'Massive' U.K. Study Finds No Link Between Gaming and Behavior

[Andy Chalk]

'Massive' U.K. Study Finds No Link Between Gaming and Behavior

A "massive study" out of the U.K. has found no connection between playing videogames and bad behavior, even among young children.

The Millennium Cohort Study followed approximately 11,000 children born between September 2000 and January 2002 "to explore how time watching TV and playing electronic games at age five years each predicts change in psychosocial adjustment." Does playing games cause bad behavior in children, in other words, and the authors of the study, carried out by the University of Glasgow, seemed to expect that it would.

"Games may have more powerful effects due to active user engagement, identification with characters and repeated rehearsal and reinforcement. Gaming's interactive and absorbing qualities may substitute for interpersonal relationships and increase social isolation," the introduction to the study states. "Such isolation may provoke anxiety and depression, or, if coupled with reduced empathy (from exposure to violent games) may depress prosocial behavior."

What it found, however, is that games don't seem to have any meaningful impact on behavior at all. Watching three or more hours of television or videos on a daily basis did correspond with "a small increase in conduct problems between the ages of five and seven years," but the study "did not find associations between electronic games use and conduct problems," nor was there "strong evidence for effects of TV or electronic games use on attentional problems."

The authors of the study called for more research into the matter but concluded, "Our findings do not demonstrate that interventions to reduce screen exposure will improve psychosocial adjustment. Indeed, they suggest that interventions in respect of family and child characteristics, rather than a narrow focus on screen exposure, are more likely to improve outcomes."

Source: Games and Learning [http://www.gamesandlearning.org/2013/11/15/game-play-has-no-negative-impact-on-kids-uk-study-finds/]


Permalink

 

[MXRom]

Maybe this study will help to finally put those skeptics about gaming to rest.


Or maybe they'll just ignore it and continue to preach their garbage day in day out.

 

[Hagi]

Indeed, they suggest that interventions in respect of family and child characteristics, rather than a narrow focus on screen exposure, are more likely to improve outcomes.

Damn... must be quite the degree these guys and gals have got to come to this conclusion.

Who'd have thought? Behavioral problems being more complicated than just exposure to games?

MIND = BLOWN

 

[PunkRex]

Indeed, they suggest that interventions in respect of family and child characteristics, rather than a narrow focus on screen exposure, are more likely to improve outcomes."

Or in other words, if your kid's misbehaving, TALK TO THEM!!! Be a bloody parent and do your freaking job!

 

[loa]

I call bullshit.
Game addiction is a very real thing.
Saying games "don't seem to have any meaningful impact on behavior at all" only proves that your study is borked to begin with.

 

[Hagi]

I call bullshit.
Game addiction is a very real thing.
Saying games "don't seem to have any meaningful impact on behavior at all" only proves that your study is borked to begin with.

It means game addiction isn't caused by games.

It means game addiction is caused by other factors.

You don't spend all your time with nothing but video games because those games are so utterly amazing. You spend all your time with nothing but video games because the rest of your life is so utterly shit.

 

[JazzJack2]

Saying games "don't seem to have any meaningful impact on behavior at all" only proves that your study is borked to begin with.

"If you disagree with me then you must be wrong"

Compelling argument.

 

[Jamash]

I call bullshit.
Game addiction is a very real thing.
Saying games "don't seem to have any meaningful impact on behavior at all" only proves that your study is borked to begin with.

The study was only done on 11-13 year olds. The type of behavioural changes that can be brought on by gaming and other addictive activities probably doesn't manifest itself until after adolescence.

It's one thing to say gaming doesn't affect an 11 year old when there's isn't really much for an 11 year old to do, but when that same person is 7 years older and dictates their own timetable, but is still heavily gaming at the expense of education, a job, a social life and other responsibilities, then you can make a more accurate statement on the effects of gaming on behaviour.

I agree that the study was doomed to begin with, mostly because of the narrow age range of subjects.

 

[Kargathia]

I call bullshit.
Game addiction is a very real thing.
Saying games "don't seem to have any meaningful impact on behavior at all" only proves that your study is borked to begin with.

It means game addiction isn't caused by games.

It means game addiction is caused by other factors.

You don't spend all your time with nothing but video games because those games are so utterly amazing. You spend all your time with nothing but video games because the rest of your life is so utterly shit.

Not to mention that this was a study done over the general population, and (even allowing for games to be possibly addictive in their own right) anyone who could possibly described as "addicted" would be a statistically irrelevant minority.

You're doing the equivalent of debunking general sexual health research on the basis that sex addiction exists. Except that, y'know, sex addiction actually is confirmed to exist.

The study was only done on 11-13 year olds. The type of behavioural changes that can be brought on by gaming and other addictive activities probably doesn't manifest itself until after adolescence.

It's one thing to say gaming doesn't affect an 11 year old when there's isn't really much for an 11 year old to do, but when that same person is 7 years older and dictates their own timetable, but is still heavily gaming at the expense of education, a job, a social life and other responsibilities, then you can make a more accurate statement on the effects of gaming on behaviour.

I agree that the study was doomed to begin with, mostly because of the narrow age range of subjects.

I'm not entirely sure whether I agree here. It's entirely possible that you're right, but any correlation between excessive gaming and failing at life would require some creative research methods before it can be called causative.

It's a bit hard to call whether somebody is pissing his life away because of games, or whether gaming is simply more convenient than alcoholism.

EDIT - Oh, and to OP: a study concluding that "further research is needed" is merely scientist-speak for "please keep funding us".

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

I call bullshit.
Game addiction is a very real thing.
Saying games "don't seem to have any meaningful impact on behavior at all" only proves that your study is borked to begin with.

It means game addiction isn't caused by games.

It means game addiction is caused by other factors.

You don't spend all your time with nothing but video games because those games are so utterly amazing. You spend all your time with nothing but video games because the rest of your life is so utterly shit.

I have to concur: I played more games when I was distraught or depressed so that I would get away from those problems.

Upon entering college though, I play less because even though the workload is somewhat amplified, I feel less out of place and in general happier.

That is not to say that "Don't play games=happy", but just that I require escapism less to get away from problems and more just to have fun now.

Gaming compulsion(as physical addiction is impossible regarding games) is always to do with something you miss in your life, be it attention, love, recognition, respect, a sense of community or well-being, as games can easily provide all of those: it is why people defend this medium so, as it truly can help people with their lives.

If you're interested, check out Extra Credit's episodes on Game "Addiction", as they can explain better than I can.

 

[CriticalMiss]

I can already see the nay-sayers on the horizon preparing to stick their fingers in their ears to make the bad bad go away. I am suprised to hear that there was no effect though, I would have thought there would be at least a tiny one.

 

[Pyrian]

I can already see the nay-sayers on the horizon preparing to stick their fingers in their ears to make the bad bad go away.

You don't need to look to the horizon, it's alive and strong in this comment thread. People really, really want to believe that video games are bad for you.

 

[Therumancer]

Maybe this study will help to finally put those skeptics about gaming to rest.


Or maybe they'll just ignore it and continue to preach their garbage day in day out.

Not likely, like every issue there are at least two sides with their own beliefs and research. In general you find that one person who believes in an early study or theory, is going to dismiss later ones as being conducted improperly, or simply being political or business related constructs. This is why very little is resolved when it comes to big issues involving a lot of people like gaming (which has to do with mass media), gay rights, "racism", etc... expect polarization to continue no matter how many studies are pulled out.

That said, I'll be honest in saying I'm wary of a study on this subject using 5 year olds, and what's more as much as I want to agree with it, to play devil's advocate the claim of how games of this sort effect the youth tend to involve tweens, teens, and young adults, more than concerns over very young children.

To put things into perspective, a lot of titles, especially "M" rated ones tend to include narratives about morality, how the world works, relationships, etc... woven throughout them. More so than any acts of sex or violence, that tends to be the problem according to the opposing studies. A character in such a game does a lot to make you empathize with them and sell their position and way of thinking/viewing the world, and what is considered right and wrong. It is however pure fantasy and no matter how "realistic" or "relevant" such a message might seem, it's not intended to have any bearing on how someone thinks or acts IRL. An adult can generally make that distinction fairly easily, but kids, well, less so. To be fair to the studies I myself have run into people during video game discussions who have mentioned how one game or another had a huge impact on them and how they see the world... and that's kind of the issue. Half the problem allegedly being that the kids with the problems do not think they themselves have a problem or have been influenced.

The point is this battle is going to continue, and really I don't see this resolving much. Especially seeing as your not going to find too many games of the sort the other side is talking about that are played by five year olds, and if they can, the odds of them being able to figure out those "problem messages" that are supposed to be doing the warping to have any influence are minimal.

This is likely to go on for a long time, to be honest the anti-video game elements seem to be even more fanatical than similar groups who have attacked comics and music. I suspect this battle won't really be over for another 70 or so years when most of these people are dead and buried.

 

[Yopaz]

I can already see the nay-sayers on the horizon preparing to stick their fingers in their ears to make the bad bad go away.

You don't need to look to the horizon, it's alive and strong in this comment thread. People really, really want to believe that video games are bad for you.

I am one to dismiss studies going either way because I'm a hipster. Seriously though, I argue that it's actually quite complicated, the research group is tiny, there's no ground for comparison and I was ready to roll my eyes at this article. However I was surprised, 11000 kids isn't a lot on world basis, but for research purposes I am impressed with the amount, they compared it to TV in order to see if they could observe any variations and they actually did.

For once I am impressed with a study on gaming and behaviour. I still think it's too complicated for anything conclusive, but they even covered that. However you're right, people will still dismiss this and they already have in this comment thread. We need a scapegoat to explain why we're screwed up or why our children turn out as maladjusted adults.

 

[razer17]

So when a study says games could cause harm we dismiss it, but when they say they don't people just go "well duh". WEll, it's not just "well duh". It's complicated.

For my psychology degree dissertation (which given that this is the internet, you can feel free to believe or not believe that I actually have a degree), I actually studied something videogame related, and part of that involved looking at the research into whether games can cause aggression or violence. now, I'll admit that I never saw anything that convinced me that playing violent games could cause long lasting damage, but on the other hand I haven't seen much that disproves the idea either.

In the end of the day, the media that we consume CAN have an effect on some people. Is GTA going to turn people into crazy murderers? Probably not. Certainly not psychologically normal people. But if they don't have any effect, why don't we just scrap game ratings and sell CoD straight to 5 year olds?

 

[Zer0Saber]

That study is such bull. Back in the day when I was playing Doom on PC, when i finished playing I jumped through a portal to Hell and started shooting cybernetic demons, and I only did that because I played the game.

 

[Hagi]

So when a study says games could cause harm we dismiss it, but when they say they don't people just go "well duh". WEll, it's not just "well duh". It's complicated.

Yes. Yes it is.

Which is why, when a study shows that there's not a single defining factor the response is indeed "well duh".

Exactly because it's complicated do we dismiss studies finding that it's all because of one single thing.
Exactly because it's complicated do we see studies finding that it's not all because of one single thing as obvious.

It's complicated. That's why this study is "well duh". Because that's exactly their conclusion, that it's complicated.

 

[Pyrian]

So when a study says games could cause harm we dismiss it, but when they say they don't people just go "well duh".

We know, empirically, that video games don't cause the sort and degree of social harm that's blamed on them precisely because the rise of videogames has coincided with a outright decrease in criminal violence. If videogames were anywhere near as bad as some people try to claim they are, we'd be living in a very different world, right here and right now.

So, yeah, when a small and indirect study claims that games "could" cause harm we DO dismiss it, and when a large study comes along and says that they actually, in practice, do no such thing, we go "well duh".