Control ( 20)
The training period was 4–24 weeks (mean = 11.49; S.D. = 6.88). One study by Lee et al. had two length periods and total hours because the study examined video game training of two types. The total training hours were 16–90 h (mean = 40.63; S.D. = 26.22), whereas the training intensity was 1.5–10.68 h/week (mean = 4.96; S.D. = 3.00). One study did not specify total training hours. Two studies did not specify the training intensity. The training periods and intensities are in Table 8 .
Periods and intensities of video gaming intervention.
Author | Year | Length (Week) | Total Hours | Average Intensity (h/Week) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Gleich et al. [ ] | 2017 | 8 | 49.5 | 6.2 |
Haier et al. [ ] | 2009 | 12 | 18 | 1.5 |
Kuhn et al. [ ] | 2014 | 8 | 46.88 | 5.86 |
Lorenz et al. [ ] | 2012 | 8 | 28 | 3.5 |
Lee et al. [ ] | 2015 | 8–11 * | 27 | n/a |
Martinez et al. [ ] | 2013 | 4 | 16 | 4 |
Roush [ ] | 2013 | 24 | ns | n/a |
West et al. [ ] | 2017 | 24 | 72 | 3 |
West et al. [ ] | 2018 | 8.4 | 90 | 10.68 |
The training length was converted into weeks (1 month = 4 weeks). ns, not specified; n/a, not available; * exact length is not available.
Of nine eligible studies, one study used resting-state MRI analysis, three studies (excluding that by Haier et al. [ 40 ]) used structural MRI analysis, and five studies used task-based MRI analysis. A study by Haier et al. used MRI analyses of two types [ 40 ]. A summary of MRI analyses is presented in Table 9 . The related resting-state, structural, and task-based MRI specifications are presented in Table 10 , Table 11 and Table 12 respectively.
MRI analysis details of eligible studies.
MRI Analysis | Author | Year | Contrast | Statistical Tool | Statistical Method | Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Resting | Martinez et al. [ ] | 2013 | (post- > pre-training) > (post>pre-control) | MATLAB; SPM8 | TFCE uncorrected | <0.005 |
Structural | Haier et al. * [ ] | 2009 | (post>pre-training) > (post>pre-control) | MATLAB 7; SurfStat | FWE corrected | <0.005 |
Kuhn et al. [ ] | 2014 | (post>pre-training) > (post>pre-control) | VBM8; SPM8 | FWE corrected | <0.001 | |
West et al. [ ] | 2017 | (post>pre-training) > (post>pre-control) | Bpipe | Uncorrected | <0.0001 | |
West et al. [ ] | 2018 | (post>pre-training) > (post>pre-control) | Bpipe | Bonferroni corrected | <0.001 | |
Task | Gleich et al. [ ] | 2017 | (post>pre-training) > (post>pre-control) | SPM12 | Monte Carlo corrected | <0.05 |
Haier et al. * [ ] | 2009 | (post>pre-training) > (post>pre-control) | SPM7 | FDR corrected | <0.05 | |
Lee et al. [ ] | 2012 | (post>pre-training) > (post>pre-control) | FSL; FEAT | uncorrected | <0.01 | |
Lorenz et al. [ ] | 2015 | (post>pre-training) > (post>pre-control) | SPM8 | Monte Carlo corrected | <0.05 | |
Roush [ ] | 2013 | post>pre-training | MATLAB 7; SPM8 | uncorrected | =0.001 |
* Haier et al. conducted structural and task analyses. + Compared pre-training and post-training between groups without using contrast. TFCE, Threshold Free Cluster Enhancement; FEW, familywise error rate; FDR, false discovery rate.
Resting-State MRI specifications of eligible studies.
Author | Year | Resting State | Structural | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Imaging | TR (s) | TE (ms) | Slice | Imaging | TR (s) | TE (ms) | Slice | ||
] | 2013 | gradient-echo planar image | 3 | 28.1 | 36 | T1-weighted | 0.92 | 4.2 | 158 |
Structural MRI specifications of eligible studies.
Author | Year | Imaging | TR (s) | TE (ms) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Kuhn et al. [ ] | 2014 | 3D T1 weighted MPRAGE | 2.5 | 4.77 |
West et al. [ ] | 2017 | 3D gradient echo MPRAGE | 2.3 | 2.91 |
West et al. [ ] | 2018 | 3D gradient echo MPRAGE | 2.3 | 2.91 |
Task-Based MRI specifications of eligible studies.
Author | Year | Task | BOLD | Structural | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Imaging | TR (s) | TE (ms) | Slice | Imaging | TR (s) | TE (ms) | Slice | |||
Gleich et al. [ ] | 2017 | win–loss paradigm | T2 echo-planar image | 2 | 30 | 36 | T1-weighted | 2.5 | 4.77 | 176 |
Haier et al. [ ] | 2009 | Tetris | Functional echo planar | 2 | 29 | ns | 5-echo MPRAGE | 2.53 | 1.64; 3.5; 5.36; 7.22; 9.08 | ns |
Lee et al. [ ] | 2012 | game control | fast echo-planar image | 2 | 25 | ns | T1-weighted MPRAGE | 1.8 | 3.87 | 144 |
Lorenz et al. [ ] | 2015 | slot machine paradigm | T2 echo-planar image | 2 | 30 | 36 | T1-weighted MPRAGE | 2.5 | 4.77 | ns |
Roush [ ] | 2013 | digit symbol substitution | fast echo-planar image | 2 | 25 | 34 | diffusion weighted image | ns | ns | ns |
All analyses used 3 Tesla magnetic force; TR = repetition time; TE = echo time, ns = not specified.
This literature review evaluated the effect of noncognitive-based video game intervention on the cognitive function of healthy people. Comparison of studies is difficult because of the heterogeneities of participant ages, beneficial effects, and durations. Comparisons are limited to studies sharing factors.
Video gaming intervention affects all age categories except for the children category. The exception derives from a lack of intervention studies using children as participants. The underlying reason for this exception is that the brain is still developing until age 10–12 [ 52 , 53 ]. Among the eligible studies were a study investigating adolescents [ 40 ], six studies investigating young adults [ 41 , 42 , 43 , 47 , 49 , 51 ] and two studies investigating older adults [ 48 , 50 ].
Differences among study purposes underlie the differences in participant age categories. The study by Haier et al. was intended to study adolescents because the category shows the most potential brain changes. The human brain is more sensitive to synaptic reorganization during the adolescent period [ 54 ]. Generally, grey matter decreases whereas white matter increases during the adolescent period [ 55 , 56 ]. By contrast, the cortical surface of the brain increases despite reduction of grey matter [ 55 , 57 ]. Six studies were investigating young adults with the intention of studying brain changes after the brain reaches maturity. The human brain reaches maturity during the young adult period [ 58 ]. Two studies were investigating older adults with the intention of combating difficulties caused by aging. The human brain shrinks as age increases [ 56 , 59 ], which almost invariably leads to declining cognitive function [ 59 , 60 ].
Three beneficial outcomes were observed using MRI method: grey matter change [ 40 , 42 , 50 ], brain activity change [ 40 , 43 , 47 , 48 , 49 ], and functional connectivity change [ 41 ]. The affected brain area corresponds to how the respective games were played.
Four studies of 3D video gaming showed effects on the structure of hippocampus, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), cerebellum [ 42 , 43 , 50 ], and DLPFC [ 43 ] and ventral striatum activity [ 49 ]. In this case, the hippocampus is used for memory [ 61 ] and scene recognition [ 62 ], whereas the DLPFC and cerebellum are used for working memory function for information manipulation and problem-solving processes [ 63 ]. The grey matter of the corresponding brain region has been shown to increase during training [ 20 , 64 ]. The increased grey matter of the hippocampus, DLPFC, and cerebellum are associated with better performance in reference and working memory [ 64 , 65 ].
The reduced activity of DLPFC found in the study by Gleich et al. corresponds to studies that showed reduced brain activity associated with brain training [ 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 ]. Decreased activity of the DLPFC after training is associated with efficiency in divergent thinking [ 70 ]. 3D video gaming also preserved reward systems by protecting the activity of the ventral striatum [ 71 ].
Two studies of puzzle gaming showed effects on the structure of the visual–spatial processing area, activity of the frontal area, and functional connectivity change. The increased grey matter of the visual–spatial area and decreased activity of the frontal area are similar to training-associated grey matter increase [ 20 , 64 ] and activity decrease [ 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 ]. In this case, visual–spatial processing and frontal area are used constantly for spatial prediction and problem-solving of Tetris. Functional connectivity of the multimodal integration and the higher-order executive system in the puzzle solving-based gaming of Professor Layton game corresponds to studies which demonstrated training-associated functional connectivity change [ 72 , 73 ]. Good functional connectivity implies better performance [ 73 ].
Strategy gaming affects the DLPFC activity, whereas rhythm gaming affects the activity of visuospatial working memory, emotional, and attention area. FPS gaming affects the structure of the hippocampus and amygdala. Decreased DLPFC activity is similar to training-associated activity decrease [ 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 ]. A study by Roush demonstrated increased activity of visuospatial working memory, emotion, and attention area, which might occur because of exercise and gaming in the Dance Revolution game. Results suggest that positive activations indicate altered functional areas by complex exercise [ 48 ]. The increased grey matter of the hippocampus and amygdala are similar to the training-associated grey matter increase [ 20 , 64 ]. The hippocampus is used for 3D navigation purposes in the FPS world [ 61 ], whereas the amygdala is used to stay alert during gaming [ 74 ].
Change of the brain structure and function was observed after 16 h of video gaming. The total durations of video gaming were 16–90 h. However, the gaming intensity must be noted because the gaming intensity varied: 1.5–10.68 h per week. The different intensities might affect the change of cognitive function. Cognitive intervention studies demonstrated intensity effects on the cortical thickness of the brain [ 75 , 76 ]. A similar effect might be observed in video gaming studies. More studies must be conducted to resolve how the intensity can be expected to affect cognitive function.
Almost all studies used inclusion criteria “little/no experience with video games.” The criterion was used to reduce the factor of gaming-related experience on the effects of video gaming. Some of the studies also used specific handedness and specific sex of participants to reduce the variation of brain effects. Expertise and sex are shown to affect brain activity and structure [ 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 ]. The exclusion criterion of “MRI contraindication” is used for participant safety for the MRI protocol, whereas exclusion criteria of “psychiatric/mental illness”, “neurological illness”, and “medical illness” are used to standardize the participants.
Some concern might be raised about the quality of methodology, assessed using Delphi criteria [ 45 ]. The quality was 3–9 (mean = 6.10; S.D. = 1.69). Low quality in most papers resulted from unspecified information corresponding to the criteria. Quality improvements for the studies must be performed related to the low quality of methodology. Allocation concealment, assessor blinding, care provider blinding, participant blinding, intention-to-treat analysis, and allocation method details must be improved in future studies.
Another concern is blinding and control. This type of study differs from medical studies in which patients can be blinded easily. In studies of these types, the participants were tasked to do either training as an active control group or to do nothing as a passive control group. The participants can expect something from the task. The expectation might affect the outcomes of the studies [ 81 , 82 , 83 ]. Additionally, the waiting-list control group might overestimate the outcome of training [ 84 ].
Considering the sample size, which was 20–75 (mean = 43.67; S.D. = 15.63), the studies must be upscaled to emphasize video gaming effects. There are four phases of clinical trials that start from the early stage and small-scale phase 1 to late stage and large-scale phase 3 and end in post-marketing observation phase 4. These four phases are used for drug clinical trials, according to the food and drug administration (FDA) [ 85 ]. Phase 1 has the purpose of revealing the safety of treatment with around 20–100 participants. Phase 2 has the purpose of elucidating the efficacy of the treatment with up to several hundred participants. Phase 3 has the purpose of revealing both efficacy and safety among 300–3000 participants. The final phase 4 has the purpose of finding unprecedented adverse effects of treatment after marketing. However, because medical studies and video gaming intervention studies differ in terms of experimental methods, slight modifications can be done for adaptation to video gaming studies.
Several unresolved issues persist in relation to video gaming intervention. First, no studies assessed chronic/long-term video gaming. The participants might lose their motivation to play the same game over a long time, which might affect the study outcomes [ 86 ]. Second, meta-analyses could not be done because the game genres are heterogeneous. To ensure homogeneity of the study, stricter criteria must be set. However, this step would engender a third limitation. Third, randomized controlled trial video gaming studies that use MRI analysis are few. More studies must be conducted to assess the effects of video gaming. Fourth, the eligible studies lacked cognitive tests to validate the cognitive change effects for training. Studies of video gaming intervention should also include a cognitive test to ascertain the relation between cognitive function and brain change.
The systematic review has several conclusions related to beneficial effects of noncognitive-based video games. First, noncognitive-based video gaming can be used in all age categories as a means to improve the brain. However, effects on children remain unclear. Second, noncognitive-based video gaming affects both structural and functional aspects of the brain. Third, video gaming effects were observed after a minimum of 16 h of training. Fourth, some methodology criteria must be improved for better methodological quality. In conclusion, acute video gaming of a minimum of 16 h is beneficial for brain function and structure. However, video gaming effects on the brain area vary depending on the video game type.
We would like to thank all our other colleagues in IDAC, Tohoku University for their support.
PRISMA Checklist of the literature review.
Section/Topic | # | Checklist Item | Reported on Page # |
---|---|---|---|
Title | 1 | Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. | 1 |
Structured summary | 2 | Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and implications of key findings; systematic review registration number. | 1 |
Rationale | 3 | Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. | 1, 2 |
Objectives | 4 | Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed related to participants, interventions, comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS). | 2 |
Protocol and registration | 5 | Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it is accessible (e.g., Web address), and if available, provide registration information including registration number. | 2 |
Eligibility criteria | 6 | Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale. | 2 |
Information sources | 7 | Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify additional studies) in the search and date last searched. | 2 |
Search | 8 | Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be repeated. | 2 |
Study selection | 9 | State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and if applicable, included in the meta-analysis). | 3 |
Data collection process | 10 | Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes for obtaining and confirming data from investigators. | 3 |
Data items | 11 | List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and simplifications made. | 3 |
Risk of bias in individual studies | 12 | Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis. | 2 |
Summary measures | 13 | State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). | - |
Synthesis of results | 14 | Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency (e.g., I ) for each meta-analysis. | - |
Risk of bias across studies | 15 | Specify any assessment of risk of bias that might affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective reporting within studies). | - |
Additional analyses | 16 | Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating which were pre-specified. | - |
Study selection | 17 | Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. | 3,5 |
Study characteristics | 18 | For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and provide the citations. | 5-11 |
Risk of bias within studies | 19 | Present data on risk of bias of each study, and if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12). | 5,6 |
Results of individual studies | 20 | For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study: (a) simple summary data for each intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot. | 4 |
Synthesis of results | 21 | Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. | - |
Risk of bias across studies | 22 | Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). | - |
Additional analysis | 23 | Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression [see Item 16]). | - |
Summary of evidence | 24 | Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers). | 12,13 |
Limitations | 25 | Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of identified research, reporting bias). | 13 |
Conclusions | 26 | Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research. | 14 |
Funding | 27 | Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the systematic review. | 14 |
For more information, visit: www.prisma-statement.org .
D.B.T., R.N., and R.K. designed the systematic review. D.B.T. and R.N. searched and selected the papers. D.B.T. and R.N. wrote the manuscript with R.K. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. D.B.T. and R.N. contributed equally to this work.
Study is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 17H06046 (Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas) and 16KT0002 (Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)).
None of the other authors has any conflict of interest to declare. Funding sources are not involved in the study design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, or writing of the study report.
How to Teach and Experience Empathic Emotion
Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 1134))
Included in the following conference series:
1563 Accesses
8 Citations
21 Altmetric
This article focuses on how video games may trigger empathy. On the one hand, globalization and our fast-changing, globalized world have resulted in an empathy deficit, a situation that calls desperately for a new approach to tackle the empathy issue. On the other hand, recent statistical data has shown that players in some countries today spend on average more than 4 h weekly playing games. Most past research has found that playing violent games decreases pro-social behavior. However, only a few studies investigate the effects of neutral or pro-social video games. Our study aims to identify several characteristics of four games that seem to promote positive moral and empathy and involves 40 subjects. Specifically, we look into the effects of variation of number of interventions and the correlation with perceived presence and immersion. The research reported in this paper covers background and related work on empathy research, existing work on video games for experiencing empathy and the layout of the study. The findings of this initial study on four pro-social games suggest that sufficient story-line of video games can positively impacts aspects such as the ‘perspective taking’ of players. Findings also indicate that multiple interventions and higher perceived immersion dent to increase the level of empathy. This research may contribute to supporting the promotion and development of the ‘ games for good ’ or ‘ games for change ’ campaign.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Institutional subscriptions
Anderson, C.A., Warburton, W.A.: The impact of violent video games: an overview. In: Warburton, W., Braunstein, D. (eds.) Growing Up Fast and Furious: Reviewing the Impacts of Violent and Sexualised Media on Children, pp. 56–84. The Federation Press, Annandale (2012)
Google Scholar
Ann: Games We Need: Old Man’s Journey. Screen Therapy Review, 5 March 2018. https://screentherapyblog.wordpress.com/2018/03/05/old-mans-journey/
Bachen, C.M., Hernández-Ramos, P.F., Raphael, C.: Simulating REAL LIVES: promoting global empathy and interest in learning through simulation games. Simul. Gaming 43 , 437–460 (2012)
Article Google Scholar
Batson, C.D., Polycarpou, M.P., Jones, E.H., Imhoff, H.I., Mitchener, E.C.: Empathy and attitudes: can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group improve feeling toward the group? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 72 (1), 105–118 (1997)
Coeckelbergh, M.: Violent computer games, empathy and cosmopolitanism. J. Ethic Inf. Technol. 9 (3), 219–231 (2007)
Davis, M.H.: A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog Sel. Doc. Psychol. 10 (85), 2–17 (1980)
de Smale, S., Kors, M.J.L., Sandovar, A.M.: The case of this war of mine: a production studies perspective on moral game design. Games Cult. 14 (4), 387–409 (2017)
Dohrenwend, A.M.: Defining empathy to better teach, measure, and understanding its impact. Acad. Med. 93 (12), 1754–1756 (2018)
Eisenberg, N., Eggum, N.D.: Empathic responding: sympathy and personal distress. In: Decety, J., Ickes, W. (eds.) The Social Neuroscience of Empathy, pp. 71–83. MIT Press, Cambridge (2009)
Chapter Google Scholar
Elmore, C.A., Harden, N.K.G.: The influence of supportive parenting and racial socialization messages on African American youth behavioural outcome. J. Child Fam. 22 (13), 63–75 (2013)
Gee, J.P.: Learning and games. In: Salen, K. (ed.) The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning. The John D. and Cathere T. McArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2008)
Gough, C.: Video Game and Industry: Statistic and Fact, 12 August 2019. https://www.statista.com/topics/868/video-games/
Greitemeyer, T., Osswald, S., Brauer, M.: Playing prosocial video games increases empathy and decreases schadenfreude. Emotion 10 (6), 796–802 (2010)
Hafner, M., Jansz, J.: The players’ experiences of immersion in persuasive games: a study of my life as a refugee and peacemaker. Int. J. Serious Games 5 (4), 63–79 (2018)
Happ, C.: Empathy in video games and other media. Ph.D. dissertation, Psychology Department of Philipps Universitaet Marburg (2013)
Heron, M., Belford, P.: It’s only a games: ethics, empathy and identification in game morality systems. Comput. Games J. 3 (1), 34–52 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392356
Huizinga, J.: Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Elements in Culture. Beacon Press, Boston (1983)
Krahe, B., Moeler, I.: Longitudinal effect of media violence on aggression and empathy among German adolescents. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 31 (5), 401–409 (2010)
Lankoski, P.: Goals, affects, and empathy in games. In: The Proceeding of Philosophy of Computer Games, pp. 39–55. Springer (2007)
Manney, P.J.: Empathy in the time of technology: how storytelling is the key to empathy. J. Evol. Technol. 19 (1), 51–61 (2008)
Mark, R.: Other People’s Shoes, 18 February 2019. https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/other-peoples-shoes-2019-02-18
McDonald, N., Messinger, D.: The development of empathy: how, when, and why. In: Acerbi, A., Lombo, J.A., Sanguineti, J.J. (eds.) Free Will, Emotions, and Moral Actions: Philosophy and Neuroscience in Dialogue. IF-Press, London (2011)
Meier, A.: A Games Lets You Navigate an Artist’s Flight from Syria, 20 September 2017. https://hyperallergic.com/399758/path-out-game-causa-creations/
Miller, S.M.: The potential of Serious Games as Mental Health Treatment. University Honors Theses. Paper 148 (2015)
Prot, S., Anderson, C.A., Gentile, D.A., Brown, S.C., Swing, E.L.: The positive negative effects of video games play. In: Jordan, A.B., Romer, D. (eds.) Media and the Well-Being of Children and Adolescents, pp. 109–128. Oxford University Press, New York (2014)
Przybylski, A.K., Weinstein, N.: Violent video game engagement is not associated with adolescents’ aggressive behaviour: evidence from a registered report. R. Soc. Open Sci. 6 (2), 171–174 (2019)
Solberg, D.: The Problem with Empathy Games, 19 January 2016. https://killscreen.com/articles/the-problem-with-empathy-games/
The Global Games Market Reaches \$99.6 Billion in 2016, Mobile Generating 37%, 1 April 2016. https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/
Vaughan, A.R., Pepler, S.B., Craig, W.: Quest for the golden rule: an effective social skills promotion and bullying prevention program. Comput. Educ. 56 (1), 166–175 (2011)
Watson, J.C.: The role of empathy in psychotherapy: theory, research, and practice. In: Cain, D.J., Keenan, K., Rubin, S. (eds.) Humanistic Psychotherapies: Handbook of Research and Practice, pp. 115–145. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC (2016). https://doi.org/10.1037/14775-005
Witmer, B., Singer, M.J.: Measuring presence in virtual environments: a presence questionnaire. Presence 7 (3), 225–240 (1998)
Witmer, B., Singer, M.J.: Immersive Tendencies Questionnaire. Revised by UQO Cyber-psychology Lab (1996)
Download references
Authors and affiliations.
Graz University of Technology, Inffeldgasse 16c, Graz, Austria
Ossy Dwi Endah Wulansari, Johanna Pirker, Johannes Kopf & Christian Guetl
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Correspondence to Ossy Dwi Endah Wulansari .
Editors and affiliations.
Carinthia University of Applied Sciences, Villach, Austria
Michael E. Auer
Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
Hanno Hortsch
King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bangkok, Bangkok, Thailand
Panarit Sethakul
Reprints and permissions
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
Cite this paper.
Wulansari, O.D.E., Pirker, J., Kopf, J., Guetl, C. (2020). Video Games and Their Correlation to Empathy. In: Auer, M., Hortsch, H., Sethakul, P. (eds) The Impact of the 4th Industrial Revolution on Engineering Education. ICL 2019. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 1134. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40274-7_16
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40274-7_16
Published : 18 March 2020
Publisher Name : Springer, Cham
Print ISBN : 978-3-030-40273-0
Online ISBN : 978-3-030-40274-7
eBook Packages : Intelligent Technologies and Robotics Intelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Policies and ethics
College & Research Libraries ( C&RL ) is the official, bi-monthly, online-only scholarly research journal of the Association of College & Research Libraries, a division of the American Library Association.
C&RL is now on Instragram! Follow us today.
Shannon L. Farrell is Natural Resources Librarian in the Natural Resources Library at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities; e-mail: [email protected] . Amy E. Neeser is Assistant Librarian, Library Research—Science and Engineering in the University Library at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; e-mail: [email protected] . Carolyn Bishoff is Physics, Astronomy, and Earth Sciences Librarian in the Walter Library at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities; e-mail: [email protected] ).
C&RL News
ALA JobLIST
Advertising Information
Shannon L. Farrell, Amy E. Neeser, and Carolyn Bishoff *
Academic libraries develop collections and services for scholars who use video games in teaching and research. However, there are no assessments of related information and technology needs. The authors conducted 30 semistructured interviews to gather data about these needs and understand how the University of Minnesota Libraries can facilitate access to games and technology. A total of 28 interviewees used games in research, and 23 used games in teaching. We identified a variety of information and technology needs; many showed strong disciplinary trends. The findings can inform needs-based multidisciplinary strategies to develop video game services and collections relevant to unique academic communities.
Recent studies show that video games are ingrained in American culture and, increasingly, higher education. A 2015 Pew Research Center survey found that 49 percent of American adults and 67 percent of adults ages 18–29 play video games. 1 The New Media Consortium reported that games and gamification have several applications in higher education, as educational technology and components of blended learning. 2 A search for “video games” in major article indices finds game technology used in diverse research areas.
College and research libraries share a vision of exceptional services to motivate and facilitate cutting-edge research and student learning 3 and have proactively supported scholars using and experimenting with video games. Librarians frequently collaborate with faculty and students to create game collections and interactive spaces for research, teaching, game development, and play. Despite this, there are currently no multidisciplinary assessments that provide an overview of the information and technology needs required by scholars working with video games. Some disciplinary-specific needs are understood, such as the needs of game design programs and curricula, but most information on needs is based on anecdotal evidence.
The University of Minnesota (UMN) is a large, doctoral-granting research university. The Twin Cities campus includes more than 4,000 faculty and 52,000 students, 16 colleges, and more than 300 research, education, and outreach centers and institutes. There is no video game design program or department, but there are a number of research faculty, teaching faculty, and students who use video games for academic purposes. To understand the diverse uses of video games across disciplines, we conducted semistructured narrative interviews of faculty, staff, and graduate students who use games or gaming technology in their work. This paper explores the information and technology needs of scholars who use video games on the UMN campus, similarities and differences by discipline, and how college and research libraries can incorporate disciplinary needs into a strategic approach to video game services and collections.
Many academic libraries recognize that scholars using video games for research and instruction have unique information and technology needs. In 2008, Smith 4 called for a better understanding of game scholars’ information needs, research methods, and types of materials they require, but there are three challenges to understanding those needs on a large scale: lack of information on conducting a comprehensive needs assessment of academic video game users, scarce information about research and teaching needs related to video games, and little information about how unique disciplinary or institutional needs affect a game-related collection or service.
Most library literature on games focuses on recommended genres and equipment 5 or the specifics of acquiring, cataloging, and circulating games. 6 Descriptions of video game collections and services often include a process to gather input; but none of these articles go into detail about the methods or findings, nor do they share a specific plan for how faculty and students would be consulted as technology, research, and classroom needs change.
Laskowski and Ward provide the most thorough overview of classroom and research needs and areas the library can support. 7 They note three primary needs for game-related classes at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (UIUC): access to labs with high-powered PCs, availability of course reserves, and access to discontinued games. They propose a variety of needs for game design classes and surmise that those classes would benefit from close liaison partnerships. The research needs they identify all relate to analyses of gameplay, and they propose archiving gameplay videos with player commentary. Since then, game technology has evolved and these recommendations are worth updating.
Many academic libraries have new game collections since the publication of these foundational articles, and descriptions of these collections provide the most up-to-date understanding of the evolving academic uses of video games. It is well recognized that researchers and instructors who use games come from many different disciplines, including education, economics, and the humanities. 8 Some libraries developed partnerships with one department or discipline, such as education 9 or the arts. 10 Librarians managing the game collection at the University of Chicago (UChicago) intend to serve a wide population, from music to media studies to computer science. 11 UChicago also has strong faculty advocates who identified many potential users on campus. 12 Game collections at the University of Michigan 13 and Carleton University 14 likewise support a range of courses and research interests from the sciences to the humanities.
Despite the variety of potential users, there is less documentation about how a library game collection reflects the disciplinary or departmental information and technology needs at a particular institution. The information available shows a surprising amount of consistency across academic game collections: most libraries collect commercially successful games to play on consoles, such as the Playstation 3 or XBox 360. UIUC, 15 the University of Michigan, 16 and the University of California Santa Cruz (UCSC) 17 have vintage games and game systems available. Though personal computer (PC) games are recognized as an important genre to collect, 18 it was difficult to determine if any academic libraries collected PC games or provided hardware to play them. Carleton University is one of the few that does. 19
There are similarities among the themes of many game collections. Collections at Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU), 20 UChicago, 21 and the University of Michigan 22 all represent the history of video game development and the evolution of games through time. Many academic game collections also focus on acquiring current releases. 23
Some libraries have unique aspects to their collections. For example, VCU collects games specifically for users in the arts. The arts librarian looks for “games that have certain aesthetics … have significant artistic direction, unique narrative or cerebral gameplay.” 24 Some libraries plan to expand beyond console games, including UChicago; a faculty member from English hopes that “computer and mobile games” are eventually added to the collection. 25 At least two libraries make game development software available: the University of Calgary game resources include “six high performance (liquid cooled) gaming PCs” with software packages including Unity and several Autodesk products; 26 and Carleton University had requests for software including Poser Pro. 27
As affordable game technology evolves, libraries take steps to stay up-to-date with new research and teaching applications. Commonly, academic libraries rely on subject librarians to stay aware of research and instruction trends, and that is no different when video games are involved. 28 Another strategy involves direct faculty and student input, which often happens during the initial development of video game collections. 29 However, some collections are built from donations and gifts like at the University of Calgary; 30 a for those, the relationship between the collection and local research and teaching needs is less clear. Some collections accept donations for a particular purpose: the University of Michigan Computer and Video Game Archive (CVGA) accepts donations and purchases games to create the most comprehensive collection possible, while also collecting in targeted ways to support faculty and student activities. 31
No literature to date provides a comprehensive overview of the information and technology needs of academic video game users. Many universities rely on a handful of faculty advisors to understand needs on campus; UIUC consulted a faculty member and hosted a game night for students to gather input; 32 Carleton University similarly “crowd-sourced” input for their game collection from faculty, students, and library staff, though they did not describe their methods. 33 At UChicago, faculty advocates assisted directly with the development of the collection. 34 The University of Michigan LibGuide for the CVGA provides the most comprehensive list of courses, research, and faculty who have used the CVGA on their campus, but the list is intended to inform students and potential users, not provide an overview of trends about research and teaching needs or inform collection and service development. 35
This paper explores the information and technology needs of games scholars at UMN Twin Cities and how libraries can accommodate disciplinary needs and help overcome barriers to academic work related to video games.
We formulated the following research questions:
To answer these questions, we identified scholars at UMN who work with video games or video game technology. This was defined broadly and ranged from using games as an object of study to using the technology to study a separate problem. We excluded researchers studying “game theory” (a mathematical concept) or studying analog games such as board games or logic puzzles because our interest was in needs related to video game technology.
We used a number of methods to identify a population of faculty, staff, and students. SciVal Experts, a research profile system used at UMN, identified 62 people who had published on video games. The SciVal Experts system does not include all UMN scholars, and the database best represents disciplines that use journal articles as their primary means of scholarly communication, so we also conducted searches of the UMN website to find mentions of video games in biographies, research statements, or classes. Word-of-mouth also played an important role: we asked librarians at the UMN for recommendations and used snowball sampling to find additional names from those we interviewed. Through these combined methods, we obtained 92 total names, which we considered an exhaustive list.
A qualitative approach was most appropriate, as opposed to a survey, since it allowed participants to drive the conversation and focus on topics important to them. Since we did not have personal connections to those doing video game–related work at UMN, interviews had the additional advantage of building new relationships. We sent invitations to conduct hour-long, semistructured interviews to our sample of faculty, staff, and graduate students. Those who responded were interviewed at a location of their choice. Those who did not respond were sent a follow-up invitation two weeks later. Of the 92 names in the original population, 30 people agreed to be interviewed, 20 declined, and 42 did not respond.
Each interview was attended by two members of the research team and was audio recorded with the interviewee’s permission. We asked guiding questions, but the interviewee led the conversation. Instead of transcribing each interview, we used a Google form to code data from the audio (see appendix for codes and definitions). We used a controlled vocabulary to code most topics and captured quotes and observations with free-text responses. To make sure that different coders maintained a level of consistency, we reviewed the audio from the first 15 interviews in tandem and resolved disputes with the codes and analysis methodology. We then assigned a single reviewer to the final 15 subjects.
We took measures to ensure participants’ anonymity by assigning each participant a random number, coding participants by discipline instead of department, and using generic titles (such as untenured faculty) in place of official positions. These methods were approved by the UMN Institutional Review Board on October 17, 2014.
We identified 92 people from four broad disciplinary groups: arts and humanities, social sciences, science/technology/engineering/math (STEM), and health sciences (see table 1). We interviewed 30 people from this population, an overall response rate of 33 percent. The interview sample overrepresented the STEM population, which had a 52 percent response rate, and underrepresented health sciences, which had a 19 percent response rate (see figure 1). It also overrepresented graduate students, who had a 46 percent response rate overall. Participants were split almost evenly between graduate students (13) and faculty/staff (17). It was also noteworthy that the largest number of interviewed graduate students (in both frequency and percentage of total) occurred in arts and humanities (5).
Figure 1 |
Demographics of Interview Subjects (N=30) and Subject Population (N=92) by Discipline and Academic Status |
Interdepartmental collaboration was defined as a relationship, formal or informal, between an interview participant and a member of another department. Both formal and informal collaboration were considered: formal collaboration was defined as a relationship based on an externally recognized partnership, such as a project, grant, coauthorship on a manuscript, or serving as an academic advisor or dissertation committee member; informal collaboration was defined as unofficial or casual partnerships based on consultations, conversations, and friendships that contribute to academic work. These data were used to determine whether an interviewee’s work was confined to a single department or discipline or whether he or she had potential connections outside the interviewee’s home department. We found high levels of interdepartmental collaboration in all disciplines (see figure 2). One third of interview participants (10) reported three or more interdepartmental relationships, including an untenured instructor in arts and humanities who collaborated with faculty and students across five different departments in arts and humanities, STEM, and social sciences. A total of 20 percent of participants (6) reported no collaboration or no collaboration outside their departments, including an untenured instructor in STEM who only collaborated with graduate teaching assistants in his department. Interviewees from arts and humanities were the only group where all interviewees reported collaborative partnerships.
Figure 2 |
Number of Current Interdepartmental Relationships by Discipline (n=30) |
|
The majority (21/30) of interview participants used video games in both research and teaching (see figure 3). Most participants conducted research with video games (28/30). About a quarter of interviewees (7), most from STEM and health sciences, used games solely in research, including a graduate student in STEM who received funding for research and did not teach. Five categories of game-related research emerged from the interviews (see figure 4). Interviewees who conducted research on the development of games or technology typically produced software or algorithms that could be used in games or developed games based on existing technology. Researchers who used games as instrumentation modified game technology to collect quantitative data or used video games as a cheaper alternative to another analogous instrument they could have purchased. When games were used as an object of study, researchers often applied critical analysis or theory to a video game as they would another text or primary source. When games were used to study influences on people or society, the researcher typically used qualitative methods to examine some societal impact of games. Finally, games were studied by some for their educational applications and impact on student outcomes. Some interviewees used games in more than one way, such as a graduate student in arts and humanities who studied video games as both a cultural object and a cultural influence. Similarly, an untenured faculty in STEM researched video games as an educational technology while also examining their social influence. Each discipline was represented in 3–4 research application categories. At the same time, strong disciplinary research trends were present and each category was dominated by a single discipline, with the exception of educational technology. Educational technology applications primarily included testing games and game-based learning principles in the classroom.
Figure 3 |
Areas of Academic Work Where Interview Subjects Used Video Games or Game Technology, by Discipline (n=30) |
|
Figure 4 |
Role of Video Games/Technology in Research by Discipline (n=28) |
|
Fewer people used video games in teaching (23/30) than in research, but interviewees who taught with games most often used them in research as well. For example, a tenured faculty researched the effectiveness of a mobile game to create and grade assignments and used the same game in several of his courses. Only two individuals used video games solely in a teaching capacity, including an instructor in STEM who had no research responsibilities. Four categories of teaching applications emerged from the interviews (see figure 5). Some instructors designed games from scratch for students to use in the classroom. Other instructors taught game design principles sometimes using commercial games and sometimes requiring students to create their own games. Games were also used as course material, analogous to texts or other primary sources: instructors assigned games in the syllabus or had students watch videos of others playing through a game. Finally, instructors discussed games, game mechanics, or their own research on games in the classroom but may not have assigned games to students to play in the course. Similar to research applications, some interviewees used games in the classroom multiple ways, like an untenured faculty in STEM who taught game design and also used video games as course material. Every disciplinary group used video games as course material and as a discussion piece in class. Some teaching applications were more common in particular disciplines; 4 of 8 STEM interviewees designed a game for their classes and 5 of 6 from the social sciences used games as course material. Overall, disciplinary trends were far less distinct. Table 2 summarizes the data from figures 3–5.
Figure 5 |
Role of Video Games/Technology in Teaching by Discipline (n=23) |
|
Among the interviewees, 18 types of information were used (see table 3). Arts and humanities participants used the most information sources (13), while STEM participants used the least (6). Video games were used as primary sources by interviewees in arts and humanities and social sciences, including a tenured faculty in the social sciences who studies game symbology. Interviewees from all disciplines used colleagues, web sources, journals and Google Scholar. Dominant information sources emerged from each discipline: arts and humanities, journals and web sources (see figure 6); social sciences, journals (see figure 7); STEM, colleagues, journals, and Google Scholar (see figure 8); and health sciences, colleagues (see figure 9).
Participants identified 17 unique technology needs (see table 4). The following technology categories emerged: equipment, games, programming languages, servers, software, and web applications. Equipment included any type of hardware, from game consoles like Xbox or PlayStations, to mobile phones or personal computers (PCs). PCs were the most common piece of equipment identified as required by the whole sample, but peripherals (accessories such as game controllers) were the predominant type of equipment mentioned by participants in the health sciences. For example, a Wii balance board was used to study involuntary bodily movements. Only five interviewees used console system equipment (see figure 10).
Figure 6 |
Information Sources in Arts and Humanities (n=7) |
|
Figure 7 |
Information Sources in Social Sciences (n=7) |
|
Figure 8 |
Information Sources in STEM (n=11) |
|
Figure 9 |
Information Sources in Health Sciences (n=5) |
|
Games referred to all types of playable software, and four categories of video games emerged: PC games, played on a computer and often accessed through a platform like Steam, were the most common, followed by console games (played on a console) and web games (played through an Internet browser); mobile games (played on a phone) were the least common. Arts and humanities and social sciences participants had the strongest need for games, and they use the widest variety of platforms. For example, a graduate student in arts and humanities uses PC, console, and mobile games to study music, and a graduate student in the social sciences uses web, PC, and console games to study representations of bodies. Social sciences have the largest use of web-based games, used by 3 of 4 interviewees. Only 1 of 11 STEM participants used video games in his or her academic activities (see figure 11), a graduate student studying a prominent massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG).
Figure 10 |
Equipment Technology Requirements for Game-Related Research/Teaching by Discipline (n=30) |
|
Software as a category excluded video games but included almost any other type of digital application that a researcher or instructor identified as necessary to his or her work. The subcategories were chosen with collection development needs in mind; proprietary software would likely come at a cost and include access restrictions, while open source software would be more accessible for any library or user to install. Other categories of interest included custom software, which was usually designed by the researcher or instructor and might not be widely shared or available, and game design software. Game design software might overlap with one of the other categories: some interviewees used Unity, an open source game design software; some used the Unreal engine, which at the time of the interviews cost money to download and was not open source; and some built custom game design software of their own. STEM participants had the most software needs overall; and, as a group, both STEM and health sciences interviewees reported using some type of software from every category (see figure 12). However, the needs were diverse among individuals: a graduate student in STEM used proprietary robotics software and a tenured faculty member in STEM used open source software to teach programming. Arts and humanities interviewees overall did not report many software needs; only 1 of 7 interviewees described any software needs at all. However, members of every disciplinary grouping did report a need for proprietary software.
Figure 11 |
Game Technology Requirements for Game-Related Research/Teaching by Discipline (n=30) |
|
Figure 12 |
Software Technology Requirements for Game-Related Research/Teaching by Discipline (n=30) |
|
Some technology used by the interviewees in this study was free or provided by the university, like a personal computer, but many technology needs required some financial resources to fulfill. To determine how interviewees currently met their technology needs, we asked about the specific methods they used to acquire technology. We split the results on technology acquisition into two categories: graduate students and faculty/staff (see figures 13 and 14). Tenured and untenured faculty and staff were combined because the methods of technology acquisition were very similar for both groups. Graduate students used many strategies to acquire technology, including borrowing from others or using their own personal property. For example, one graduate student in the social sciences used free technology, borrowed games from others, made purchases, and still did not have all the technology he needed. On the other hand, faculty and staff primarily purchase technology. One faculty member in health sciences said, “I usually have a couple thousand bucks in my ICR [indirect cost recovery] account… that’s more than enough to pay for the kinds of things we’ve been talking about [plasma screen, Xbox 360, games].” This trend holds true regardless of tenure status. Faculty and staff in STEM are using more freely available technology when compared to the other disciplinary groups. If the faculty, staff, or students had not yet acquired the technology they planned to use, those responses appear as “other.” Faculty planned to either create the technology themselves or hire someone to create it, while graduate students were still considering their options.
Funding sources differed significantly by status, and untenured faculty and staff are shown separately from tenured faculty and graduate students (see figures 15–17). In general, graduate students and untenured faculty and staff relied on a variety of methods for funding compared to tenured faculty. In arts and humanities and social sciences, many graduate students paid out-of-pocket, such as a graduate student in arts and humanities who was unable to get funding for game skins (armor, clothing, and the like), which were required for his dissertation research. In STEM, graduate students received some funding from grants, but that was not the case for graduate students from other disciplines (see figure 15). Tenured faculty mostly got their funding from grants (10 out of 11 in our sample), with some additional support from ICR funds, departmental funds (funding providing by a researcher’s or instructor’s department), and new technology funds (funds provided by the department, college, or university to acquire technology) (see figure 16). Unlike graduate students, tenured faculty did not pay out-of-pocket costs. Health sciences’ tenured faculty illustrated a depth of funding sources. Although there were only three participants in our sample, they had six sources of funding. One example is a tenured faculty member who had both an external grant and used department funding. Untenured faculty and staff appear to be seeking multiple sources of funding (see figure 17). For example, in arts and humanities, an untenured instructor was funding his work with a grant, departmental funds, and his own money. Figures 18–21 summarize the data from figures 13–17 and organize it by discipline.
Figure 13 |
Graduate Student Acquisition of Games/Technology by Discipline (n=13) |
|
Figure 14 |
Faculty and Staff Acquisition of Games/Technology by Discipline (n=17) |
|
Figure 15 |
Graduate Student Funding Sources for Game-Related Research and Teaching (N=13) |
|
Figure 16 |
Tenured Faculty Funding Sources for Game-Related Research and Teaching (n=11) |
|
Figure 17 |
Untenured Faculty and Staff Funding Sources for Game-Related Research and Teaching (n=6) |
|
This research had several limitations. If an eligible participant did not mention his or her work with video games on a staff profile page or in publications, or if the participant was not located through recommendations or snowball sampling, he or she was not included among the population of 92 UMN game scholars. The interview data was more limited in scope because some eligible participants were away on sabbatical, did not respond to invitations, or declined an interview.
Figure 18 |
Flowchart of Funding Sources for Interview Subjects in Arts and Humanities (n=7) |
|
Figure 19 |
Flowchart of Funding Sources for Interview Subjects in Social Sciences (n=7) |
|
Figure 20 |
Flowchart of Funding Sources for Interview Subjects in Stem (n=11) |
|
Figure 21 |
Flowchart of Funding Sources for Interview Subjects in Health Sciences (N=5) |
|
The exploratory nature of this study limits the generalizability of the findings. However, despite being limited to this one research context, the size of the institution and broad range of disciplines and activities covered in this study provide a rich starting point for future research and the development of library services aimed at these types of researchers. Librarians serving game design or game development programs may observe different needs from those identified in this study because UMN does not have a dedicated game design program.
The open-ended, semistructured nature of the interviews resulted in rich and diverse data that posed some problems when categorizing findings and ensuring anonymity. We used broad codes and categories to capture as much data as possible while also maintaining anonymity, resulting in some loss in the granularity of the data. Additionally, determining how to assign disciplines to interviewees to maintain anonymity was challenging. For example, depending on the context, History can be considered a social science or part of the humanities as it is “multifaceted and diffuse.” 36 We chose to place it in arts and humanities because the researchers interviewed were primarily studying video games as cultural objects instead of the impact on society or human behavior.
Finally, some of the subjects discussed were sensitive (for example, institutional barriers to completing work or acquisition of funding) and some participants felt apprehensive about sharing information. Therefore, the data only represents what interviewees shared “on the record.” Occasionally, the interview location could have inhibited participants (for example, one interview occurred in a public location and two interviews occurred where interviewees’ colleagues were present). However, we have no reason to believe that interviewees concealed information or provided untruthful answers; in the cases where subjects spoke “off the record,” they were candid and honest about challenges with their work.
Four disciplines were represented in both the larger population of game scholars and our sample of 30 interviewees. All but one interviewee identified strongly with a single area of study, usually the person’s department or area of research. No single department or discipline dominated; video games were used institutionwide.
Most interviewees had strong disciplinary ties and also had strong patterns of collaboration outside their departments. Collaboration was common for those we interviewed regardless of discipline. We anticipated a higher frequency of collaboration in STEM and health sciences because previous studies showed high levels of formal collaboration in these disciplines, 37 but this did not bear out in the interview sample. Collaborative partnerships took the form of coauthorships, collaborative conference presentations, and participation on doctoral committees, as well as many informal collaborations. Informal collaborations were also commonly described by interviewees and included professional friendships, relationships with advisors and committee members, pilot projects, and interest groups.
These data on collaboration are useful to keep in mind while discussing disciplinary trends around information and technology needs. Widespread collaboration on game-related projects and other projects suggests a need for cross-departmental and cross-disciplinary collaboration among librarians on collection development and the creation of services. Some libraries that invested in game technology do serve a range of users and disciplines, 38 but other prominent collections of games and game technology in academic libraries were driven by the needs of only one or two departments. 39 Awareness of the collaborative partnerships that exist could help libraries go beyond serving one student, class, or researcher at a time, and investments in game technology have the potential to support the work of whole networks of researchers and instructors. Explicit library support of collaborative work with video games could even give fringe projects and new collaborations a space to intersect and thrive. At UMN there is the potential for many departments and subject librarians to guide the development of a possible video game collection, and this would require a very collaborative approach to collection development.
Video games were commonly used in research across all four disciplines represented in our sample. This confirmed a need for the collection development practices of universities such as UChicago, 40 University of Michigan, 41 and Carleton University, 42 which accommodated users from multiple disciplines.
We did not anticipate how common video games are in classrooms, since published information about game-related courses only identified a handful of classes at any comparable institution, unless they were focused on game design. Additionally, very few course descriptions in the UMN course catalog mentioned video games, and, of the game-related courses we found during our initial searching, most were in the social sciences or arts and humanities. We did not expect so many STEM and health science classes to integrate games as well. In fact, the use of video games in classes was present within all the disciplines, especially in introductory undergraduate courses and upper level seminars. The course descriptions were often vague enough to give the instructor leeway in how to develop his or her individual section, and those who wished to incorporate games could do so. Some departments even encouraged game-related classes due to consistently high enrollment.
Most people in our sample incorporated games into both their research and teaching. We suspect that having a research interest in games may make it more likely for them to incorporate video games into the classroom as well. This may explain why only two people in our sample were using video games exclusively in the classroom.
Overall, knowing how scholars are using video games and gaming technology on campus formed the backbone of this needs assessment. Any effort to provide library support for video game–related work will impact both research and classroom/student needs. Since we know that most scholars are using games in both research and teaching capacities, the support of this work may have double the impact.
There were clear disciplinary trends in the types of research done with video game technology. The development of video games primarily occurred in STEM, while video games were most often used as a text or an object of study in arts and humanities research. There were also some strong similarities among the disciplinary groups. At least one interviewee in every discipline conducted research that studies “educational technology” or “the influences on people and society.” Since video games were used by different disciplines in different ways, the type of support the library offers should not be done through the lens of a single department or discipline, and a variety of materials need to be available for many different applications including development, study, and experimental design.
Disciplinary differences were more difficult to discern when examining the role of games in teaching. Many classes were new or were only offered once; even so, teaching game design or designing games from scratch occurred not only in STEM but also in social science and arts and humanities classrooms. Incorporating game technology as course material was common, and interviewees identified a number of different ways in which games were used: readings, storytelling devices, and technology in labs. Students were impacted by these course requirements as well. Many interviewees described accommodations for students who did not own a console or a computer equipped to run graphics-intensive games, but some required students to figure out how to access the games on their own (such as via a personal account on the Steam game distribution system). 43
Game design was taught in four classes from three disciplines, which was unexpected because there is no game design program or certificate at UMN. Supporting classes that incorporate game design would be easier if they were all in one area of study, but a subject liaison might only be aware of the one class in his or her discipline. Regular environmental scans might be needed to uncover common technology and material requirements for classes across disciplines for courses that use video games and other emerging technologies.
The most commonly used information sources were Google Scholar, journals, and web sources. The interviewees in the social sciences and arts and humanities were the strongest users of “traditional” library materials such as books and journals. Several interviewees described having to acquire the majority of their texts through interlibrary loan (ILL) because their library did not have the journals or books they needed. Libraries need to review collections in this and other emerging areas to minimize the need for backchannels and shortcuts.
Colleagues were the single most common source of information for interviewees, especially in STEM and health sciences. In one case, a project in health sciences was developed entirely with information and skills contributed from existing relationships. The frequency with which interviewees in this sample collaborate outside their department emphasizes the importance of colleague networks in new and emerging areas. Libraries cross departmental and disciplinary borders and can cultivate a role as a connector for scholars doing similar work in different subject areas with events, experimental technology space, or other strategies.
Libraries should pursue partnerships with existing video game archives and other libraries or investigate shared collection development efforts to help researchers and the public overcome barriers to accessing game-related information sources. Interview participants identified video games as both a kind of technology and a type of information. Games are available in some academic libraries and public libraries, but it is unclear how accessible they are outside their immediate communities or institutions through ILL. Game manuals and trade magazines like Nintendo Power were also used by several interviewees. Public libraries typically collect trade magazines but, according to Worldcat, many often only keep the last 1–2 years. Locating game manuals is even more difficult, as they typically lie only in the hands of hobbyists and collectors. A search on Worldcat shows that relatively few libraries have holdings for either game magazines or manuals, raising the question of how libraries can facilitate access to these materials.
The depth and variety of sources used makes it clear that libraries cannot be the sole gatekeepers of information on this subject. The people in our sample used subscription journals but also ephemeral, noncurated materials (such as game manuals, gaming websites, and streaming games). Other library resources like subscription databases were not as valuable for most interviewees, possibly because they are too narrow in scope or interviewees are simply not aware of them. Rather than collect all of the sources scholars need, libraries can create guides to help scholars locate these materials elsewhere, akin to the University of Michigan CVGA LibGuide. 44
Interviewees’ needs for devices, displays, and peripherals show no disciplinary trends. Investing in a range of equipment would benefit the largest range of users at UMN. Arts and humanities and social science scholars had a greater need for video games, while those in STEM and health sciences had more software needs. In fact, only one person in STEM identified games as a need, and only one interviewee in arts and humanities used software of any kind.
Disciplinary trends ought to factor into decisions related to purchasing and marketing game technology. For example, at UMN, subject librarians and users in the arts and humanities and social sciences disciplines might be primarily responsible for selecting game titles. Subject librarians for STEM and health sciences should weigh in on video game software selection, since usage would be most expected from STEM and health sciences disciplines.
Among our interviewees, the PC was the most common technology necessary to research and teaching. PCs are necessary to academic work, but there was some nuance to how interviewees used them. PC games are used almost as much as nearly all other types of games combined (console, mobile, and web-based). Mobile games are a growing industry, 45 but they are not used heavily on this campus for academic purposes. Other technology needs are tied to PC games as well; PC accessories, most often graphics cards, were the third highest need in the equipment category. PC games do not require much additional technology besides a computer (unless a powerful game requires faster processing or graphics cards), so they may be more attractive to the researchers and instructors from arts and humanities and social science, who make up the majority of game users. Guidance on collecting PC games is limited, since few academic libraries currently collect them. Most libraries with game collections and services collect console games almost exclusively, likely because console games do not have restrictive digital rights management (DRM) or require an account to play and are easier to collect and lend.
Peripherals were a common technology need, especially in health sciences. Interviewees shared a diverse range of applications for peripherals that have nothing to do with consoles: to control robotics, play PC games, and modify to use as instrumentation. Interviewees also preferred them for their low cost and ability to interface with a number of technologies. Since they are flexible and relatively cheap, libraries and makerspaces could provide a variety of peripherals (with or without consoles) for on-site use or rental.
In general, interviewees found they could purchase games or technology at stores or online but did not always have funding to do so. The acquisition of games and video game technology was intrinsically tied to funding, which was mentioned as the largest barrier to acquiring technology.
Graduate students used a variety of creative strategies to acquire technology (such as using their personal game collection, borrowing from friends, and other means), whereas faculty and staff simply purchased technology with grants or other funds as needed or used freely available games and technologies, such as online emulators. Graduate students may have less funding available, or they do not know how to access existing funding. The majority of graduate students, all from the social sciences and arts and humanities, were paying out-of-pocket.
Graduate students had the same technology needs as faculty and staff and conduct their own research, often independent of their faculty advisors and any associated funding. STEM graduate students were the only ones receiving grants or new technology funds. We argue that graduate students would be the primary beneficiaries of having video games and technology available, as this would break down disciplinary acquisition and funding barriers. Underfunded graduate students are probably not unique to UMN; and, if libraries made these games and technologies available, graduate students would have much more flexibility in their research. The arts and humanities students who purchased video games out-of-pocket likely used the games as primary research materials, analogous to texts. Since many libraries purchase books for research, it should be easy to purchase games for analogous reasons.
Libraries can also help connect graduate students with funding. Many academic units at UMN provide grants to fund graduate research, and the UMN Libraries subscribe to grant databases and offer workshops on locating grant funding. Since graduate student research is highly valued, it makes sense to assist them in their efforts to acquire game technology by building their grant-seeking skills.
Even though faculty and staff theoretically have the same opportunities for funding, untenured faculty and staff seek more sources of funding to meet their needs, whereas tenured faculty receive most of their funding from grants. Startup packages supported three untenured faculty from STEM and the health sciences, and one staff member reported having to pay out-of-pocket to buy games for classroom use. Faculty and staff for the most part were successful in finding funding to purchase the required technology, but making materials available at the library would put less pressure on faculty and staff to acquire them in other ways and would give them an option to use their funding for other purposes.
Collections in the UMN Libraries are focused primarily on meeting faculty research and teaching needs, as faculty tend to stay at the university longer than students. We recognize that these data could suggest that faculty and staff do not have many barriers to accessing technology and that it is neither necessary nor urgent to include video games and video game technology in library collections. It could also be argued that grants and other funding sources already pay for research and classroom needs and that libraries are not in the business of directly funding research costs like instrumentation, experimental design, or technology development. However, many faculty we spoke to welcomed a chance to collaborate with librarians whether or not the library could directly support their research. Some faculty incorporate games into their outreach service, and many have classes that would benefit from the availability of game materials. We also argue that libraries have a great opportunity to engage with graduate and undergraduate students who want to experiment with games before personally investing in the technology.
By focusing our study on researchers and instructors, we have missed the opportunity to explore implications for students taking classes that incorporate games and gaming technology. What we know came solely from the instructors’ viewpoints; therefore, we do not have a comprehensive picture of how these technologies were made available to students or if they encountered barriers to accessing them. In some classes the game technology was provided, like a health sciences class where Wii balance boards were available to take measurements; but, in another case, students were expected to purchase World of Warcraft and install it on their PCs. Some instructors did note that requiring students to purchase video games may be prohibitive and not directly analogous to purchasing textbooks, as it requires students to own consoles or a high-powered PC that supports gaming. Some attempted to find alternative solutions such as asking the UMN Libraries to install games on library computers and investigating Steam licensing for computer labs. It would be worthwhile to interview students from some of these classes to uncover if they encountered any barriers in attempting to access these technologies.
There is little data available about the information and technology needs of researchers and instructors who use video games in higher education. This study attempted to fill that gap with interviews with faculty, staff, and graduate students from UMN. Scholars from all disciplinary groups were represented and demonstrated both a high level of collaborative activity and use of video games in both research and teaching. As libraries build new video game collections or expand existing collections, they should consider the following findings:
This study found some consistency in video game applications between disciplines but even more differences, especially in technology and information use. This suggests that the support libraries provide should be done collaboratively through a multidisciplinary lens. We propose a strategic approach to video game services and collections focused on disciplinary needs. For UMN, this would mean building a collection focused on PC games, a few console games, cutting-edge equipment with game design software, and a collection of peripherals with or without consoles, perhaps associated with a makerspace. Each academic game collection should reflect its institution, based on an evaluation of the unique needs of its population.
Since this study was limited to the UMN campus, we would like to see similar studies undertaken at various institutions that look at how students use and acquire games for classroom use, as well as a large-scale multi-institution look at the use of games in higher education. As technology changes and moves away from physical media, academic institutions will benefit from studies looking at the impact of DRM on scholarship and libraries. Very few video game companies have partnerships with higher education, and more exploration of this issue is needed. These studies would provide a more complete understanding of scholarly video games–related work and scholars’ information and technology needs.
APPENDIX. Interview Themes, Codes, and Definitions
1. Meave Duggan, “Gaming and Gamers” (Report, Pew Research Center, 2015), available online at www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/gaming-and-gamers/ [accessed 18 December 2015].
2. Laurence F. Johnson et al., “NMC Horizon Report: 2015 Higher Education Edition,” Horizon Report (Austin, Tex.: The New Media Consortium, 2015), 22, 35, available online at www.nmc.org/publication/nmc-horizon-report-2015-higher-education-edition/ [accessed 18 December 2015].
3. Association of College and Research Libraries, “ACRL Plan for Excellence,” 2015, available online at www.ala.org/acrl/aboutacrl/strategicplan/stratplan [accessed 11 January 2016].
4. Brena Smith, “Twenty-First Century Game Studies in the Academy: Libraries and an Emerging Discipline,” Reference Services Review 36, no. 2 (2008): 205–20, doi:10.1108/00907320810873066.
5. Examples include Mary Laskowski and David Ward, “Building Next Generation Video Game Collections in Academic Libraries,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 35, no. 3 (May 2009): 267–73, doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2009.03.005 ; Kristen Mastel and Dave Huston, “Using Video Games to Teach Game Design: A Gaming Collection for Libraries,” Computers in Libraries 29, no. 3 (2009): 41–44, available online at http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ831241 [accessed 18 December 2015]; and Diane Robson and Patrick Durkee, “New Directions for Academic Video Game Collections: Strategies for Acquiring, Supporting, and Managing Online Materials,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 38, no. 2 (Mar. 2012): 79–84, doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2012.01.003 .
6. Examples include Natalie Gick, “Making Book: Gaming in the Library: A Case Study,” in Gaming in Academic Libraries: Collections, Marketing, and Information Literacy (Chicago: American Library Association, 2008), 1–25; David Baker et al., “Lessons Learned from Starting a Circulating Videogame Collection at an Academic Library,” in Gaming in Academic Libraries: Collections, Marketing, and Information Literacy (Chicago: American Library Association, 2008), 26–38; Danielle Kane, Catherine Soehner, and Wei Wei, “Building a Collection of Video Games in Support of a Newly Created Degree Program at the University of California, Santa Cruz,” Science & Technology Libraries 27, no. 4 (Aug. 20, 2007): 77–87, doi:10.1300/J122v27n04_06; and Emma Cross, David Mould, and Robert Smith, “The Protean Challenge of Game Collections at Academic Libraries,” New Review of Academic Librarianship 21, no. 2 (May 4, 2015): 129–45, doi:10.1080/13614533.2015.1043467.
7. Mary Laskowski and David Ward, “Building Next Generation Video Game Collections in Academic Libraries,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 35, no. 3 (May 2009): 267–73, doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2009.03.005 .
8. Andy Burkhardt, “Taking Games in Libraries Seriously,” The Academic Commons (blog), available online at www.academiccommons.org/2014/07/24/taking-games-in-libraries-seriously/ [accessed 5 November 2015].
9. Chris Nelson, “Gaming Reaches into Far Corners of Academic World as U of C Builds Huge Collection,” Calgary Herald (Mar. 16, 2015), available online at http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/gaming-reaches-into-far-corners-of-academic-world-as-u-of-c-builds-huge-collection [accessed 4 November 2015].
10. Brian McNeill, “VCU Libraries Launches Collection of Critically Acclaimed Video Games,” VCU News (blog) (Nov. 6, 2014), available online at http://news.vcu.edu/article/VCU_Libraries_launches_collection_of_critically_acclaimed_video [accessed 4 November 2015].
11. Sarah G. Wenzel, “New Library Videogame Collection,” The University of Chicago Library News (blog) (May 25, 2012), available online at http://news.lib.uchicago.edu/blog/2012/05/25/new-library-videogame-collection/ [accessed 30 November 2015].
12. Patrick Jagoda, “Videogame Collection Supports Scholarly Study,” The University of Chicago Library News (blog) (May 25, 2012), available online at http://news.lib.uchicago.edu/blog/2012/05/25/videogame -collection-supports-scholarly-study/ [accessed 30 November 2015].
13. An overview of classes and disciplinary uses is discussed in Mary Claire Morris, “Computer & Video Game Archive Celebrating Five Years of Growth,” The University Record (blog) (Nov. 5, 2013), available online at http://record.umich.edu //articles/computer-video-game-archive-celebrating-five-years-growth [accessed 2 December 2015]. A list of classes and research applications can be found in Valerie Waldron, “Computer & Video Game Archive: CVGA,” University of Michigan Research Guides (2015), available online at http://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=282987 [accessed 2 December 2015].
14. Emma Cross, David Mould, and Robert Smith, “The Protean Challenge of Game Collections at Academic Libraries,” New Review of Academic Librarianship 21, no. 2 (May 4, 2015): 135–37, doi: 10.1080/13614533.2015.1043467 .
15. David Ward, “Vintage Gaming Collection Development Policy and Description” (Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, 2014), available online at www.library.illinois.edu/gaming/gamearchives.html [accessed 20 December 2015].
16. Valerie Waldron, “Computer & Video Game Archive: CVGA,” University of Michigan Research Guides (2015), available online at http://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=282987 [accessed 2 December 2015]
17. University of California Santa Cruz Library, “Video Games” (2015), available online at https://library.ucsc.edu/collections/video-games [accessed 18 December 2015].
18. Diane Robson and Patrick Durkee, “New Directions for Academic Video Game Collections: Strategies for Acquiring, Supporting, and Managing Online Materials,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 38, no. 2 (Mar. 2012): 82, doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2012.01.003 .
19. Cross, Mould, and Smith, “The Protean Challenge of Game Collections,” 134.
20. McNeill, “VCU Libraries Launches Collection.”
21. Jagoda, “Videogame Collection Supports Scholarly Study.”
22. Adam DePollo, “Play On: Changing Gamer Culture at the ‘U,’” Michigan Daily (Oct. 22, 2014), available online at https://www.michigandaily.com/arts/10computer-video-game-archive22 [accessed 2 December 2015].
23. Laskowski and Ward, “Building next Generation Video Game Collections,” 268.
24. McNeill, “VCU Libraries Launches Collection.”
25. Jagoda, “Videogame Collection Supports Scholarly Study.”
26. University of Calgary Libraries and Cultural Resources, “Video Games,” available online at http://library.ucalgary.ca/dmc/video-games [accessed 4 November 2015].
27. Emma Cross and Robert Smith, “The Evolution of Gaming at Academic Libraries,” Canadian Library Association Conference (Winnepeg, Manitoba, 2013), available online at https://prezi.com/supsungb2uil/the-evolution-of-gaming-at-academic-libraries/ [accessed 4 November 2015].
28. Burkhardt, “Taking Games in Libraries Seriously.”
29. Three examples of soliciting direct feedback from faculty and students are found in Kane, Soehner, and Wei, “Building a Collection of Video Games”; Laskowski and Ward, “Building Next Generation Video Game Collections”; and Cross, Mould, and Smith, “The Protean Challenge of Game Collections.”
30. Nelson, “Gaming Reaches into Far Corners of Academic World.”
31. DePollo, “Play On: Changing Gamer Culture at the ‘U.’”
32. Laskowski and Ward, “Building Next Generation Video Game Collections,” 268.
33. Cross, Mould, and Smith, “The Protean Challenge of Game Collections,” 133.
34. Jagoda, “Videogame Collection Supports Scholarly Study.”
35. Waldron, “Computer & Video Game Archive.”
36. Mark T. Gilderhus, History and Historians : A Historiographical Introduction , 7th ed. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2010), 41.
37. Vincent Larivière, Yves Gingras, and Éric Archambault, “Canadian Collaboration Networks: A Comparative Analysis of the Natural Sciences, Social Sciences and the Humanities,” Scientometrics 68, no. 3 (2006): 519–33, doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0127-8.
38. Nelson, “Gaming Reaches into Far Corners of Academic World.”
39. Kane, Soehner, and Wei, “Building a Collection of Video Games.”
40. Wenzel, “New Library Videogame Collection.”
41. Mary Claire Morris, “Computer & Video Game Archive Celebrating Five Years of Growth,” The University Record (blog) (Nov. 5, 2013), available online at http://record.umich.edu //articles/computer-video-game-archive-celebrating-five-years-growth [accessed 2 December 2015].
42. Cross, Mould, and Smith, “The Protean Challenge of Game Collections,” 144.
43. For more information, see http://store.steampowered.com/about /.
44. Waldron, “Computer & Video Game Archive.”
45. John Gaudiosi, “Mobile Game Revenues Set to Overtake Console Games in 2015,” Fortune , (Jan. 15, 2015), available online at http://fortune.com/2015/01/15/mobile -console-game-revenues-2015/ [accessed 15 January 2016].
* Shannon L. Farrell is Natural Resources Librarian in the Natural Resources Library at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities; e-mail: [email protected] . Amy E. Neeser is Assistant Librarian, Library Research—Science and Engineering in the University Library at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; e-mail: [email protected] . Carolyn Bishoff is Physics, Astronomy, and Earth Sciences Librarian in the Walter Library at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities; e-mail: [email protected] ). ©2017 Shannon L. Farrell, Amy E. Neeser, and Carolyn Bishoff, Attribution-NonCommercial ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ ) CC BY-NC.
Contact ACRL for article usage statistics from 2010-April 2017.
2024 |
January: 175 |
February: 212 |
March: 205 |
April: 266 |
May: 257 |
June: 143 |
2023 |
January: 160 |
February: 315 |
March: 472 |
April: 210 |
May: 227 |
June: 106 |
July: 80 |
August: 56 |
September: 87 |
October: 86 |
November: 97 |
December: 75 |
2022 |
January: 257 |
February: 307 |
March: 426 |
April: 242 |
May: 341 |
June: 190 |
July: 69 |
August: 93 |
September: 217 |
October: 179 |
November: 159 |
December: 92 |
2021 |
January: 178 |
February: 205 |
March: 283 |
April: 278 |
May: 243 |
June: 163 |
July: 132 |
August: 168 |
September: 315 |
October: 377 |
November: 364 |
December: 208 |
2020 |
January: 213 |
February: 134 |
March: 133 |
April: 204 |
May: 122 |
June: 99 |
July: 145 |
August: 170 |
September: 113 |
October: 192 |
November: 183 |
December: 154 |
2019 |
January: 79 |
February: 78 |
March: 129 |
April: 129 |
May: 71 |
June: 74 |
July: 82 |
August: 214 |
September: 88 |
October: 112 |
November: 102 |
December: 99 |
2018 |
January: 111 |
February: 59 |
March: 118 |
April: 175 |
May: 185 |
June: 103 |
July: 83 |
August: 80 |
September: 134 |
October: 155 |
November: 122 |
December: 58 |
2017 |
April: 0 |
May: 0 |
June: 0 |
July: 353 |
August: 124 |
September: 223 |
October: 186 |
November: 180 |
December: 90 |
© 2024 Association of College and Research Libraries , a division of the American Library Association
Print ISSN: 0010-0870 | Online ISSN: 2150-6701
ALA Privacy Policy
ISSN: 2150-6701
You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.
All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.
Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.
Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.
Original Submission Date Received: .
Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.
Please let us know what you think of our products and services.
Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.
Evaluation of problematic video game use in adolescents with adhd and without adhd: new evidence and recommendations.
2. materials and methods, 2.1. participants, 2.2. instruments.
2.4. ethical aspects, 2.5. data analysis, 4. discussion, 5. conclusions, 6. limitations, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.
NO ADHD Freq. (%) | ADHD Freq. (%) | X | Sig | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Play Video games | 10.32 | 0.000 | ||
Yes | 1831 (77.7) | 140 (88.6) | ||
No | 524 (22.3) | 18 (11.4) | ||
Play any day of the week | 9.19 | 0.001 | ||
Yes | 1319 (56.0) | 108 (68.4) | ||
No | 1036 (44.0) | 50 (31.6) | ||
Often play at the weekend | 8.81 | 0.001 | ||
Yes | 1783 (75.7) | 136 (86.1) | ||
No | 572 (24.3) | 22 (13.9) |
NO ADHD Freq (%) | ADHD Freq (%) | X | Sig | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | Men | 1084 (59.8%) | 111 (79.3%) | 20.86 | 0.000 |
Women | 730 (40.2%) | 29 (20.7%) | |||
Spent money on video games | Yes | 468 (24.8%) | 48 (32.4%) | 25.97 | 0.000 |
No | 1346 (75.2%) | 92 (67.6%) | |||
Time spent weekly | 0–2 h | 1179 (64.4%) | 74 (52.9%) | 12.58 | 0.002 |
3–5 h | 399 (21.8%) | 32 (22.9%) | |||
6 o more hours | 253 (13.8%) | 34 (24.3%) |
NO ADHD (n = 1831) M (SD) | ADHD (n = 140) M (SD) | U | Sig. | g+ | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CERV–Psychological Dependence and Avoidance | 13.97 (4.09) | 15.36 (4.3) | 96,116.00 | 0.000 | −0.338 |
CERV–Negative Consequences of Use | 13.15 (3.41) | 14.82 (4.06) | 89,269.50 | 0.000 | −0.482 |
CERV–Total Score | 27.12 (7.05) | 30.19 (7.93) | 91,341.00 | 0.000 | −0.431 |
Harmonious Passion | 9.24 (2.78) | 10.23 (3.12) | 95,985.00 | 0.000 | −0.35 |
Obsessive Passion | 9.97 (2.91) | 11.27 (3.38) | 91,981.00 | 0.044 | −0.44 |
Medication ADHD | No-Medication ADHD | X | Sig | |
---|---|---|---|---|
No Problems | 19 (43.2%) | 25 (56.8%) | 5.115 | 0.077 |
Potential Problems | 48 (64%) | 27 (36%) | ||
Severe Problems | 13 (61.9%) | 8 (38.1%) |
NO ADHD (n =1831) M (SD) | ADHD (n = 140) M (SD) | U | Sig. | g+ | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recreation | 9.68 (2.71) | 9.80 (2.78) | 102,413.50 | 0.453 | −0.442 |
Competition | 7.50 (3.28) | 7.81 (3.18) | 100,821.00 | 0.323 | −0.100 |
Cognitive Development | 4.79 (3.25) | 5.70 (3.20) | 90,277.00 | 0.002 | −0.28 |
Confrontation | 5.33 (3.67) | 6.45 (3.96) | 99,543.00 | 0.002 | −0.30 |
Interaction | 5.05 (3.33) | 5.45 (3.58) | 100,213,5.00 | 0.212 | −0.11 |
Violent Reward | 3.99 (3.69) | 5.00 (3.94) | 90,079,5.00 | 0.003 | −0.27 |
Customization | 7.10 (3.72) | 7.37 (3.80) | 102,384.50 | 0.317 | −0.07 |
Fantasy | 6.10 (3.75) | 6.71 (3.53) | 97,140.50 | 0.067 | −0.16 |
NO ADHD (n =1831) Media (SD) | ADHD (n = 140) Media (SD) | U | p | g+ | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Emotional Symptoms | 13.81 (4.79) | 14.53 (4.68) | 116,683.00 | 0.076 | 0.15 |
Behavior Problems | 12.35 (2.96) | 13.11 (3.57) | 114,192.50 | 0.030 | 0.25 |
Relationship Problems | 15.62 (2.53) | 15.85 (2.94) | 122,780.00 | 0.402 | 0.09 |
Hyperactivity | 16.16 (2.97) | 17.44 (3.37) | 92,108.50 | 0.000 | 0.43 |
Prosocial Conduct | 21.06 (3.29) | 19.95 (3.62) | 102,986.00 | 0.000 | −0.33 |
Total Difficulties | 57.95 (9.26) | 60.93 (9.62) | 104,825.50 | 0.000 | 0.32 |
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
Isorna Folgar, M.; Faílde Garrido, J.M.; Dapía Conde, M.D.; Braña Rey, F. Evaluation of Problematic Video Game Use in Adolescents with ADHD and without ADHD: New Evidence and Recommendations. Behav. Sci. 2024 , 14 , 524. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14070524
Isorna Folgar M, Faílde Garrido JM, Dapía Conde MD, Braña Rey F. Evaluation of Problematic Video Game Use in Adolescents with ADHD and without ADHD: New Evidence and Recommendations. Behavioral Sciences . 2024; 14(7):524. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14070524
Isorna Folgar, Manuel, José M. Faílde Garrido, María D. Dapía Conde, and Fátima Braña Rey. 2024. "Evaluation of Problematic Video Game Use in Adolescents with ADHD and without ADHD: New Evidence and Recommendations" Behavioral Sciences 14, no. 7: 524. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14070524
Further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.
Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals
AI for the rest of us.
Coming in beta this fall *
Built into your iPhone, iPad, and Mac to help you write, express yourself, and get things done effortlessly.
Draws on your personal context while setting a brand-new standard for privacy in AI.
Apple Intelligence powers new Writing Tools, which help you find just the right words virtually everywhere you write. With enhanced language capabilities, you can summarize an entire lecture in seconds, get the short version of a long group thread, and minimize unnecessary distractions with prioritized notifications.
Transform how you communicate using intelligent Writing Tools that can proofread your text, rewrite different versions until the tone and wording are just right, and summarize selected text with a tap. Writing Tools are available nearly everywhere you write, including third-party apps.
Priority notifications appear at the top of the stack, letting you know what to pay attention to at a glance. And notifications are summarized, so you can scan them faster.
Priority messages in Mail elevate time-sensitive messages to the top of your inbox — like an invitation that has a deadline today or a check-in reminder for your flight this afternoon.
Tap to reveal a summary of a long email in the Mail app and cut to the chase. You can also view summaries of email right from your inbox.
Just hit record in the Notes or Phone apps to capture audio recordings and transcripts. Apple Intelligence generates summaries of your transcripts, so you can get to the most important information at a glance.
Reduce Interruptions is an all-new Focus that understands the content of your notifications and shows you the ones that might need immediate attention, like a text about picking up your child from daycare later today.
Use a Smart Reply in Mail to quickly draft an email response with all the right details. Apple Intelligence can identify questions you were asked in an email and offer relevant selections to include in your response. With a few taps you’re ready to send a reply with key questions answered.
Apple Intelligence enables delightful new ways to express yourself visually. Create fun, original images and brand-new Genmoji that are truly personal to you. Turn a rough sketch into a related image that complements your notes with Image Wand. And make a custom memory movie based on the description you provide.
Produce fun, original images in seconds with the Image Playground experience right in your apps. Create an entirely new image based on a description, suggested concepts, and even a person from your Photos library. You can easily adjust the style and make changes to match a Messages thread, your Freeform board, or a slide in Keynote.
Experiment with different concepts and try out image styles like animation, illustration, and sketch in the dedicated Image Playground app . Create custom images to share with friends in other apps or on social media.
Make a brand-new Genmoji right in the keyboard to match any conversation. Provide a description to see a preview, and adjust your description until it’s perfect. You can even pick someone from your Photos library and create a Genmoji that looks like them.
Image Wand can transform your rough sketch into a related image in the Notes app. Use your finger or Apple Pencil to draw a circle around your sketch, and Image Wand will analyze the content around it to produce a complementary visual. You can even circle an empty space, and Image Wand will use the surrounding context to create a picture.
Create a custom memory movie of the story you want to see, right in Photos. Enter a description, and Apple Intelligence finds the best photos and videos that match. It then crafts a storyline with unique chapters based on themes it identifies and arranges your photos into a movie with its own narrative arc.
Search for photos and videos in the Photos app simply by describing what you’re looking for. Apple Intelligence can even find a particular moment in a video clip that fits your search description and take you right to it.
Remove distractions in your photos with the Clean Up tool in the Photos app. Apple Intelligence identifies background objects so you can remove them with a tap and perfect your shot — while staying true to the original image.
Siri draws on Apple Intelligence for all-new superpowers. With an all-new design, richer language understanding, and the ability to type to Siri whenever it’s convenient for you, communicating with Siri is more natural than ever. Equipped with awareness of your personal context, the ability to take action in and across apps, and product knowledge about your devices’ features and settings, Siri will be able to assist you like never before.
Siri has an all-new design that’s even more deeply integrated into the system experience, with an elegant, glowing light that wraps around the edge of your screen.
With a double tap on the bottom of your iPhone or iPad screen, you can type to Siri from anywhere in the system when you don’t want to speak out loud.
Tap into the expansive product knowledge Siri has about your devices’ features and settings. You can ask questions when you’re learning how to do something new on your iPhone, iPad, and Mac, and Siri can give you step-by-step directions in a flash.
Siri, set an alarm for — oh wait no, set a timer for 10 minutes. Actually, make that 5.
Richer language understanding and an enhanced voice make communicating with Siri even more natural. And when you refer to something you mentioned in a previous request, like the location of a calendar event you just created, and ask ”What will the weather be like there?” Siri knows what you’re talking about.
Apple Intelligence empowers Siri with onscreen awareness , so it can understand and take action with things on your screen. If a friend texts you their new address, you can say “Add this address to their contact card,” and Siri will take care of it.
Awareness of your personal context enables Siri to help you in ways that are unique to you. Can’t remember if a friend shared that recipe with you in a note, a text, or an email? Need your passport number while booking a flight? Siri can use its knowledge of the information on your device to help find what you’re looking for, without compromising your privacy.
Seamlessly take action in and across apps with Siri. You can make a request like “Send the email I drafted to April and Lilly” and Siri knows which email you’re referencing and which app it’s in. And Siri can take actions across apps, so after you ask Siri to enhance a photo for you by saying “Make this photo pop,” you can ask Siri to drop it in a specific note in the Notes app — without lifting a finger.
Apple Intelligence is designed to protect your privacy at every step. It’s integrated into the core of your iPhone, iPad, and Mac through on-device processing. So it’s aware of your personal information without collecting your personal information. And with groundbreaking Private Cloud Compute, Apple Intelligence can draw on larger server-based models, running on Apple silicon, to handle more complex requests for you while protecting your privacy.
With ChatGPT from OpenAI integrated into Siri and Writing Tools, you get even more expertise when it might be helpful for you — no need to jump between tools. Siri can tap into ChatGPT for certain requests, including questions about photos or documents. And with Compose in Writing Tools, you can create and illustrate original content from scratch.
You control when ChatGPT is used and will be asked before any of your information is shared. Anyone can access ChatGPT for free, without creating an account. ChatGPT subscribers can connect accounts to access paid features within these experiences.
New App Intents, APIs, and frameworks make it incredibly easy for developers to integrate system-level features like Siri, Writing Tools, and Image Playground into your favorite apps.
Learn more about developing for Apple Intelligence
Apple Intelligence is free to use and will initially be available in U.S. English. Coming in beta this fall. *
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Video Games Research Paper Topics For College. Of course, we have a list of video games research paper topics for college students. These are a bit more difficult than the others in our list: Linking video game addiction to substance abuse. The use of first person shooter games in military training programs.
Here, we've collected excellent essay topics for true gaming enthusiasts. Whether you're looking for argumentative essay ideas on video games, research topics, or questions for debate, you will find them here. We will write. a custom essay specifically for you by our professional experts. 809 writers online.
122 Video Games Research Paper Topics For Students. Video games are a big part of our lives, just like political science, and they have been since the early days. Even with all that gaming available to us, there's still something about a classic game that keeps us coming back for more. This is why we've decided to put together a list of 100 ...
To help you get started, here are 107 video game essay topic ideas and examples to inspire your writing: The impact of violent video games on children's behavior. The evolution of video game graphics over the years. The rise of esports and its influence on the gaming industry.
Video games are interactive computer games that you play by using buttons or controls to move images on a computer screen. Video games are now everywhere, and their impacts on society are worth studying. One of the best ways to understand the impacts of video games is by researching it. Although student enjoy playing video games, they find it ...
Project Muse. This resource is a general favorite for anything art or media related, with tons of scholarly, peer-reviewed articles about video games including articles on diversity in video games, video games and the ecosystem, video games and civic development, and more. When starting research on video games, this database is highly ...
The video game industry is thriving like never before. According to a 2018 study, 60% of Americans report playing video games daily (Entertainment Software Association, 2015). Red Dead Redemption 2, released by Rockstar Games in October of 2018, …. Analysis of the Attractiveness of Video Games.
Check out our samples of video game topics for research papers for examples of solid content, structure, and outline. 154 essay samples found. Sort & filter. 1 Benefits of Video Games: a Discursive Paper . 2 pages / 691 words . In contemporary discourse, video games often polarize opinion. Initially perceived predominantly as a form of ...
Abstract. Neuro-Gaming: How Video Games Shape the Brain's Cognitive Landscape is a comprehensive research survey that investigates the impact of video games on cognitive processes and the brain's ...
A post-hoc analysis showed that the non-gamers reduced their RT from 1135.45 ± 605.75 ms when the questionnaire was completed before performing the tasks to 911.01 ± 161.57 ms when the ...
Video game scholars examining the shortcomings of previous video game research reference the need for new and innovative methodologies. Existing video game research seemingly inhibits organic learning experiences by setting specific research targets or providing players with gameplay instructions, hence utilising methodological approaches that study the learning process from the outside.
Research on the social and psychological impacts of video gaming has changed over time in response to the aging demographic of video game players, the growing diversity of video game players, increasing complexity and diversity of video games, and their growing entrenchment in the culture (Dale & Shawn Green, 2017).Scholarship on video gaming accelerated in the early 2000s, with common topics ...
A strong conclusion will not only tie together your essay but also leave the reader with a lasting impression of the depth and complexity of video gaming as a subject. Free essay examples about Video Game ️ Proficient writing team ️ High-quality of every essay ️ Largest database of free samples on PapersOwl.
There is many other benefits 2 in playing video games. In this paper, we are trying to seek information that video game can be used to improve a person’s skill, especially in decision making 3 and cognitive skills 4. ... To select the papers, we determine two research questions: (i) whether video games could really improve cognitive ...
818 Hatcher Graduate Library South 913 S. University Avenue Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1190 (734) 764-0400 Send us an email
A well-prepared research project includes an extensive amount of planning and exploration, keeping in mind the constraints of time and presentation. It also includes the choice of a good topic, which can be anything of your interest. An unconventional topic of interest for a research could be on the prevalence of children's video games on ...
Quantitative research on video games often reduces participants' gaming experience to how much time they spend playing video games. Although appropriate in some instances, it often fails to capture aspects of the video game experience. Studies that only use time as a means of establishing expertise in gaming fail to capture how much a player is involved in different types of video ...
Introduction. Video gaming is a very popular leisure activity among adults (Pew Research Center, 2018).The amount of time spent playing video games has increased steadily, from 5.1 h/week in 2011 to 6.5 h/week in 2017 (The Nielsen Company, 2017).Video gaming is known to have some benefits such as improving focus, multitasking, and working memory, but it may also come with costs when it is used ...
The game genres examined were 3D adventure, first-person shooting (FPS), puzzle, rhythm dance, and strategy. The total training durations were 16-90 h. Results of this systematic review demonstrated that video gaming can be beneficial to the brain. However, the beneficial effects vary among video game types.
1. Introduction. Video games are an immensely popular and profitable leisure activity. Last year, the revenues of the games industry were larger than the film industry's [] and the number of people who report playing games has never been higher [].Across the globe, the rise of games as a dominant form of recreation and socializing has raised important questions about the potential effect of ...
Yet few studies have attempted to systematically catalog features that characterize this research. To address this gap, we undertook a systematic review and content analysis of active video game interventions, examining only published longitudinal interventions that prominently featured active video game technology (≥50% of the intervention).
The research reported in this paper covers background and related work on empathy research, existing work on video games for experiencing empathy and the layout of the study. ... In this paper we thus aim at investigating the potential of video games for teaching and experiencing empathy in order to address our main research question, which ...
This paper explores the information and technology needs of scholars who use video games on the UMN campus, similarities and differences by discipline, and how college and research libraries can incorporate disciplinary needs into a strategic approach to video game services and collections. ... We formulated the following research questions ...
Video game addiction among adolescents, particularly those with ADHD, is a significant concern. To gather more insights into video game usage patterns in this population, we investigated levels of potentially problematic use, passion, motivations, and emotional/behavioral symptoms in adolescents with and without ADHD. Our cross-sectional, multicenter study involved 2513 subjects (Age M = 15.07 ...
Apple Intelligence can even find a particular moment in a video clip that fits your search description and take you right to it. Remove distractions in your photos with the Clean Up tool in the Photos app. Apple Intelligence identifies background objects so you can remove them with a tap and perfect your shot — while staying true to the ...