FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS CAUSE BRAIN DAMAGE ACCORDING TO NEW STUDY

[Bananasplit_00]

I can see how auto piloting your fps gaming could do some shit to your brain, that's however not how I have played them for years now. I usually play Paladins in the top 0.1%, it requires thought, communication, teamwork and strategy. Even more then I have ever felt using playing CIV V to be honest. I doubt auto piloting your fps gaming experience will give you brain damage but like quite literally everything it probably changes your brain in some way. I don't think everyone wants to play fps games competitively all the time, not even i do it all the time, sometimes I just chill and go with the flow but I find myself more on auto pilot playing games like CIV V and 1010! Then any FPS game

[SpaceGhostC2C]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I think people should read the article (not the sensationalistic one) before jumping in to defend their hobby.

The study does not say video games (or FPS games) causes brain damage. It is a lot more complicated than that. Also, 100 people is not an insignificant sample group assuming the test was done correctly.

The study does not even say video games are bad.

 

1 hour ago, Urishima said:

Exactly. Blame media for BS, sensationalist reporting. Sample of 100 people seems small, but the paper itself seems good.

 

 

We basically are facing yet another example of...

 

 

With all-caps title and all  

[kilgore_T]

even if it was true im still gonna play them

good things require a little risk

[SImoHayha]

Sounds like bullshit like usual. No peer review, no people questioning the " results"  "bias" of the researchers. The source sample ( People ) how many people actually played video games when they did this test? Did people act like a dummy on purpose to screw up the results? 

 

Again no testing is perfect but goddamn you can somewhat achieve perfect testing. Its like saying a cup of wine is akin to you working out at the gym for one hour. Yea bullshit.  I would be skeptical unfortunately science isn't the way it used to be.

 

PFFT THEY WERE PAID GUYS. LIKE THIS ISNT GOING TO SKEW RESULTS 10 OUTTA 10 G8 SCIENCE

 

http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/mp2017155a.html?foxtrotcallback=true

[SpaceGhostC2C]

12 minutes ago, Ramamataz said:

Sounds like bullshit like usual. No peer review, no people questioning the " results"  "bias" of the researchers. The source sample ( People ) how many people actually played video games when they did this test? Did people act like a dummy on purpose to screw up the results? 

 

Again no testing is perfect but goddamn you can somewhat achieve perfect testing. Its like saying a cup of wine is akin to you working out at the gym for one hour. Yea bullshit.  I would be skeptical unfortunately science isn't the way it used to be.

 

PFFT THEY WERE PAID GUYS. LIKE THIS ISNT GOING TO SKEW RESULTS 10 OUTTA 10 G8 SCIENCE

 

http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/mp2017155a.html?foxtrotcallback=true

Is that sarcasm? 

[SImoHayha]

5 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Is that sarcasm? 

No it isn't buddy boi. It literally says they were paid 9$ to participate that can fudge up results. 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

1 minute ago, Ramamataz said:

No it isn't buddy boi. It literally says they were paid 9$ to participate that can fudge up results. 

No. Paying to  participants in experiments is a fairly standard practice. How else do you think you can get random people to give sime of their valuable time to you? On the contrary, not paying would mean that only your buddies participate to do you a favor. 

Also, unless payment is tied to delivering a particular result (i.e., unless you take the results, basically), there is no problem in paying, since all participants get paie the same.

 

I honestly thought you were joking, since those claims are as baseless as it gets. Especially after other forum members got into the details of the paper, it's kind of sad

 

I guess it can happen if you never saw a research paper before, it off you haven't spent much time thinking about experiment design and the scientific method. It's not something that everyone is going to be an expert on. But the strange part is that someone can get so assertive, pitchfork-in-hand despite that. Doubt and curiosity about things we don't know are reasonable, but anger and dismissal? Not so much. 

 

[mr moose]

13 minutes ago, Ramamataz said:

No it isn't buddy boi. It literally says they were paid 9$ to participate that can fudge up results. 

It's not uncommon for the subjects to be reimbursed for their time.   It does not effect the results.   It is in most cases is the only way to ensure a truly random spread of people volunteer.    

[SImoHayha]

10 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

No. Paying to  participants in experiments is a fairly standard practice. How else do you think you can get random people to give sime of their valuable time to you? On the contrary, not paying would mean that only your buddies participate to do you a favor. 

Also, unless payment is tied to delivering a particular result (i.e., unless you take the results, basically), there is no problem in paying, since all participants get paie the same.

 

I honestly thought you were joking, since those claims are as baseless as it gets. Especially after other forum members got into the details of the paper, it's kind of sad

 

I guess it can happen if you never saw a research paper before, it off you haven't spent much time thinking about experiment design and the scientific method. It's not something that everyone is going to be an expert on. But the strange part is that someone can get so assertive, pitchfork-in-hand despite that. Doubt and curiosity about things we don't know are reasonable, but anger and dismissal? Not so much. 

 

No because paying is not a usual way of getting people to participate into your experiment. You know what polls are right? Many people use polls because it literally uses no time and of course, it's free and yet people do it. I know what research paper is, and I have done quite a few and the lesson learned is not to completely trust " Studies " because " of giant Institute"  Even the smartest people make mistakes.

 

You may not know this but yes paying people does influence people to think a certain way or do a certain thing it's something research has to take into consideration. You know that huge autism scare from that one researcher that said vaccines cause autism? He was influenced by some money and said that vaccines cause autism and has created the worlds worst pandemic when it comes to vaccines. 

 

Doesn't help the damn research is behind a paywall after I was just on it now I cant fully read it. But a people sample of 100 peeps is pretty tiny. 

Edited August 11, 2017 by Ramamataz

[Sauron]

3 hours ago, JAKEBAB said:

So.... They found a cure for brain damage?

More like this isn't actually "brain damage". I think it's a bit like saying that if you sit in a chair all day you'll have reduced muscle mass. It's not good, but it's not "muscle damage".

[TidaLWaveZ]

In this day and age every study you see like this is completely commissioned by someone with an alternate agenda in order to defame something for personal gain.

[TidaLWaveZ]

3 hours ago, deXxterlab97 said:

Let's hope these 100 participants were random and not some specific people who already has brain damage/weak brain prior...

 

It was the buzzfeed staff

[SpaceGhostC2C]

5 minutes ago, Ramamataz said:

No because paying is not a usual way of getting people to participate into your experiment.

Yes, it is. Don't make bold claims about what you don't know.

5 minutes ago, Ramamataz said:

You know what polls are right?

Yes, I know: not experiments, that's what they are. Polls (or surveys, as usually called) are a different source of data than experiments, and they don't satisfy any of the requirements for a randomized controlled trial.

5 minutes ago, Ramamataz said:

I know what research paper is,

Please stop proving the opposite.

5 minutes ago, Ramamataz said:

 You know that huge autism scare from that one researcher that said vaccines cause autism? He was influenced by some money and said that vaccines cause autism and has created the worlds worst pandemic when it comes to vaccines. 

The researcher being paid to find a conclusion and the participants getting paid just to participate are black and white different. Please, really, stop.

5 minutes ago, Ramamataz said:

But a people sample of 100 peeps is pretty tiny. 

No it's not, it has been discussed in this thread before. There's no such thing as a universal sample size that is good for everything. The necessary sample size to obtain consistent results depends very much on the characteristics of the study (how many parameters to be estimated, whether it uses experimental data or survey data, etc).

 

 

You know, skepticism about the bullshit, sensationalist claims in OP and the news sources he links is healthy, even required. You are right to doubt the headline (which is, in fact, wrong). But you are directing your skepticism to the wrong place: instead of questioning the media directly providing you with bullshit claims, you are skipping them and going directly against "those studies" which in fact don't claim what OP says they claim. Don't let the bullshit reporters guide you away from proper scientific research.

[mr moose]

9 minutes ago, Ramamataz said:

No because paying is not a usual way of getting people to participate into your experiment. You know what polls are right? Many people use polls because it literally uses no time and of course, it's free and yet people do it. I know what research paper is, and I have done quite a few and the lesson learned is not to completely trust " Studies " because " of giant Institute"  Even the smartest people make mistakes.

 

You may not know this but yes paying people does influence people to think a certain way or do a certain thing it's something research has to take into consideration. You know that huge autism scare from that one researcher that said vaccines cause autism? He was influenced by some money and said that vaccines cause autism and has created the worlds worst pandemic when it comes to vaccines. 

 

Doesn't help the damn research is behind a paywall after I was just on it now I cant fully read it. But a people sample of 100 peeps is pretty tiny. 

Nope, wrong, wrong wrong, just wrong.

 

 

paying is common.  These studies are highly structured, they can not just use polls.   Please.  You clearly know nothing about this level of research.

 

Andrew Wakefield was influenced by money, his subjects weren't.   The Autism scare is not due to that one study, but due to the hype and continued lobbying by people who make money selling bogus autism treatments.   Andrew Wakefield's study was pulled, and he was struck off the register.  That is what happens when you don't follow the rules and try to present bogus studies. 

 

 

 

[Dylanc1500]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Nope, wrong, wrong wrong, just wrong.

 

 

paying is common.  These studies are highly structured, they can not just use polls.   Please.  You clearly know nothing about this level of research.

 

Andrew Wakefield was influenced by money, his subjects weren't.   The Autism scare is not due to that one study, but due to the hype and continued lobbying by people who make money selling bogus autism treatments.   Andrew Wakefield's study was pulled, and he was struck off the register.  That is what happens when you don't follow the rules and try to present bogus studies. 

 

 

 

I can say first hand I have participated in a study and was reimbursed rough $950 plus fuel, food, and Hotel. It was a medical study, but nonetheless it was a study. Reimbursement is highly common with scientific studies.

 

 

yay, I feel like I participated now.

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, Dylanc1500 said:

yay, I feel like I participated now.

You have helped advance the human race.  Because that is the only way science can advance. 

[Urishima]

43 minutes ago, Ramamataz said:

No because paying is not a usual way of getting people to participate into your experiment. You know what polls are right? Many people use polls because it literally uses no time and of course, it's free and yet people do it. I know what research paper is, and I have done quite a few and the lesson learned is not to completely trust " Studies " because " of giant Institute"  Even the smartest people make mistakes.

Do you know what this study WASN'T? A poll.

 

You know fuck all about this.

[Jito463]

I know it's already been addressed that the headline was just sensationalized, not the study itself, but I have to post this.

 

5 hours ago, TheReal1980 said:

FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS CAUSE BRAIN DAMAGE ACCORDING TO NEW STUDY

1 hour ago, Dylanc1500 said:

yay, I feel like I participated now.

[Evolution90]

Explains why i'm so dumb /s

 

 

[Evolution90]

No co-ordination ability.

 

 

No mental process required.

 

 

[TacoSenpai]

What I'd be more interested in is the second bit about how puzzle games, platformers and so on supposedly help the brain.  Its certainly plausible as you do have to think through them and games like Zelda more often than not have tricky puzzles to figure out.  And you are gonna laugh about this but a big thing that accelerated me learning to read back in my toddler to 5 year old days was playing games like Zelda and Pokemon where I had to read the dialogue often being introduced to new vocabulary and learn how to comprehend it to progress.  Then I had to also read the manuals to know what the hell I was doing.  Then again maybe that just provided motivation because I wanted to play the game.

[The Benjamins]

6 minutes ago, LordTaco42 said:

What I'd be more interested in is the second bit about how puzzle games, platformers and so on supposedly help the brain.  Its certainly plausible as you do have to think through them and games like Zelda more often than not have tricky puzzles to figure out.  And you are gonna laugh about this but a big thing that accelerated me learning to read back in my toddler to 5 year old days was playing games like Zelda and Pokemon where I had to read the dialogue often being introduced to new vocabulary and learn how to comprehend it to progress.  Then I had to also read the manuals to know what the hell I was doing.  Then again maybe that just provided motivation because I wanted to play the game.

I feel that all types of games improve different skills. example employers love to say "we are looking for someone quick on their feet" which is something people that play competitive games learn, they have to adapt fast to win many types of games.

 

I feel that all those Chinese Cartoons I watch that have subs help me to read better.

[XenosTech]

5 hours ago, tom_w141 said:

Excuse me which games are you buying? The average $60 has about 40-50 hours of content  The only notable recent exception for me is PUBG which cost  £25 and im already over 200 hours playing most days. although its not really content its just addictive AF

Then there's 

 

Oh I've played 1 game from beta right up until that had a lv 110 cap... Ahh silkroad online, the game you spent all your life playing lol.

[XenosTech]

-Double post-

[DutchTexan]

5 hours ago, TheReal1980 said:

FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS CAUSE BRAIN DAMAGE ACCORDING TO NEW STUDY

So a new study has come out from the University of Montreal where they found a link between FPS and brain damage.

http://nouvelles.umontreal.ca/en/article/2017/08/07/playing-action-video-games-can-actually-harm-your-brain/

http://cogconnected.com/2017/08/first-person-shooter-brain-damage/

 

 

*Question Time*
1. Should people never have stopped playing Nintendo games since it says that platformers are good to play?

2. So a whole generation of brain damaged people are now walking around, should people be scared (of you)?

 

TL; DR. They is good 

 

Here is a preview(can't give full version for free) for a study concluded July of 2014, but first published August of 2013: https://search.proquest.com/openview/cbb7671a196f3059830db92a1e1e7ef3/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=44096

 

Quote

⁶ It has been demonstrated that video game playing can enhance probabilistic inferences⁷ as well as visual skills related to attention, memory and the spatial resolution of vision.^8–11 Furthermore, improvements in higher-level cognitive functions such as task switching,¹² working memory and reasoning have been associated with video gaming improvements.¹³ In addition, video games have been shown to enhance spatial¹⁴ and motor skills such as endoscopic surgical performance in medical doctors

Quote

For violent video games, detrimental effects have been reported in the social domain, namely short-term increases in aggression and reductions of empathy and pro-social behaviour.²

Quote

We found more gray matter (GM) volume in the left ventral striatum for frequent (49 h per week) compared with infrequent video gamers (p9 h per week).^3,18 However, video gaming is not restricted to adolesence. The average age of a video gamer in the United States was 30 years and he has on average played for 12 years in 2012.

Quote

We theorized that because of the prominent navigation component in many threedimensional (3D) video games, the hippocampal formation may be enlarged in frequent gamers. In order to test this hypothesis, we investigated the structural correlates of video gaming in an adult population within the scope of the present study

They tested 62 healthy adult male participants (mean 28.4 years, s.d. 6.07, range 24). Recruited by means of newspaper advertisements, announcing the study as a scientific study including an MRI measurement.

 

 

Another study combining several other studies published May of this year: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316790505_Neural_Basis_of_Video_Gaming_A_Systematic_Review

Quote

Objectives: We aim to understand the relationship between the use of video games and their neural correlates, taking into account the whole variety of cognitive factors that they encompass.

 

Methods: A systematic review was conducted using standardized search operators that included the presence of video games and neuro-imaging techniques or references to structural or functional brain changes. Separate categories were made for studies featuring Internet Gaming Disorder and studies focused on the violent content of video games.

 

Results: A total of 116 articles were considered for the final selection. One hundred provided functional data and 22 measured structural brain changes. One-third of the studies covered video game addiction, and 14% focused on video game related violence.

 

Conclusions: Despite the innate heterogeneity of the field of study, it has been possible to establish a series of links between the neural and cognitive aspects, particularly regarding attention, cognitive control, visuospatial skills, cognitive workload, and reward processing. However, many aspects could be improved. The lack of standardization in the different aspects of video game related research, such as the participants’ characteristics, the features of each video game genre and the diverse study goals could contribute to discrepancies in many related studies.

Quote

The most researched areas in studies examining volumetric differences found relevant changes in prefrontal regions, mainly the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and surrounding areas, superior and posterior parietal regions, the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), the cerebellum, the insula, and subcortical nuclei, as well as the striatum and the hippocampus. In addition to this, structural connectivity studies observed changes in virtually all parts of the brain, such as in fibers connecting to the visual, temporal and prefrontal cortices, the corpus callosum, the hippocampus, the thalamus, association fibers like the external capsule, and fibers connecting the basal ganglia.

Quote

Structures in the basal nuclei also have a prominent role, particularly the striatum, in studies related to VG addiction. Finally, we must not overlook a series of brain regions which do not appear as frequently, such as occipital and temporal cortices, the cerebellum, the thalamus, and the hippocampus, where distinctive activity patterns have also been observed as a result of VG play.

Quote

Neural correlates related to visuospatial skills have been detected in relationship with structural volume enlargements of the right hippocampus (HC), both in long-term gamers and experimentally after a VG training period (Kühn et al., 2013; Kühn and Gallinat, 2014∗ ). Increased hippocampal volumes were also found by Szabó et al. (2014∗∗), although the authors do not attribute that effect to the VG training. The entorhinal cortex, associated with navigational skills (Schmidt-Hieber and Häusser, 2013), which together with the HC is involved in spatial memory (Miller et al., 2015), was also correlated with lifetime experience in logic/puzzle and platform VG (Kühn and Gallinat, 2014∗ ).

Quote

The attentional benefits resulting from the use of VG seem to be the most evidence-supported aspect, as many studies by Bavelier and Green have shown (Green and Bavelier, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2012; Dye et al., 2009; Hubert-Wallander et al., 2011; Bavelier et al., 2012b). Improvements in bottom-up and top-down attention, optimization of attentional resources, integration between attentional and sensorimotor areas, and improvements in selective and peripheral visual attention have been featured in a large number of studies.