Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Kristina Martinez
It is well known that playing violent video games can have negative effects on an
individual, such as increased aggression or antisocial behavior. This has caused a major
stir in Congress and prompted our law makers to consider developing stricter laws on
video games companies. So much attention has been focused on researching violent
video games and aggression that the positive effects of playing video games have been
largely overlooked or ignored. High bias against violent video games has been shown to
exaggerate the negative aggression displayed, verses the natural positive aggression that
is displayed when faced with violence. This biased against violent video games has also
been the cause for the over shadowing of the positive effects of video games in general
New studies have stepped away from the repetitive experiments on violent video
games and broadened their research to search for possible benefits of playing video
games. Recent studies have shown that playing video games can actually have positive
effects on adolescence’s behaviors and development. Video games have also been shown
to help improve visuospatial cognition, increases helpful behaviors, and even increases
physical fitness. Even violent video games have been shown to have possible positive
out to see if there are always negative social outcomes to playing video games. In
particular, they wanted to examine if playing games with prosocial content could led to
POSITIVE EFFECTS 3
promoting prosocial or helping behavior. In their first experiment they wanted to see how
after playing either a prosocial, neutral, or violent video game. It was predicted that the
prosocial gamers would be more likely to assist in picking up the pencils then the violent
video game players. They had 54 students ages 19-43 years old randomly assigned to
Participants were unaware of the actual nature of the study and thought the
experiment was how much people enjoyed playing classic video games. After the 8
minutes an experimenter, who knew the game conditions of the participant, would come
in an “accidentally” knock over a jar of pencils while reaching for questionnaire works
sheets. The experimenter paused for five seconds and participants were then observed to
see if they would assist the experimenter in picking up the spilt pencils. It was found that
those who played the prosocial video games were more likely then either the neutral or
violent video game players to help the experimenter pick up the pencils. 67% of the
prosocial game players assisted the experimenter, while only 33% of the neutral and 28%
of the violent video game players assisted. This showed that those who played prosocial
video games were more likely to participate in prosocial behavior. What was surprising
was that neutral video game players showed very little difference in their prosocial
A second experiment was done in order to ensure that experimenter biases were
not affecting the results of the first study. In this second study Gretemeyer & Osswald
(2010) ensured that the experimenter did not know the gaming condition of the
participants. They also eliminated the violent video game option as the first experiment
POSITIVE EFFECTS 4
showed little difference between neutral and violent video games in prosocial behavior.
In this second experiment participants were tested under similar conditions as the first
experiment, except that their prosocial behavior was determined by whether or not they
would help a “graduate student” in completing their thesis by helping in further research.
The results showed that 100% of the prosocial video game players were willing to help
the “graduate student” in further research, while only 13/20 of the neutral gamers were
willing to help. This supports the results from experiment one and showed that
experimenter bias were not responsible for the first experiments results. Prosocial video
These results led to a third experiment were Greitemeyer and Osswald (2010)
wanted to see if these prosocial behaviors from playing prosocial games would extend to
real life situation where not helping could lead to negative consequences for the person
they did not help, in this case sexual harassment. This study had conditions similar to the
games, played for 8 minutes, and unaware of real testing objective. After the 8 minutes of
“observing” the participant would come in to the testing area. He would begin to make a
ruckus about how he wants her back and trying to get her to come with him, while the
female experimenter would keep saying she is busy and telling him to leave her alone.
Participants were observed to see if they would assist the experimenter and tell the “ex-
boyfriend” to leave, which he would if told, or ignore the situation and not help. In this
case another experimenter came in and “kicked” the confederate out. I was found that
56% of the prosocial player would intervene, while only 22% of the neutral gamers
POSITIVE EFFECTS 5
would help. This experiment further proves the theory that playing prosocial video games
increases helping and positive behaviors. This experiment was most important in that it
showed a real world instance in which playing prosocial games would be beneficial not
playing prosocial video games primed prosocial knowledge structures that promoted
prosocial behavior. The experiment had the same set up and conditions of experiments
two and three. This time participants were not only tested for prosocial behavior, picking
up pencils, but were also asked to write down what they were thinking while playing the
video game. Two independent rater assessed their responses and rated there thoughts on
the amount of prosocial and neutral content they contained. They discovered that the
prosocial players had more prosocial thoughts then the neutral game players. It was also
noted that the number of pencils picked up corresponded to the amount of prosocial
thoughts. Neutrals only picked up pencils 22% of the time where as prosocial player
picked up the pencils 63% of the time. This experiment remains consistent with the
results of the three previous experiments in the increase of prosocial behavior after
Follow up studies by Greitemeyer and Osswald (2011) also showed that prosocial
video games helped to prime prosocial ideas. This in turn would lead a person to behave
in a more prosocial way because their thoughts are already primed for prosocial behavior.
The researcher’s (2011) study proved the existence of this prosocial priming effect after
playing prosocial video games. They had participants tested under similar conditions to
the 2010 studies, such as unaware of true experiment objectives, and randomly assigned
POSITIVE EFFECTS 6
to prosocial or neutral game. After ten minutes of playing their assigned game,
participants were asked to perform a lexical decision task. The results showed that those
who played the prosocial game responded faster to the prosocial words then those who
played the neutral game. Also those who played the neutral game responded quickest to
the neutral words in the lexical task. This proves that playing video games has a priming
effect and that prosocial video games can have a prosocial priming effect.
Another study by Bosche (2010) also supports the findings of Greitemeyer and
Osswald’s positive video game priming effect. The difference in this study was that
violent video games were used and the objective of the study was to show that playing
violent video games have the potential to prime positive concepts, such as engaging in
positively valenced playful fighting. This was shown through the participant’s
completion of a lexical decision task after playing either a violent video game or a neutral
game. The results showed that participants responded quickest to aggressive negative
words and positive words as well. This shows that violent video games not only prime
In a final study by Greitemeyer et. al. (2012), prosocial video games were again
studied, but this time to see if they could reduce aggressive behavior and aggressive
violent video game. They were then given an aggression questionnaire to account for
individual differences. After that they were told to write an essay that was then scored by
an examiner in another room. No matter what the participants wrote they were given a
poor score to illicit angry and aggressive feelings. They then proceeded to play their
assigned video games for 15 minutes. After the 15 minutes they were asked to rate how
POSITIVE EFFECTS 7
they felt from -5 to 5 and adjust some music to the volume of their choice. It was found
that the prosocial gamer rated themselves as feeling less angry and played the music
quieter then either the neutral or violent video game players. This shows that playing
prosocial video games can have a positive influence on an individual’s thoughts and
aggressive feelings. Schmierbach et. al. (2011), also supported the idea that people feel
video games do have negative benefits, but that their can also be great positive benefits
on oneself. However, some weaknesses of this study were that there was no controlled
experiment done and it relied on the participant’s subjective opinions through the filling
out of a questionnaire. All of these studies show many potential positive and beneficial
effects of playing video games and that a mood can be altered based on what video game
playing video games has been shown to have cognitive benefits, such as increased
(2010) revealed that video games help to improve attention, spatial cognition, and mental
rotation. Positive benefits like improved mental rotation abilities and improved attention
recognize objects more quickly and accurately, while an improved attention span can be
beneficial to adolescence that have trouble focusing or paying attention in school. Also
mentioned were video games abilities to help individuals overcome cognitive limitations,
such as fear of flying, through simulations. This opens the window for new forms of
POSITIVE EFFECTS 8
phobia treatments and therapy that may help individuals who have phobias that are
normally hard to replicate, like fear of flying on a plane. Although it isn’t understood
why these cognitive benefits occur as a result of playing video games, Chandrasekharan
et. al. (2010) proposed a theory that they call the ideomotor effect. They define this
ideomotor effect as the brains common coding ability which connects an organism’s
the connections of the ideomotor effect do happen when individuals play video games
and may be one of the causes of the cognitive benefits that develop as the result of
playing video games. Further studies on this ideomotor effect may yield even more
video games has a positive effect on an individual’s visuospatial cognition. It was also
found that so far, only violent video games have been shown to increase visuospatial
cognition. All other non- violent games have provided minimal effects of this positive
benefit that seems to be thus far almost exclusive to violent video games. These positive
benefits raised the question of why no one has heard of such benefits before. Ferguson
showed that these positive effects have often been ignored because of the stigma and bias
Ferguson (2007), found that publication bias was one of the main contributors to
the bias results being published about both violent and non-violent video games. He also
discovered that many studies used un-standardized measures of aggression when studying
the effects of violent video games on aggression. It is not to far off to assume that many
of the studies done on video games, specifically violent video games, contained
POSITIVE EFFECTS 9
experimenter or participant biases as well. The most impacting discovery was made when
Ferguson adjusted the studies for the publication bias. He found that with the adjustment,
visuospatial cognition still showed significant increases after participants played violent
video games, while the association between violent video games and aggression no
longer held true to the popular belief. He also pointed out that it is easy to find “proof” of
violent video games causing aggressive behavior when 98% of adolescence play video
games. This study shows the importance of carefully scrutinizing results and being aware
Ferguson (2010). He found that moral panics are often responsible for such high
publication biases in the scientific community. Moral panics are when certain members
of society, usually older members, try to impose their beliefs on the larger society. In the
case of violent video games high members of society have spoken out against them and
made claims that they increase aggression or lead to individuals committing violent
crimes. These authority figures of society then fund research that will support their
claims. This is the beginning of the biases found not only in violent video games, but in
Researchers will then play into the moral panic in order to receive funding for
their research. Their research was found to be conducted with invalid aggression
measures. This gave inaccurate results. Ferguson listed several factors that are the cause
of the biases found in video games research. The first was that “third” variable effects,
like a violent home environment, where not take into consideration. Other factors such as
citation bias, publication bias, and lack of scrutinizing peer reviews contributed to more
POSITIVE EFFECTS 10
violent video games equal increased aggression studies being published. All opposing
studies, such as those that showed positive benefits or those that did not support the moral
panic claim, were highly criticized and the results generally ignored. The media, such as
the nightly news, also helped fuel the bias flames by constantly reporting inaccurate
studies findings. These biases have only recently been exposed and the research on the
positive cognitive effects of playing video games has already begun to come to light.
Video games have also been proven to have benefits for our physical health,
especially with the invention of the Wii, Playstation Eye Toy, and Xbox kinects. All three
of these new gaming technologies require users to physically move in order to control the
game. A recent study by Maddison et.al. (2012) showed that these physically active game
systems may hold the key to battling the recent epidemic of obese children. Their study
found that by just playing one hour of the Playstation eye toy or Wii, children reduced
their BMI (body mass index) by 8% and their body fat by as much as 50%. All the
researchers did was have these normally sedentary gamers replace one of their gaming
hours with a physically active game for 24 weeks. This study opens up a whole new
window for the interventions of obesity in children and provides a treatment that not only
The health care industry is another area which has shown a positive benefit for
playing video games. Various video games have been used in the health industry to treat
burn victims, asthma patients, physical therapy, diabetes, bowel dysfunction, cancer, and
even improve doctor’s surgical skills. Specialized games have been developed tailored to
POSITIVE EFFECTS 11
a particular medical condition and have proven to raise children’s understanding of their
disease. These tailored games also play an important role in motivating children and
increasing their self efficacy when dealing with their ailments. The case of the specialized
game for burn victims, called Snow World, has been especially effective in reducing pain
by tricking the brain into thinking it is cold and drawing attention away from the burning
sensation. With these studies, video games have shown themselves to have positive
Conclusion
Overall these studies have shown several benefits and positive effects of playing
video games. They can improve cognitive abilities, such as increase visuospatial
cognition, mental rotation, attention, and help individuals overcome cognitive limitations.
Video games can also prime natural positive aggression, helping behaviors, and prosocial
behaviors. They can even be of service to the healthcare industry, such as in the treatment
of burn patients. Improving our physical health by helping to combat the obesity
epidemic in adolescent children is another positive benefit of video games that we are
only beginning to explore. These positive effects show that playing video games may do
more good then harm. Such findings can influence real world policy making and show
proof to Congress that stricter regulation on video games is unnecessary. Further research
is needed to show the many positive benefits that have only recently come to light and
References
Bösche, W. (2010). Violent video games prime both aggressive and positive cognitions.
Chandrasekharan, S., et. al. (2010). Ideomotor design: Using common coding theory to
derive novel video game interactions. Pragmatics & Cognition, 18, 313-339.
Ferguson, C. J. (2007). The good, the bad and the ugly: A meta-analytic review of
positive and negative effects of violent video games. Psychiatric Quarterly, 78,
309-316.
Ferguson, C. J. (2010). Blazing angels or resident evil? Can violent video games be a
Greitemeyer, T., & Osswald, S. (2010). Effects of prosocial video games on prosocial
Greitemeyer, T., & Osswald, S. (2011). Playing prosocial video games increases the
128.
Greitemeyer, T., Agthe, M., Turner, R., Gschwendtner, C. (2012). Acting prosocially
Kato, P. M. (2010). Video games in health care: Closing the gap. Review of General
Maddison, R., Mhurchu, C. N., Jull, A., et.al. (2012). Active video games: The mediating
Schmierbach, S., Boyle, M. P., Xu, Q., McLeod, D. M. (2011), Exploring third-person
327.