User:Sasserrr/sandbox

= Benefits of Video Games =

Benefits of video games have been under the consideration of researchers for at least 9 years.

Attention and video games
A 2003 study hypothesized that video game players possess increased attentional capacity, of which they found people who play video games regularly possess more attentional capacity than those who do not. They observed the differences in attention capacity in video game players compared to non video game players using the flanker compatibility task in which participants are briefly presented a shape (either a square or a diamond) in one of 6 large rings. Participants were asked which of the two shapes appeared in one of the 6 rings, There were also relatively larger squares and diamonds outside of the circle that the 6 rings formed, as well as irrelevant shapes (such as triangles and pentagons) inside the actual rings that served as distractors. The difficulty of the task was increased with the distractors. Results for the task had shown that as the task became more difficult (more distractors), the non video game players' ability to guess correctly had declined, while the video game players' ability remained relatively constant. However initially, the ability of non video game players were better. Still, not only were the video game players able to consistently find the right shape in the rings, they were also able to report some distractors even as their numbers increased. Therefore, it did not take complete attention to find the shape for video game players. Another task in this experiment was where participants were asked how many squares they were briefly presented with, with video game players being able to report 33% more squares than non video game players, with about 26% less error.

In the same study, non video game playing participants played Medal of Honor, a first person shooter for one hour for 10 consecutive days. Another group played Tetris, a game which they hypothesized required less attention, because one only needs to pay attention to one object. The participants were tested for attentional capacity with the flanker compatibility task and the enumeration task before and after 10 days of their group's video game. The participants who played the first person shooter showed better results, which shows that video games' abilities to improve attention depends on their genres, which determine how many objects one must pay attention to, with shooters having more of an effect. In fact, the Tetris game had shown no significant effect on attention in the study. Not only did the study support that action video game players have better attentional skills, it also demonstrated that one needs as little as 10 days to see an increase in performance as a product of video games.

Coordination and Motor Skills
Research supports the theories that people who play video games possess improved visual ability, higher reaction time on average, and enhanced motor skills. Studies have also demonstrated a reduction in attentional blink among video game players, increasing their ability to recognize more stimuli as they are presented in quick succession (as fast as blinks of the eye). Such findings are important because they infer that video games are sufficient enough of a supplement to the teaching of trades involving quick decision making and precise movement.

Research also supports the possibility of video game players having better hand-eye and motor coordination. Their ability to find targets regardless of distractors while at the same time pay attention to intricate details outside of their immediate vision (such as "hit points" at the corner of the screen) in the video games they play are perhaps the factors involved in increased cognitive ability.

Debate
There is also conflicting data that suggests video games have no real positive effect, or that they have negative effects on other aspects of cognition, such as attention span. Particularly, the issue with attention is that video games are meant to be engaging and addicting, as this will get the developers more sales. People without any real attention deficit will have an easier time playing video games for hours on end, while at the same time, show symptoms of a decline in attention when subjected to comparatively less engaging tasks, such as academics. Studies conducted in this fashion do not necessarily take into account possible "types" of attention used for video games, and those used in a school.

However, a definitive attack on the theory that video games promote cognition is a study by Boot, Blakely and Simons whose research suggests "action" video games - those that are fast-paced - have no significant effect on mental ability. They state that past studies have shown difficulty in the construction process of testable research designs used to determine positive cognitive effects of video games. Their own study puts more of an emphasis on non-video game players, and the importance of testing the effects of prolonged exposure of video games to people such as these, of which they have found no significant change.

People tested in past studies were established to be gamers, and if most of those people were labeled as gamers, and knew the study was about gamers, the distribution of their average cognitive processes would not vary. Studying non-gamers would directly demonstrate the true effects of video games on people in general. Otherwise, it is implied that video games are simply a hobby that people with above average cognitive ability tend to partake in. People with naturally better attentional skills decide to play video games because they are naturally better at them, while people who were not as successful avoided video games. This confound was noted in previous experiments, and was assessed by having non video game players develop skills in video games to see if video games themselves had any effect.

Boot's study, however, highlights the lack of improvement in non video game players: that regardless of whether video games had an effect, that the nature of test-retest procedures should yield better results the second time, but instead results typically remained constant. This will skew interpretations because the experimental group (i.e., people who play video games) will seem that much better than the control. The study stresses that the cognitive benefits of video games are not ideally researched, costly, more elaborate research will need to be conducted, and that as it stands, video game players are inherently better at paying attention to details. It is necessary to use inexperienced video game players to gauge the effectiveness of video games on cognition.