The Effects of Video Games on Perception
Granic et. al.'s meta-analysis:
Granic's article involving the multifaceted benefits of gaming starts out describing the benefits playing video games, even action/violent first-person shooter video games, can have on the cognitive function of a person. Granic notes that although video games are thought to be a form of laziness or loafing, it has been shown through studies in which non-gamers are made to play either a shooter game or another kind of video game for a short period of time that those in the shooter condition can shift their attention faster, have better visual resolution processing, and better mental rotation abilities (being able to mentally view an object from numerous angles simply by seeing one side of it). Also, this article mentioned that such skills can be trained via video games. Such skills are useful in the fields of technology, engineering, math, and science, and predict success in these fields.
It was noted that benefits to cognitive abilities of game players are not found in every video game genre, however. Most often they manifest themselves after playing a shooter game rather than puzzle games. Certain games that contain puzzle levels of varying complexity may block the player from advancing, and with little instruction, the player must discover how to solve the puzzle, which teaches analytical and problem solving skills.
Granic's article involving the multifaceted benefits of gaming starts out describing the benefits playing video games, even action/violent first-person shooter video games, can have on the cognitive function of a person. Granic notes that although video games are thought to be a form of laziness or loafing, it has been shown through studies in which non-gamers are made to play either a shooter game or another kind of video game for a short period of time that those in the shooter condition can shift their attention faster, have better visual resolution processing, and better mental rotation abilities (being able to mentally view an object from numerous angles simply by seeing one side of it). Also, this article mentioned that such skills can be trained via video games. Such skills are useful in the fields of technology, engineering, math, and science, and predict success in these fields.
It was noted that benefits to cognitive abilities of game players are not found in every video game genre, however. Most often they manifest themselves after playing a shooter game rather than puzzle games. Certain games that contain puzzle levels of varying complexity may block the player from advancing, and with little instruction, the player must discover how to solve the puzzle, which teaches analytical and problem solving skills.
Donohue et. al (2010) performed a study in order to examine whether video game players experienced cognitive benefits from playing their games. Participants were a group of 45 males from Duke University (there were no females because finding females who played video games frequently enough was difficult).
There were two tasks involved in the experiment, both of which involved the participant being shown a figure on a screen and hearing a sound played through speakers, and the participant was instructed to determine which of the two came first, or if they were simultaneous. Both the noise and the picture were shown or played at various intervals: 300 milliseconds apart, up to zero milliseconds apart, in increments of 50 milliseconds each. In any situation, the note or the picture could occur up to 300 milliseconds before the picture or note, respectively.
The participants were divided in to groups labelled VGPs (video game players) and NVGPs (non video game players), based on the amount of time they played video games each week, All VGPs had experience playing first person shooter games at some point. The first task performed was a simultaneity judgment task, and a temporal order judgment task. Though both experiments were done in almost the exact same manner, the information that was searched for was different. In the simultaneity judgment task, participants were asked to determine if both the sound and the picture had occurred at the same time. The temporal order judgment task was done in order to see if participants could determine which event, the sound or the picture, occurred first. These tasks may sound very similar, but they did indeed collect differing results.
After the simultaneity judgment task, Donohue (2010) discovered from the results that VGPs were more likely to correctly determine when the stimuli had not occurred at the same time, and between the various time intervals used, they were more precise (or closer to actual simultaneity) than NVGPs. Meaning, if the auditory stimuli played (for example) 100 ms before the visual stimuli, VGPs were more likely to answer that the two events were not simultaneous than the NVGPs, who would be more likely to say that the 100ms difference was actually a case of simultaneity.
In the temporal order judgment task, Donohue (2010) found that VGPs were the closest to accurate when determining which stimuli had come first. The time at which objects are perceived subjectively as simultaneous, because they happen so rapidly in succession that the difference is nearly indistinguishable is 50 milliseconds. It is difficult for many to determine if somethings are not simultaneous if they take place slightly more than 50 ms apart from each other, but VGPs were more accurate with such perceptions than NVGPs, even when the time between stimuli occurring was 50ms.
Overall, it was shown that VGPs were especially more accurate when the visual stimulus occurred first. One reason given for this was the possibility that the high levels of rapid processing that are required to play action video games could cause heightened visual processing in VGPs. In the Temporal Order experiment, it was shown that VGPs were again significantly better than NVGPs at determining that the auditory stimuli came first (accurately). VGPs were also much better at determining if the Auditory came first, and the hypothesis given for this was, NVGPs might be less able to divide their attention across tasks and senses. VGPs, on the other hand, must focus on sounds and visuals in multiple areas of the screen, and even sounding as though it is coming from different directions in the case of gamers with high definition headphones. NVGPs, therefore, would be more likely to incorrectly say that a visual stimuli happened first because that is the thing that captures their attention before the noise does. There is no causal relationship that can be determined from this article, but this article as well as numerous other studies strongly suggest that playing video games does alter attentional and perceptual abilities in those who play them, most often in positive ways. Cited in this study were other articles that mentioned findings of non-gamers who were put under a video game training regimen and were found to have experienced similar effects as those who frequently play video games do, further reinforcing the idea that playing video games can have benefits to the cognitive processes of the player, even if the games are “action” or “first person shooter” as opposed to prosocial or neutral games.
There were two tasks involved in the experiment, both of which involved the participant being shown a figure on a screen and hearing a sound played through speakers, and the participant was instructed to determine which of the two came first, or if they were simultaneous. Both the noise and the picture were shown or played at various intervals: 300 milliseconds apart, up to zero milliseconds apart, in increments of 50 milliseconds each. In any situation, the note or the picture could occur up to 300 milliseconds before the picture or note, respectively.
The participants were divided in to groups labelled VGPs (video game players) and NVGPs (non video game players), based on the amount of time they played video games each week, All VGPs had experience playing first person shooter games at some point. The first task performed was a simultaneity judgment task, and a temporal order judgment task. Though both experiments were done in almost the exact same manner, the information that was searched for was different. In the simultaneity judgment task, participants were asked to determine if both the sound and the picture had occurred at the same time. The temporal order judgment task was done in order to see if participants could determine which event, the sound or the picture, occurred first. These tasks may sound very similar, but they did indeed collect differing results.
After the simultaneity judgment task, Donohue (2010) discovered from the results that VGPs were more likely to correctly determine when the stimuli had not occurred at the same time, and between the various time intervals used, they were more precise (or closer to actual simultaneity) than NVGPs. Meaning, if the auditory stimuli played (for example) 100 ms before the visual stimuli, VGPs were more likely to answer that the two events were not simultaneous than the NVGPs, who would be more likely to say that the 100ms difference was actually a case of simultaneity.
In the temporal order judgment task, Donohue (2010) found that VGPs were the closest to accurate when determining which stimuli had come first. The time at which objects are perceived subjectively as simultaneous, because they happen so rapidly in succession that the difference is nearly indistinguishable is 50 milliseconds. It is difficult for many to determine if somethings are not simultaneous if they take place slightly more than 50 ms apart from each other, but VGPs were more accurate with such perceptions than NVGPs, even when the time between stimuli occurring was 50ms.
Overall, it was shown that VGPs were especially more accurate when the visual stimulus occurred first. One reason given for this was the possibility that the high levels of rapid processing that are required to play action video games could cause heightened visual processing in VGPs. In the Temporal Order experiment, it was shown that VGPs were again significantly better than NVGPs at determining that the auditory stimuli came first (accurately). VGPs were also much better at determining if the Auditory came first, and the hypothesis given for this was, NVGPs might be less able to divide their attention across tasks and senses. VGPs, on the other hand, must focus on sounds and visuals in multiple areas of the screen, and even sounding as though it is coming from different directions in the case of gamers with high definition headphones. NVGPs, therefore, would be more likely to incorrectly say that a visual stimuli happened first because that is the thing that captures their attention before the noise does. There is no causal relationship that can be determined from this article, but this article as well as numerous other studies strongly suggest that playing video games does alter attentional and perceptual abilities in those who play them, most often in positive ways. Cited in this study were other articles that mentioned findings of non-gamers who were put under a video game training regimen and were found to have experienced similar effects as those who frequently play video games do, further reinforcing the idea that playing video games can have benefits to the cognitive processes of the player, even if the games are “action” or “first person shooter” as opposed to prosocial or neutral games.