Video Games: Seniors and students

In my first post I expressed an interest in seeing how games can affect different age groups. And I made an error in limiting myself, in word if not in spirit, to looking for affects on young adults and children. Today I found an article which discusses ways that gaming can help seniors improve themselves with games.

An article posted in the news section of the University of Illinois, available here, reveals that playing a strategic nation-building game can actually improve cognitive function in seniors over the age of 60. Per the article decades of research would prove that under laboratory conditions, cognitive functions that typically decline with age could be improved. But only using the method trained for and tested in the lab. And only while in the lab. Meanwhile, after playing the game Age of Nations, testers showed increased memory, improved ability to switch tasks, and other improvements in cognitive function. The researchers did point out that while these were amazing results, playing games should be, by no means, the only efforts seniors make to improve themselves.

Greater Good, a science research center of the University of California Berkeley, has published the article “Playing the Blame Game” which discusses the results of a federally funded study on how video games affect adolescents. Among other results, they find that boys are more apt to be social as a result of and in conjunction with games. That anti-social gaming is potentially a sign, not of a problem with video games, but with the player in question, who may have anti-social tendencies and were more likely to report getting into physical fights. Their study also indicates that playing games with friends encourages, rather than discourages, physical play as well, with an increased probability if the game is a sports game. They do note that the time spent socializing and in physical activity generally was found to come at a cost; less time was spent reading and on homework. The report indicates that while video game play can affect school performance, this is not related to the content of the games. They make a comparison to television: students who watch large amounts of television generally aren’t watching educational programs.

Further into the article the writer discusses violent games, such as the Doom series, and its correlation, or lack of, to violence in youth, with particular discussion regarding school related shootings such as Columbine. An interesting note here is that the profile of a typical school shooter is male with a history of depression and/or suicidal behavior. A study referenced from 2002 showed no relationship between violent games and school shootings and only 1 in 8 shooters having any notable interest in violent games. However a link between increased aggressive behaviors and playing violent games was mentioned in the article, which then proceeded to ask an important question, posed in the form of an apt metaphor: which is the chicken and which is the egg? That is do increased aggressive behaviors draw a player to the violent games? Or do violent games provoke the increased aggressive behaviors? No answer has been yet concluded on this.

Both of these articles feel relevant to me. Each explores how games can affect their player, whether their player is an adolescent or a senior citizen. The articles contrast each other in that one, the Greater Good article discusses the topic in an open-ended manner, searching for as many answers as it can, whereas the article from the University of Illinois takes a specific style of game and sees if it can be adapted to clinical use, and finds that it can. Both articles appear to be written in a fairly neutral form, being written by parties who were not involved in the studies they report, helping to keep them unbiased and free of assumptions. Of the two articles, I think it clear that I am more personally drawn to “Playing the Blame Game” because it discusses more that is personally relevant. It’s interesting to think I could potentially set my grandmother up on a PC to help her Alzheimer’s, but the practicality of it negates the benefit. The information regarding socialization, play, and the lack of an actual link between violent games and violent behavior is personally satisfying.

In light of this I start wondering if there is a NEED for ESRB ratings? What is the purpose of them? Are they effective? I know I raised that last question last time, but I think it becomes more relevant in this new light. If there is no correlation between violent games and violent outbursts, should we be censoring the content this strictly?