Those who feel you must NOT "act out" and those that believe you should in a non-violent way.

The first group tends to be authoritarian and medicate people,....a lot. (Big Pharma loves them and they get lots of grants and their wards are quiet and they employ former members of the High School wrestling team as orderlies.)

The second is dismissed by the first as "letting people run wild" or as "thinking a pillow fight is a cure".

And I very much doubt the average academic psychologist receives much money from private industry. Big Pharma isn't usually interested in academic studies of violence.

Is that a conflict of interest? It sure is. But it's a double-edged sword for the researcher who accepts grants from private industry; it may be easier to tailor your application to the interests of the organization, but if your research is disingenuous you're going to get slammed in the peer review process.

As for psychotropic medications turning people into "quiet zombies who can still feed themselves": that's a pretty stigmatizing thing to say. Millions of people who have been prescribed antidepressants, anxiolytics, and/or anti-psychotics enjoy functional lives; they don't need people like you questioning their intelligence or their autonomy.

You know, the ones that are seen as a monthly SS disability check by the owners of the facility.

They're all about pacification.

I was trained in various schools of somatic and expressive therapies, so I definitely fit in the second camp you describe.

We are a minority these days, rarely receive insurance coverage, and are not supported by the major psychological & psychiatric organizations.

With that said I agree completely with the study and conclusions drawn. After all, I have been playing video games for decades and enjoy FPS a great deal as a way to 'unwind' after a stressful day.