Blood Pressure Raised by TV Time

According to the study covered here, children's blood pressure may go up as they watch TV or play video games. Oddly enough, blood pressure increases independent of the body type of the 3 to 8 year-olds studied did not increase with regular sedentary activity or computer usage, but it did increase when the children watched or played on the TV. I wonder if wearing a special device to measure their blood pressure and trying to play a video game may have caused the kids some undue stress, perhaps.

The Skeptic's Guide to Violent Video Game Studies

On BlogCritics, I published My "Skeptic's Guide to Violent Video Game Studies" today. Follow the link for my largest article in a long time.

Studying Studies: Violent Video Games Linked to Hostility Again

Yesterday, the Washington Post ran a story with the headline "Study Links Violent Video Games, Hostility", with the subtitle "Research in U.S., Japan Shows Aggression Increased for Months After Play". The only problem is, the news story is really weak on the details of how the study came to that finding. They mention in the body of the text that it was a group of three longitudinal studies over time, using kids from Japan and the United States. The study showed "an increased likelihood of getting into a fight at school or being identified by a teacher or peer as being physically agressive five to six months later in the same school year". The American children were from 9 to 12 and they lived in Minnesota.

First of all, 9 to 12 seems a bit young for what we should be looking for. Most of the concern about violent video games centers on real world violent crime, not little fights at school. Also, Mature-rated games aren't entirely prevalent at that age range, though they are likely more prevalent than we think.

Secondly, did all kinds of video games increase chances of aggressive behavior? Or just "violent" ones, which are defined by the study as "when one character harmed of killed another". This definition of violent obviously includes things considered very tame, like Kirby and Madden. Anyway, the rest of the article just says "we have conclusive evidence..." then goes on to say that certain important people now consider media violence a public health concern. They just pulled out their list of public health concerns, crossed out comic books and rock 'n' roll, then wrote video games right under there with no sense of irony at all.

So, we need more details. From what I've heard, that isn't conclusive evidence. Even if their study factored in previous aggression, kids who are more aggressive are more likely to play "violent" games. Also, violent crime in the United States has consistently gone down ever since video games became readily available for children. I'm not suggesting that video games cause less violence, but rather that there is little to no effect.

Studying Studies: Gender Differences in Gamers

Originally via GamePolitics, I came upon the recent Stanford University study that said men are more likely to become addicted to video games than women. Quote from the press release:

"Allan Reiss, MD, and his colleagues have a pretty good idea why your husband or boyfriend can’t put down the Halo 3. In a first-of-its-kind imaging study, the Stanford University School of Medicine researchers have shown that the part of the brain that generates rewarding feelings is more activated in men than women during video-game play."

Format

I thought at least "the Halo 3" should amuse some of you. Anyway, twenty-two people, evenly divided in gender, were given a game to play involving balls and a line across the middle of the viewing ground (you may as well just look at it in the original Stanford link up at the top.) A constant stream of balls come towards the middle line, and the line will move left if hit by a ball and move right if the balls are far enough away from it. The participants were only told to click as many balls as they could, removing them from the screen, but everyone quickly found out that their "territory" to the left of the middle line had to be increased to "win".

Results

The results came in roughly equal for the genders in number of balls clicked, but the men came out with more territory than the women, by identifying the balls closest to the wall as needing to be clicked first. According to Alan Reiss, “The females ‘got’ the game, and they moved the wall in the direction you would expect. They appeared motivated to succeed at the game. The males were just a lot more motivated to succeed.” After looking at the visuals for brain activity from the fMRI the players were hooked to, the researchers noticed increased activity in the area of the brain representing both reward and addiction for whoever ended up with more territory, meaning, the males.

My Response

So the conclusion that made the headlines and became more general and underexplained with each repeated telling was "Men more addicted to video games". I have a couple of issues with the study, which I discussed here at VG Researcher alongside Wai Yen Tang's write-up about the study. My main issue was likely the fact that the researchers claimed this game was "a fairly representative, generic computer game." Boiling down video games into this one simplistic tech demo-level program seems unfair, though I understand it's necessary that the experiment eliminate as many variables as possible. The game, in the end, doesn't represent video games so much as goal-oriented activities due to its abstract nature. Therefore, I think that a better conclusion would likely be "men are more addicted to achieving abstract goals" instead of video games. It mostly makes me wonder if the same brain visual results would occur from, say, scoring in a sport or winning at roulette in a comparison between genders.

Another interesting point we happened upon in our discussion at VG Researcher was that games without specific goals tend to be the ones stereotypically associated with girl gamers. The Sims and the various match-three puzzle games are often associated with girl gamers, and at least The Sims doesn't have a specific goal the player must reach. The puzzle games don't especially either, with more of a vague infinite points system than levels or worlds to beat. One can never "beat" Tetris or Bejewled especially, and girls seem to have an easier time obsessing over it than Civilization IV.

The Stanford research team said they planned to do more research in the area, which is definitely what I'm looking for. It's an interesting topic, and it's not likely to lead to laws being passed against gaming, so I'm all for it. I still have some concerns about the findings that will need more study to resolve.