As per the answer to the 2018 question on this site about the same topic, we did not know whether there was a causal link between exposure to violent video games and aggressive behavior because the experts were divided and were upholding opposite believes.
Today, however, my Googling of 'violent video games' mostly reveals news articles about studies from 2019 that are supposed to disprove this purported link. Examples of such articles: CNBC, Forbes, CNN, The New York Times. These articles link to such studies and quote experts' opinions.
Courtesy of the Oxford Internet Institute and the University of Oxford, this new study was published in Royal Society Open Science and is being touted as being one of the most comprehensive studies on the subject to date.
As time has gone on, he said, "the evidence has become pretty clear that, where there are correlations, it's probably because of a third factor." For example, boys have historically been more likely to play video games, and they also happen to be more aggressive than girls on average, Przybylski said.
If I read these articles correctly, they seem to mean that the lack of causal link here is nowadays the dominant opinion among experts. CNBC even says:
The APA has reiterated for years that there is no connection between violent video games and violent actions.
Although this statement seems simply untrue: APA resolution on Violent Vide Games, APA Review Confirms Link Between Playing Violent Video Games and Aggression , APA task force on violent media. My bad: the APA differentiates between violence and aggression; they link violent games to aggression but not violence
CNN on the other hand explicitly says that:
The American Psychological Association has yet to update its policy statement on video games and aggression, and other groups, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, also warn against violent media.
And they link to this AAP policy statement which is far more dire than what APA had released, even in spite of the harsh criticism APA faced for their policy statement.
However, importantly, the above APA and AAP statements are from 2015 - 2016 while the news articles I link to are from 2019 - much could have changed within 3 years.
Given the lack of new statements released by APA nor AAP that I know of that would either reaffirm or reverse their 2015-16 positions about the subject, I believe it is appropriate if I ask my question:
As of 2019, are the experts still divided in the subject, or is the lack of causal link here becoming the dominant opinion among experts?