The high score of bias: Exploring how violent video game players perceive scientists in this field and engage with their research

We explore how habitual players of violent video games (VVGs) form perceptions of researchers and engage with further scientific literature on this topic when exposed to studies linking VVGs to increased aggression. Across two experimental studies (Total N = 1,576), we examined whether these players exhibit biased judgments of researchers' competence and friendliness and whether they demonstrate selective exposure to further research. In Study 1, participants were presented with fictional, standardized research summaries that varied only in their conclusions about the effects of VVGs. In Study 2, real published studies were used to provide ecological validity. Results from both experiments revealed that habitual players formed more negative perceptions of researchers when the researchers’ conclusions conflicted with their beliefs. Causal inference and mediation analyses showed that these judgments were causally driven by participants' agreement with the conclusions, independent of the researchers’ methods or credentials. Furthermore, habitual players demonstrated selective exposure, showing less interest in engaging with research that concluded VVGs increase aggression. This disengagement was partially explained by their negative evaluations of researchers' competence. These findings reveal a reinforcing cycle in which biased perceptions of VVG researchers drive avoidance of opposing evidence, ultimately reducing engagement with the broader body of VVG research.