Put down that Xbox remote: Researcher suggests video games may not boost cognition
September 15, 2011 in Psychology & Psychiatry
This is Daniel Blakely, FSU psychology doctoral student and Walter Boot, assistant professor in FSU's Department of Psychology. Credit: Florida State University
Wouldn't it be nice if all those hours kids spent glued to their PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 or Nintendo DS video games actually resulted in something tangible? Better grades, perhaps? Improved concentration? Superior driving skills?
Over the past decade, many studies and news media reports have suggested that action video games such as Medal of Honor or Unreal Tournament improve a variety of perceptual and cognitive abilities. But in a paper published this week in the journal Frontiers in Psychology, Walter Boot, an assistant professor in Florida State University's Department of Psychology, critically reevaluates those claims.
Together with FSU psychology doctoral student Daniel Blakely and University of Illinois collaborator Daniel Simons, Boot lays out what he believes is a persuasive argument that much of the work done over the past decade demonstrating the benefits of video game play is fundamentally flawed.
"Despite the hype, in reality, there is little solid evidence that games enhance cognition at all," he said.
The authors make the case that a number of influential studies supporting the superior skills of action gamers suffer from a host of methodological flaws. Many of those studies compared the cognitive skills of frequent gamers to non-gamers and found gamers to be superior. However, Boot and his coauthors point out that this doesn't necessarily mean that their game experience caused better perceptual and cognitive abilities. It could be that individuals who have the abilities required to be successful gamers are simply drawn to gaming.
Researchers looking for cognitive differences between expert and novice gamers often recruit research participants by circulating ads on college campuses seeking "expert" video game players. That wording alone, Boot argues, "lets participants know how researchers expect them to perform on challenging, often game-like computer tests of cognition."
Media reports on the superior skills of gamers heighten gamers' awareness of these expectations. Even studies in which non-gamers are trained to play action video games have their own problems, often in the form of weak control groups, according to Boot and his coauthors.
Boot, who grew up playing video games, said at first he was excited about research that claimed playing action video games could enhance basic measures of attention. He and his fellow researchers conducted their own video-game training study to determine what other abilities might improve following video game play, but they were unable to replicate the training benefits found in earlier studies.
"The idea that video games could enhance cognition was exciting because it represented one of the few cases in which cognitive training enhanced abilities that weren't directly practiced," Boot said. "But we found no benefits of video game training." Not only did some of his studies fail to replicate those earlier findings, but "no study has yet met the 'gold standard' methods necessary in intervention studies of this sort."
In fact, certain methodological problems appeared again and again in the studies that Boot and Blakely and reviewed. Even more important than identifying flaws of previous studies, Blakely said, their new paper outlines a series of best practices for researchers who want definitive answers on the potential benefits of video game play.
Boot and Blakely haven't entirely written off video games as a way to boost perceptual and cognitive abilities; in fact, they're still open to the possibility. But before they start recommending video game interventions as a means to improve perception and cognition for kids, adults and senior citizens, they say more evidence is necessary.
"If people are playing games to improve their cognition, they may be wasting their time," Boot said. "Play games because you enjoy them, not because they could boost your brain power."
Provided by
Florida State University
-
Forget teenagers -- seniors got game
Dec 22, 2006 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Racing, shooting and zapping your way to better visual skills
Dec 17, 2009 |
not rated yet |
0
-
How video games stretch the limits of our visual attention
Nov 18, 2010 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Video games shown to improve vision
Mar 15, 2007 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Violent video games increase aggression long after the game is turned off
Sep 20, 2010 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Of mice and mental models: Neuroscientific implications of risk-optimized behavior in the mouse
22 hours ago |
not rated yet |
0
-
Limits to growth: Scientists identify key metastasis-enabling enzyme
May 22, 2012 |
5 / 5 (4) |
0
-
Seeing is as seeing does: Spatially-structured retinal input in early development of cortical maps
Apr 26, 2012 |
5 / 5 (4) |
1
-
Dreamless nights: Brain activity during nonrapid eye movement sleep
Apr 09, 2012 |
4.4 / 5 (12) |
0
-
Take your time: Neurobiology sheds light on the superiority of spaced vs. massed learning
Mar 28, 2012 |
4.5 / 5 (21) |
3
-
A question about drug tolerance
May 23, 2012
-
Poor nutrition leading to overeating?
May 23, 2012
-
Math and dyslexia?
May 21, 2012
-
portable metabolism meter?
May 21, 2012
-
Rare medical conditions on 20/20 tonight
May 18, 2012
-
"Good" Cholesterol in Doubt
May 17, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - Medical Sciences
More news stories
More mental health care urged for kids who self-harm
(HealthDay) -- Doctors have long known that some kids suffering severe emotional turmoil find relief in physical pain -- cutting or burning or sticking themselves with pins to achieve a form of release.
Psychology & Psychiatry
19 hours ago |
not rated yet |
0
Questionable research practices surprisingly common
(Medical Xpress) -- Not all scientific misconduct is flat-out fraud. Much falls into the murkier realm of questionable research practices. A new study finds that in one field, psychology, these practices are surprisingly ...
Psychology & Psychiatry
22 hours ago |
not rated yet |
0
|
Feeling strong emotions makes peoples' brains 'tick together'
Experiencing strong emotions synchronises brain activity across individuals, research team at Aalto University and Turku PET Centre in Finland has revealed.
Psychology & Psychiatry
May 24, 2012 |
5 / 5 (1) |
0
Formal recognition of PMDD will lift stigma for women
A decision to recognise premenstrual dysphoric disorder as a genuine psychiatric condition will finally provide validation for this awful and poorly understood syndrome and alleviate the stigma ...
Psychology & Psychiatry
May 24, 2012 |
2 / 5 (1) |
1
Long-term meditation leads to different brain organization
(Medical Xpress) -- People who practice mindfulness meditation learn to accept their feelings, emotions, and states of mind without judging or resisting them. They simply live in the moment.
Psychology & Psychiatry
May 24, 2012 |
5 / 5 (5) |
0
|
Of mice and mental models: Neuroscientific implications of risk-optimized behavior in the mouse
(Medical Xpress) -- Regardless of an organism’s biological complexity, every encephalized animal continuously makes under-informed behavioral choices that can have serious consequences. Despite its ubiquity, ...
Tongue analysis software uses ancient Chinese medicine to warn of disease
For 5,000 years, the Chinese have used a system of medicine based on the flow and balance of positive and negative energies in the body. In this system, the appearance of the tongue is one of the measures used to classify ...
Cancer may require simpler genetic mutations than previously thought
Chromosomal deletions in DNA often involve just one of two gene copies inherited from either parent. But scientists haven't known how a deletion in one gene from one parent, called a "hemizygous" deletion, can contribute ...
Inherited DNA change explains overactive leukemia gene
A small inherited change in DNA is largely responsible for overactivating a gene linked to poor treatment response in people with acute leukemia.
Skp2 activates cancer-promoting, glucose-processing Akt
HER2 and its epidermal growth factor receptor cousins mobilize a specialized protein to activate a major player in cancer development and sugar metabolism, scientists report in the May 25 issue of Cell.
Early physical therapist treatment associated with reduced risk of healthcare utilization and reduced overall healthcare
A new study published in Spine shows that early treatment by a physical therapist for low back pain (LBP), as compared to delayed treatment, was associated with reduced risk of subsequent healthcare utilization and lower ...
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Possibly.
there seems to be something genetic or cultural involved in some cases.
The Korean dominance of the professional gaming, particularly Real Time Strategy, strongly suggests genetics or culture is involved in producing people who are both interested and able to excell at a game genre. In Korea, a Starcraft tournament is like the Super Bowl in the U.S.
I do know it takes a very smart and very dedicated person to play Starcraft above the casual noob skill level, and more so than almost any other video game.
The skill gap in Starcraft between A pro and F- "worse than a computer" noob is about as far as the difference between Usain Bolt and a quadrapelegic.
I was considered "c-" by the pros, but was at the top of the second highest league, and regularly beat players half way up the top league.
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
The letter ranking is logarithmic. I might have been "c-", but I was significantly better than about 95% of all players, and could legitimately win 1vs2 or even 1vs3 players just one league lower than my self...
My cousin and I used to join 4vs4 games back in the late 1990's and backstab our two allies, and then still beat the 4 opponents 2vs4, but that was before "Boxer" and the koreans and the pro gaming scene. They are just incredible really...
In order to legitimately play a game like Starcraft at the "expert" level you have to REALLY play it and research and exploit every stat, mechanic, bug, timing, etc, etc. It's like Chess. You have to actually practice all build orders and openings for all matchups and find out what works and when you should use it. And you have to improvise for every new map or patch...
Honestly, casual gamers do not have the intelligence or patience to do that.
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Unlike Chess, which has finite number of openings, you could play 50 games of Starcraft, even on the same map and even with the same race matchup, and yet never have it go exactly the same way, especially in 2vs2 games.
Then there's micromanagement.
When the game first came out, gamers complained about the Terran Race, my self included. it was believed they were teh "weakest" race. Gamers even asked Blizzard to replace the Vulture bikes with something that was "Less useless".
But as people's understanding of the game improved, it was discovered that Terran was probably slightly BETTER than the other 3 races, and Vulture bikes were actually one of the best units in the game...It got to the point that for TvT and Tvprotoss almost nothing got made by the T any more except vultures and tanks!
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
to a noob, they thing that massing capital air is the best strategy, and vulture bikes are "useless," because they don't have the skill, timing, or micromanagement abilities to understand how to use the other units.
To a pro, capital air is nearly useless, because it's too late on the tech tree, too vulnerable, and too centralized of your resources, but vulture bikes, tanks, goliaths(anti-air,) and transports are the only thing worth making, at least for TvT and TvP...
I'm rambling, but I think this shows that being intelligent makes you a good gamer, along with a hell of a lot of practice, and not the other way around.
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
I quit FPSs for the exact same reason. Trying to mitigate PTSD symptoms and fast action violence do not mix, apparently. Who would have thought? haha
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
I quit broodwar several times. I even threw it away several times only to repurchase it a few months later, I am ashamed to say.
Honestly, it's that addicting.
Oh definitely.
I used to beat diamond league protosses easily for PvP in SC2.
The only time I lose in SC2 it happens in the first 5 minutes.
If I get in the "early mid game," I get a free win for PvP and PvZ anyway. With like one exception, my opponents always quit after my first attack, because even if they stop me, it's usually impossible for them to recover and counter attack.
PvT is annoying as hell though, and usually takes like 35 or 40 minutes to win...
I play one base, low economy protoss, at least in PvP and PvZ. Never needed an expand except 1 game...
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
My basic build was:
2 gates, 1 robo, 1 starport.
This gives a lot of flexibility and "one-off" tech options as well.
Huk used 5 gate protoss a lot, but I never played anyone THAT good, so I guess the guys I played weren't good enough micro.
Honestly, haven't played in a while, so don't know how the matchups have evolved since then.
But 1 base protoss pretty much beats 2 base protoss easy. The fast expand Nexus is too easy to kill with stalkers and an immortal or two...
Sep 15, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)