your own feelings. Everyone loves food. A nice hot meal with some sides to fill us up at night before sleeping. According to the article, “Why Stress Causes People to Overeat” it states, “Over 5,000 men and women showed that obesity was associated with stress-related eating in women but not in men” (“Why Stress Causes People to Overeat” 2012). Instant signs of stress or emotion lead to the desire for food. All these ways are disadvantages of stress and bad ways of trying to manage it.

In conclusion, stress is a big deal. Some people might say one is overreacting or exaggerating the situation, but stress is very effective. Being able to manage stress the appropriate way will make life so much easier. Managing stress in the wrong and unhealthy way isn’t the way to go at all. It may not seem like a huge deal in the beginning because we are all bound to do things at the moment, but in the long run, it can be really damaging.

The most common problem students are dealing in teamwork coordination is lack of contribution of team members. For example, some members tend to remain silent and do not participate in tasks with full commitment. This is due to the fact that delegating unfair mark on workload contribution (Labeouf., Griffith &Roberts, 2016, p.18). When a group submits their work, all the members get the same mark regardless of their contribution. So, students resort in taking advantage of this marking system. Students who have contributed more is unfairly disadvantaged by those who did not perform well in group work. Hand in hand, this situation forms free riders in teamwork process (Bovees&Thill, 2014, p.512).Students do not like to contribute in teamwork based project because of these free riders. Free riders do not give their full commitment in team works. They just get benefits from the effort of other members. Based on (Bushe&Chu, 2011, p.186), students are facing difficulties in expressing true opinions. In this case students give less contribution to the team. They are less confident and lack of skills which make them hesitate to speak out their mind. Students should have the belief that they will not be punished if they make a mistake to overcome the problem in expressing opinions.

Continuously, students encounter difficulties in coordinating teamwork because teamwork is not effective in online environment. Information technology has become a big part of student’s life. Therefore, they have started to work in groups virtually. So, teamwork is now hindered by complicated and unreliable technology, insufficient transfer speed and limitation on understudy get to internet (Karin, 2011, p.3). Online teamwork totally depends on the internet. Students get in trouble in the process of finishing a group project when insufficient accessibility occurs. Based on (Karin, 2011, p.3), the given task cannot be completed earlier because of the lack of communication in online teamwork. They suffer to exchange ideas when a slow internet connection takes place. Students could not receive or share the details completely. This creates misunderstanding and delays the project work. Students find confronting and collaborating to be difficult as there are high chances that the students will not see each other face to face.face to face (Karin, 2011, p.3). Online team members only communicate once in a while for discussions and get disconnected. Such case brings no bonding among team members. At the same time, it makes the teamwork unproductive.

Next, students essentially do not like group works. Students understudies favor work independently (Daft, 2012, p.511). Because some give less collaboration in groups and it is hard to find out who is participating and who is not participating. So, they prefer working independently. Students does not enjoy the process of working in group works. They feel anxious, shy and introverted to work in group (Labeouf., Griffith&Roberts, 2016, p.17).Students who are Introverted and shy usually do not voice out or remain silent during teamwork. They feel nervous and awkward to share their thoughts and idea. In this case, discussions and meetings become harder and the work left undone. Based on (Bovee&Thill, 2014, p.72), students dislike working in groups because they thinks that it is waste of time. Group tasks needs cooperation, performance, presence and collaboration of all team members. It takes quite long time to be completed due to lack of collaboration and busy schedules. Some members do not collaborate well and some might be work slowly. Students should wait until other’s part is done to finish a group task. Team work is consuming a lot of time. Thus, students does not interested to be involved in team works.

In addition, students suffer to coordinate teamwork because different people have different style of working (Witt, 2011, p.12). Some students are loud and outgoing person. On the other hand, some students are quiet and need a little time to open up. Various type of personality may lead to conflict and arguments in a group. Based on (Bearmen, Owen, Brooks&Grunwald, 2013, p.6), discussion and disagreements will slow down the problem solving process. This can delay the group works. Each students have different ability and skills. Lack of understanding of skill and abilities of people also can lead to conflicts in team work. Team members should understand the potential of all the members and divide the work according to their ability. Existence of cultural difference can also disturbs the work process (Bearmen, Owen, Brooks&Grunwald, 2013, p.6). A team consists of members from various country, religion and family background. The reason team members struggles working in multicultural team is because they do not aware of cultural difference. They behave or talk in improper way without knowing it can hurt a person from different culture. Students should try to understand the culture of their team member to avoid problems.

Water pollution is a huge issue around the world because it affects everyone. No one can live without water, and if that water is contaminated, we can’t survive. Water pollution can be caused by the dumping of toxic chemicals, and even acid rain, which is caused by air pollution. This polluted water can cause a loss in biodiversity, as well as diseases in humans drinking from contaminated water sources. Our team took action against this growing problem by starting out small, and writing a letter to the Albany city planner. We plan to set out recycling and trash bins along the Albany Corning Preserve, so that the runners or bikers on the path will dispose of their waste properly. This is going to reduce the amount of waste going into the Hudson, and hopefully encourage the public to make a difference as well.

The main causes of water pollution are people dumping toxic waste into or around water bodies, and acid rain coming from air pollution. Our team focused more on the Hudson River, and the Albany Corning Preserve. In the corning preserve, water pollution is caused by the lack of waste disposal bins. People who use the path along the preserve don’t have anywhere to throw their garbage away, so they just drop it on the ground. Most of this waste is classified as municipal solid waste. It’s really not always the people’s fault, but just the lack of proper disposal methods. The effects of water pollution can be related to the environment, as well as the people in the environment. When water is polluted, it creates a loss in biodiversity because the aquatic life has to live in that water. It’s estimated that about 100 thousand marine animals die each year from polluted water. People realize that water pollution is a huge problem, so government organizations such as the EPA, were created to help in the effort to stop the harmful effects on the environment. Cleanup efforts also cost a lot of money; 4.3 billion dollars a year, to be specific.

Our team actually has two solutions to this problem. For the first one, we wrote a letter to the Albany city planner to pace trash and recycling bins along the Albany Corning Preserve, to serve as incentive for people to dispose of their waste properly. If our plan is put into action by the city planner, the Corning Preserve will definitely be a cleaner place. For our second solution, we’ll be hosting a cleanup effort on the 15th of June. We’ll be picking up trash along the river from 11:30AM to 4:00PM. Along with the first solution, this is going to help permanently clean up the Albany Corning preserve, making it a better place, and making the river cleaner.

Water pollution is caused by people dumping their waste into water bodies, as well as acid rain coming from air pollution. The effects of water pollution are things like loss of biodiversity and billions of dollars spent in cleanup efforts. Both of our solutions are going to clean up the Hudson River, and hopefully spark a chain reaction across the world to stop water pollution. So why should you do something about it? Because without the combined effort of everyone in the world, we can’t make this happen. We can’t stop this problem, unless everyone cares. If you care about the future of our planet, then fix this problem now.

Do you know anyone who either hurts themselves or is suicidal? Have you ever got annoyed when someone talks about their problems to you? Well, why is that? 1 in 5 teens are struggling with mental health, that is 20% of our population. Does this population do anything to help? In 2018 we lost 22 children aged 0-14 and 182 teens aged 15-19 to suicide in Australia alone. Since then, these numbers are still rising. Most of these teens either tried to call out for help but weren’t heard, and sadly, some were just plainly ignored. Do you know what it is like to be ignored or misheard? Well, this is a daily occurrence for teens with mental health.

Imagine that you are stuck in a box and can’t find a way out. All these thoughts go around your head saying, “You’re not good enough.”, “You suck.”, “You should just kill yourself.”. You’re smacking the side of this box screaming, “Someone help me! Please help me!”. But no one can hear you. This is how some people with mental health feel. Why is it that society doesn’t like the idea of mental health? We’re always told to talk to someone when we need help, but when we do, we are told that they don’t want to hear it, or “you will be fine”.

Most of society believes suicide is selfish, when it really is someone that could find a different way out of their thoughts. No one really wants to die; they just think it is the only way they can escape the pain they feel. If you told someone that suicide is selfish, and they were suicidal, how do you think that would make them feel?

Right now, somewhere in the world, a family is grieving a family member who decided that their only way out was suicide. While we go about our day complaining that we’re exhausted, and all we want is to sleep, there is always someone around you struggling and needing your help because their thoughts have overcome them. So, why aren’t we trying to help those who are hurting, those who are struggling? We’re too consumed in our lives to see that there are more people in the world than just ourselves.

If teen came and said that they are suicidal, why do we assume that they are attention seeking? If that same person commits suicide everyone considers it a tragedy. Why do we completely ignore the signs? Do we just not know how to help? The more aware people are, the more help that can be provided. Less people left in the shadows, and less families left without a loved one.

Yes, this is something that students learn in their high school experience but that is having a negative effect on their views on suicide. All it does makes us be more consumed in ourselves because they are literally teaching you that these thoughts are unnatural , and you can’t tell your friends because they will tell a teacher and that would get you into “trouble” or be told you shouldn’t be in school.

If you’re confused in class, you raise your hand and ask the teacher to help. So why can’t it be the same when you are confused on your emotions or you’re having a bad day? Well, I think this is because there is really no trust between you and your teachers, because as soon as you tell them that you hurt yourself or are suicidal, they must go to your parents.

Now, while most parents are supportive and caring about this topic, there are some parents that either go over the top and tell you to just toughen up and forgot about it, or some who just don’t trust you with your own feelings anymore. I feel like this idea of how your parents are going to react makes it so difficult to be brave and confident because you never know how someone is going to take news so serious like this.

So why is it so hard to ask for help when you feel like you’re drowning in your emotions? Why do schools say that if you need help, speak up, but when you do, all you get is hate and get told to just shake it off and you will be fine. Why is it when you ask for help, no teachers or adults you trust can help you? Many people are suffering conditions like this in this world, so if we can take away this bad stigma on mental health maybe we can help teens realise that they can share their feelings and they have to be brave and even save a life.

The underlining fact why people commit suicide is mental health. How can us as society change the negative views and opinions about mental health. Just because it doesn’t affect you, your effecting someone else when you decide to say that “you will be fine, just be happy” You might not see it, but it hurts them. So, do you want to be a part of a society that puts people down so much but there only way out is suicide, or be a part of a society that make people happy and helps when people are feeling down?

Suicide is one of the most tragic things that can happen to an individual and can be a very sensitive subject to talk about. Suicide is the act of causing your own death. When I chose this topic, I had my own theories on ‘why people commit suicide in the US and how it may impact everyone else in society?’ My first thoughts going into this I would figure that the people that committed would be diagnosed with some type of disorder followed by people that has been a victim to being bullied. When I did further research, I noticed that there are many different reasons even bigger than the ones assumed. I have never personally known anyone that committed suicide, so picking this subject helped me understand how society takes it, whether it’s a family member, a witness, or someone who simply known a person that committing that act.

According to the CDC (Center for Disease Control and prevention) and AFSP (American Foundation for Suicide Prevention) suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the United States and as recent as 2017. Most suicides are caused by firearms with over 50% of the death toll. Firearms have been a consistent issue in the US and continues to be a problem to this day. The United States government has been in a battle for years determining new laws as far as gun control. The most recent mass shootings and suicide deaths within the country has led to gun control being the topic of discussion. Although most of the deaths are by firearms, they are less than 6% of the suicide attempts. Suffocation comes in second with 28% with poisoning coming in at 14%. Teenagers over last couple years between the ages of 12-18 and college students have increased the suicide death rate to be the second leading cause of death within that age group. Teenagers with a psychological disorder mainly depression and bipolar disorder are 95% of the people that pass away due to suicide.

During my study, I discovered that there are many of reasons on why people in the United States, commit suicide. Some of the articles that I investigated I discovered that committing suicide is not just in initial act, it happens in steps of some kind and over time. There are usually multiple circumstances where an individual has been feeling of consistently stressed, being abused, traumatic events or anything effecting their mental and physical state in a negative way. For example, say that a woman in her late 20s, was constantly abused by her boyfriend and always being told that she is worthless by her family consistently. This causes her to go into a deep depression and she takes her life by overdosing.

When someone passes away it makes a great impact on society. It always impacts the people that are closest to that person them such as: family, friends, people who interacted with them on a daily. Those people are most likely going to be impacted first and greatly, they will miss being with them physically. Also, those other people that interreacted with the person every now and then or was apart of this person’s life will also be affected and feel as though they should’ve contributed more and maybe any little decisions, they could’ve made would have changed the person’s view upon life.

In Conclusion, suicide is problem that happens all over the world to many different people and affect those same people in many of different ways. Seeing and speaking to a person one day then the next you hear they have taken their own life will be life altering and very shocking to anyone. The United States is not considered one of the worse countries that deal with suicide rates and are constantly improving on ways to prevent suicide by any needs necessary. If you or anyone you know is dealing with suicidal thoughts or ways, contact the Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-8255.

References

1. Good Morning America. (n.d.). Survival stories: How 4 people got back from the brink of suicide. Retrieved from https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/wellness/story/life-attempting-suicide-survivors-55841545
2. Lyness, D. A. (Ed.). (2015, August). About Teen Suicide (for Parents). Retrieved from https://kidshealth.org/en/parents/suicide.html
3. NAMI. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.nami.org/Blogs/NAMI-Blog/September-2018/The-Ripple-Effect-of-Suicide
4. Preventing Suicide |Violence Prevention Injury Center CDC. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/suicide/fastfact.html
5. Products – Data Briefs – Number 309 – June 2018. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db309.htm
6. Suicide Statistics. (2019, April 16). Retrieved from https://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/