That last line made me laugh.Marter said:I thought it was supposed to be ANY screen activity that's bad to do before bed. Video games would be no exception, I would think.
Oh, studies. You so funny.
TheLazyGeek said:Interesting...because I totally never knew this before...
Wait, 17? What a shit number of people that is. Well, let me tell you about MY "study" that took 20 people and we went on a three-day marathon at a LAN party and only 6 of us didn't make the full time. After that everyone got 6 hours of sleep and was ready to go again. This proves that humans don't actually need sleep at all except very sparingly and only for a few hours every other day.The 17 participants played a newly released...
I would like a headline now.
A Smooth Criminal said:The sampling size is terrible.. But playing fast paced shooters that get your adrenaline going immediately before you go sleep is hardly going to help you is it?King of Asgaard said:Ummm, is no one else going to point out how terrible the sample size is?The study, which was conducted by Masters student Daniel King with supervision from child sleep psychologist Dr. Michael Gradisar, included 17 participants.
Because the sample size is nigh on abysmal.
Taking a handful of people is not what constitutes a proper study, you need at least a few hundred to have a certain degree of credibility, more if you're feeling sassy.
Honestly, he didn't even need a sampling size of 17. The guy could have just read an already existing book
No, it doesn't matter how large your sample size is as long as you have 95% certainty- where 95% of your test subjects fall in the first standard deviation of what you were testing. While sample size helps, it doesn't necessarily matter in the long run.King of Asgaard said:Ummm, is no one else going to point out how terrible the sample size is?The study, which was conducted by Masters student Daniel King with supervision from child sleep psychologist Dr. Michael Gradisar, included 17 participants.
Because the sample size is nigh on abysmal.
Taking a handful of people is not what constitutes a proper study, you need at least a few hundred to have a certain degree of credibility, more if you're feeling sassy.
I'm here to say I agree with all these concerns, and look damn pretty doing it.lunavixen said:Quite a few issues with this study, the sample size was not of a sufficient size to properly determine accurate results that are verifiable, 25-30 would have been a better size for a smaller study as it allows for a greater margin of error, using one gender does not help all adolescents. Also it should have been state what game was being played not just calling it a "fast paced violent game" as there are heaps of those and they span across many genres from shooters to horror and more, the researcher also should have tested other types of video games, puzzler, RPG, platformer etc. to see how the body's REM cycle reacts to various types of games.
TLDR: It seems that the focus of the study was how long games were played, leaving out the factors of type of game, teenage female gamers, using only one type of game etc. Not exactly a totally comprehensive study is it?
Did anyone else thought about blaming REM the bad? ...Am I that old?"This may not seem like a significant reduction but REM plays an important part in helping us remember content we learned that day,"