video game problem solving skills

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Can Video Gameplay Improve Undergraduates’ Problem-Solving Skills?

Benjamin emihovich, nelson roque, justin mason.

• Author information
• Copyright and License information

In this study, the authors investigated if two distinct types of video gameplay improved undergraduates’ problem-solving skills. Two groups of student participants were recruited to play either a roleplaying video game (World of Warcraft; experimental group) or a brain-training video game (CogniFit; control group). Participants were measured on their problem-solving skills before and after 20 hours of video gameplay. Two measures were used to assess problem-solving skills for this study, the Tower of Hanoi and The PISA Problem Solving Test. The Tower of Hanoi measured the rule application component of problem-solving skills and the PISA Problem Solving test measured transfer of problem-solving skills from video gameplay to novel scenarios on the test. No significant differences were found between the two groups on either problem-solving measure. Implications for future studies on game- based learning are discussed.

Keywords: Assessment, Brain Training, Cognition, Gameplay, Problem-Solving Skills, Roleplaying, Rule Application, Transfer, Video Games

Introduction

Video games are played by more than half of the U.S population and the video game industry generated $36 billion in 2018 ( ESA, 2018 ). Given the popularity and success of the video game industry, game- based scholars are exploring how well-designed video games can be used to improve a wide range of knowledge, skills, and abilities referred to as game-based learning (GBL). Proponents of GBL argue that well-designed video games are grounded by active participation and interaction as the focal point of the learner experience and can lead to changes in behavior and cognition ( Ifenthaler, Eseryel, & Ge, 2012 ; Shute et al., 2019 ). Moreover, well-designed video games immerse players in environments that can provide a framework for learning experiences by promoting engagement and transfer from simulated worlds to the natural world ( Dede, 2009 ).

Current American students are not receiving adequate exposure to authentic ill-structured problem-solving scenarios in their classrooms, and schools need to address the acquisition of problem-solving skills for students in the 21st century ( Shute & Wang, 2016 ). American students trail their international counterparts in problem-solving skills on the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) Problem Solving Test. Furthermore, American business leaders complain about recent college graduates’ lack of problem-solving skills. Two surveys conducted by the Association of American Colleges and Universities of business leaders and students indicated that problem-solving skills are increasingly desirable for American employers, but only 38% of employers reported that recently hired American college graduates could analyze and solve complex problems while working ( Hart Associates, 2018 ).

Researchers of video game studies find that gameplay can be positively associated with the improvement of problem-solving skills ( Shute, Ventura, & Ke, 2015 ; Spires et al., 2011 ). However, current discourse in the field of gameplay and problem-solving skills centers primarily on descriptive research ( Eseryel et al., 2014 ) which can be summarized based on the following premise: video games require players to solve problems, and over time, playing video games will lead to improved problem- solving skills ( Hung & Van Eck, 2010 ). Descriptive research is important to argue that video games support problem-solving skills, but further empirical research is needed to demonstrate whether problem-solving skills are acquired through video gameplay. This research study addressed whether two distinct types of video gameplay empirically affects undergraduates’ problem-solving skills.

Video Games and Problem-Solving Skills

According to Mayer and Wittrock’s (2006) definition, problem solving includes four central characteristics: (1) occurs internally to the problem solver’s cognitive system; (2) is a process that involves conceptualizing and manipulating knowledge; (3) is goal directed; and (4) is dependent on the knowledge and skills of the problem solver to establish the difficulty in which obstacles must be overcome to reach a solution. Unlike the well-structured problems that students face in formal learning settings, well-designed games provide students with challenging scenarios that promote problem-solving skills by requiring players to generate new knowledge from challenging scenarios within interactive environments, while also providing immersive gameplay that includes ongoing feedback for the players to hone their problem-solving skills over time ( Van Eck, Shute, & Rieber, 2017 ). Rules govern video gameplay mechanics and one component of problem solving is the ability to apply existing rules in the problem space known as rule application ( Shute et al., 2015 ). One example of a rule application is found in the well-researched problem-solving puzzle the Tower of Hanoi ( Huyck & Kreivenas, 2018 ; Schiff & Vakil, 2015 ; TOH, 2019 ). The rule application component of problem-solving skill is one of the dependent variables in this study. Rule application refers to the problem-solver’s representation of the problem space through direct action, which is critical to problem solving ( Van Eck et al., 2017 ).

Literature Review

Video gameplay and transfer.

Researchers contend that the hidden power of well-designed video games is their potential to address higher-level learning, like retention, transfer, and problem-solving skills ( Gee, 2008 ; Shute & Wang, 2015 ). Retention is the ability to remember the presented information and correctly recall it when needed, while transfer is the ability to apply previously learned information in a novel situation ( Stiller & Schworm, 2019 ). Possible outcomes of playing video games may include the improvement of collaborative problem-solving skills, confidence, and leadership skills that are transferable to the workforce environment. Recent research on video game training studies and transfer of cognitive and noncognitive skills indicates that gameplay is positively associated with the improvement of attention, problem-solving skills, persistence ( Green & Bavelier, 2012 ; Rowe et al., 2011 ; Shute et al., 2015 ; Ventura et al., 2013 ), executive functions ( Oei & Patterson, 2014 ), and hypothesis testing strategies ( Spires et al., 2011 ). However, other researchers have found null effects of video gameplay and transfer of cognitive skills ( Ackerman, et al., 2010 ; Baniqued, Kranz, et al., 2013 ; Boot et al., 2008 ).

A recent meta-analysis of brain-training interventions found that brain-training interventions can improve performance on trained tasks but there were fewer examples of interventions indicating improved performance on closely related tasks, and minimal evidence that training enhances performance on daily cognitive abilities ( Simons et al., 2016 ). Among those finding null effects, questions were raised about the methodological shortcomings of video game training and transfer studies that are common pitfalls in experimental trials. Some of the pitfalls included failing to report full methods used in a study and lack of an effective active control condition that can expect to see similar improvement in competencies as the experimental group ( Baniqued et al., 2013 ; Boot, 2015 ; Boot, Blakely & Simons, 2011 ). Unless researchers define recruitment methods for participants and their gaming expertise (novice vs. expert), as well as compare active control groups with experimental groups receiving equal training games, then differential improvement is indeterminable ( Boot et al., 2013 ; Shute et al., 2015 ). The recruitment approach is outlined in the Method section.

Motivation for Selection of Games

The video games selected for this research study were based on the problem-solving skills players exercise and acquire through gameplay that were aligned with the problem-solving skills assessed on the external measures, the PISA Problem Solving Test and the Tower of Hanoi (TOH). Well-designed video games include sound learning principles embedded within gameplay such as requiring players to solve complex problems which can then be applied to other learning contexts ( Lieberman et al., 2014 ). In this study, the authors examined the effects of playing World of Warcraft ( Activision Blizzard, 2019 ) and CogniFit ( CogniFit, 2019 ) for twenty hours on undergraduates’ problem-solving skills (rule application and problem-solving transfer). The inclusion of CogniFit addresses a main concern of game-based research which is the lack of an active control condition to determine differential improvement ( Boot et al., 2013 ).

Problem-Solving and Video Gameplay Model

The authors have identified observable in-game behaviors (i.e., indicators) during gameplay that provide evidence for each of the problem-solving processes on the PISA Problem Solving Test. The process included playing each video game extensively, checking community forums for solutions to the most challenging problems for each game, and viewing experts’ gameplay video channel streams on YouTube. After generating a list of credible indicators, those selected were based on the following criteria: (a) relevance to the PISA problem solving levels of proficiency and (b) verifiable through gameplay mechanics. Examples of indicators for the PISA problem-solving processes for each game are listed in Tables 1 and 2 . The purpose of developing the problem-solving behavior model is to operationalize the indicators of gameplay that align with the cognitive processes being assessed on the PISA test (i.e., Exploring and Understanding, Representing and Formulating). The PISA Problem Solving Test contains questions representing six levels of proficiency: Level 1 is the most limited form of problem-solving ability such as rule application (solving problems with simple rules or constraints) and Level 6 is the complex form of problem-solving ability (executing strategies and developing mental models to solve problems). The PISA test will determine whether there is transfer of problem-solving skills from video gameplay to novel scenarios.

Examples of indicators for each PISA problem-solving process in Warcraft

Examples of indicators for each PISA problem-solving process in CogniFit

World of warcraft

Massive multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) require players to manage resources, adapt playstyle to the environment, test new skills and abilities, identify and apply rules to solve problems as well as explore the story of the game through questing. MMORPGs like Warcraft provide gameplay experiences that are analogous to meaningful instruction by offering complex multifaceted problems that require model-based reasoning—understanding interrelated components of a system, and feedback mechanisms among the components to find the best solutions to problems that arise using available tools and resources in a given environment ( Chinn & Malhotra, 2002 ; Steinkuehler & Chmiel, 2006 ). Therefore, if MMORPGs provide an authentic sense of inquiry into solving problems through gameplay, then it is worth testing whether these gameplay experiences transfer to novel problem-solving scenarios.

One specific example of transfer from gameplay in the MMORPG Warcraft to a natural context concerns the problem of reducing travel time. When players enter the game environment, they must account for extended travel time between different activities such as exploration, questing, and combat. To solve this problem, players are given a tool that can be accessed on their user interface by pressing (M) on their keyboard, which opens the map. Listed on the map are designated flight paths (FPs) that act as a taxi service for players. The image in Figure 1 indicates the various FPs a player has unlocked on their world map as well as those that have yet to be discovered ( Activision Blizzard, 2019 ). The flight path is a handy tool because it connects the goal of completing quests as soon as possible to earn rewards with the knowledge that using flight paths greatly reduces travel time between quests. Greatly reducing travel time results in a more efficient way to complete many of the sub goals in the game, and as noted by Shute and Wang (2016) the use of tools and resources efficiently is an important part of problem solving during gameplay.

Player map listing flight path locations in World of Warcraft (2019)

Now, consider one of the questions being assessed on an external measure in the study, the PISA Problem Solving Test. Individuals are given a map that shows the roads between each city, a partially filled-in key that shows distances between cities in kilometers, and the overall layout of the area. The purpose of this question is to assess how individuals calculate the shortest distance from one city to another. To solve the problem, individuals are required to calculate the distance between the two cities of Nuben and Kado using the resources available. This is the same kind of problem that Warcraft players experience during gameplay when travelling between locations to complete quests. Both problem scenarios share the same overlapping components, the ability of the problem solver to use given tools and resources efficiently to find the most direct route that reduces travel time between two separate locations. Figure 2 illustrates this problem scenario on the PISA test ( OECD, 2003 ).

Problem scenario for planning the best route for a trip from PISA (2003)

The brain training game CogniFit claims to have developed a patented system that measures, trains, and monitors cognitive skills like rule application, attention, memory, and visual perception and their relation to neurological pathologies. According to the CogniFit (2019) website the company states there are transfer effects from their mini games to problem solving in the natural world. The brain training game is selected as an active control condition based on this claim as well as repeated practice of rule application embedded into the gameplay experience.

One example of rule application in the brain training game CogniFit occurs in the mini-game Gem Breaker 3D. This mini-game requires players to direct a paddle back and forth across the screen to bounce a ball off the paddle that breaks the gem blocks without letting the ball touch the bottom of the screen. The initial tutorial informs players that improvement of their hand-eye coordination and processing speed skills are emphasized through gameplay with over 100 levels available to master. Feedback is provided to players with a score for each level showing where they can improve. Once all gem blocks are broken the level is completed and a new level begins. However, each player only has access to 4 balls for each level, and if they lose, the game reverts to the beginning. The tutorial shows players how to use the mouse to control the paddle back and forth across the screen while the spacebar launches the ball. Once a gem is broken there is a chance for a power-up to be gained such as shooting multiple balls, explosives, missiles, side quests or power-ups. Figure 3 illustrates the rules of the mini-game in Gem Breaker 3D ( CogniFit, 2019 ).

Rules for the mini-game Gem Breaker 3D listed in the initial tutorial (2019)

Rule application occurs when playing the TOH and requires one to move an entire stack of disks (i.e., a number between 3 and 8) of varied sizes from one of three rods to another. While playing, players are constrained by the following rules: (1) only one disk can be moved at a time; (2) no disk can be placed on a smaller one; (3) only the uppermost disk can be moved on a stack. Rule application is demonstrated by the problem solver in the TOH by configuring the disks and the rods to reach a solution in the problem space. By configuring the disks onto the rods, each move of a disk indicates the problem solver attempting to creatively apply the rules, which is vital to problem solving ( Shute et al., 2019 ). Figure 4 illustrates the problem space in an online version of the TOH (2019) .

Problem space in an online version of the Tower of Hanoi puzzle with 5 disks (2019)

Both video games require players to apply rules to solve problems and rule application is a component of problem solving ( Van Eck et al., 2017 ). As an example, Warcraft players learn that they can only cast certain spells in combat while standing still or that eating and drinking food while sitting down hastens the regeneration of health. Similarly, when playing the mini-game Gem Breaker 3D in CogniFit players use a paddle and a ball to break bricks. One of the first rules players encounter in the game is that they can only move the paddle left or right across the screen or that bonus bricks have special effects like increasing ball speed. The rules are more explicit in CogniFit than Warcraft so brain-training gameplay may promote better performance on solving the TOH. Each move with the paddle and ball is an example of applying the rules, and this is frequently done during gameplay in CogniFit .

However, CogniFit mini-games lack some of the salient gameplay features in Warcraft such as roleplaying gameplay, meaningful interactions with other players, and richly designed problem spaces that GBL scholars suggest are important to the transfer of problem-solving skills from video gameplay to novel contexts measured on the PISA Problem Solving Test. Warcraft gameplay provides players with repeated practice to solve authentic ill-structured problems in rich detailed problem-solving scenarios that may be better suited for transfer to novel scenarios on the test.

Research Questions

After describing the video gameplay conditions of Warcraft and CogniFit as well as reviewing the literature on problem-solving skills, the authors seek to answer the following research questions:

Is there a change, from pretest to posttest, on the rule-application component of problem solving, after 20 hours of video gameplay, on either a role playing or brain-training video game?

Does an immersive, collaborative role-playing video game promote transfer of problem-solving skills to novel scenarios better than a brain-training video game for undergraduates after 20 hours of video gameplay?

Setting and Participants

For this study, 91 undergraduate student participants (M Age = 19.32; SD Age = 1.43) were recruited to participate in this study and completed the initial questionnaire for the study, assessing: age, gender, ethnicity, major, and video games played daily. Participants were not invited to participate if they were not students at the data-collecting institution, were not 18–23 years old, or if they reported playing 30 or more minutes of Warcraft or CogniFit . 56 participants were randomly assigned to either the experimental group Warcraft or the control group CogniFit , yet only 34 completed the study ( n = 17 per group). Participant attrition for both groups were attributed to lack of time to complete the study or being too busy with schoolwork. Given the nature of our research questions assessing change as a function of training, subsequently presented analyses only include data from the 34 participants (17 males and 17 females) who completed the study (M Age = 19.44; SD Age = 1.41).

The independent variable in this research study is the video game with two levels: a roleplaying video game ( Warcraft ) and a brain-training video game ( CogniFit ). The video games provide players with repeated problem-solving scenarios requiring players to engage in problem-solving processes. The dependent variable measured for this study is problem-solving skill. One measure assessed the component of rule application of problem solving to solve a puzzle which is the TOH. The second measure assessed problem-solving in novel scenarios which is the PISA Problem Solving Test. Both groups were assessed on the TOH and the PISA Problem Solving Test. The TOH was used to assess research question 1 and the PISA Problem Solving Test was used to assess research question 2.

The Tower of Hanoi

Recall, the TOH is a valid and reliable experimental paradigm that can be used to assess rule application, problem solving and transfer ( Huyck & Kreivenas, 2018 ; Schiff & Vakil, 2015 ). Rule application is demonstrated by the problem solver in the TOH by configuring the disks and the rods to reach a solution in the problem space. By configuring the disks on to the rods, each move of a disk indicates the problem solver attempting to creatively apply the rules. Participants played the TOH on a computer from a free website online. The test score (i.e., lower scores are better) for completing the TOH can range anywhere from 31 (which is the minimal number of moves to execute) until it is solved.

PISA Problem Solving Test

The second external problem-solving measure in this study is the (2003) version of the PISA Problem Solving Test. The PISA Problem Solving Test ( OECD, 2003 ) contains 10 novel problem-solving scenarios, and within each scenario there is a range of one to three different questions that must be solved. There are 19 total questions on the test across all scenarios that required students to solve problems. For this study, participants completed five novel problem-solving scenarios for the pretest and the remaining five novel problem-solving scenarios for the posttest. The levels of proficiency for each question are randomized across all problem-solving scenarios. Each problem-solving scenario is independent from one another and each of the 19 questions across all scenarios being assessed in this study are isomorphic from the questions that were implemented in 2003. The scoring for most questions was either correct or incorrect, with some questions allowing for partially correct answers. Participants that answered each question correctly were awarded one point, while partially correct answers awarded participants a half-point.

Participants for this study were recruited via flyers posted publicly on campus and dormitory bulletin boards. Over the course of eight weeks, participants engaged in 10 gameplay sessions that lasted two hours each. Participants had the opportunity to complete these 10 sessions in two-hour time-blocks that were made available Monday through Friday for eight consecutive weeks. Participants completed the experiment in a classroom lab on campus at the university. In this experiment, student participants were randomly assigned to play one of two video games.

Participants in the experimental condition played the popular roleplaying video game Warcraft that promotes learning new terminologies, mastering interrelated skills and abilities, applying rules to solve problems, goal setting, and reflecting on progress. In addition, participants in the active control condition played the brain-training video game CogniFit (2019) . The video game allows players to select various mini-games including Gem Breaker 3D that may enhance cognitive abilities including rule application, memory, and focus. Student participants in this study were guided by discovery learning and provided with in-game tutorials for each condition while learning to solve problems through active exploration, interacting with the game environment and self-direction ( Westera, 2019 ). At pre-test and post-test participants had 20 minutes to complete isomorphic versions of the TOH as many times as possible. All participants successfully completed the TOH once during the pretest and once during the posttest. At pre-test and post-test, participants also had 20 minutes to complete as many questions as possible on The PISA Problem Solving Test. The pretest required participants to answer nine questions and the posttest required participants to answer 10 questions from multiple problem-based scenarios. Each problem-based scenario was unique, and some examples included the following: (1) calculating the distance between two points given a map; (2) developing a decision tree diagram of a library loan system; and (3) calculating daily energy needs for an individual given a set menu.

Data Structure and Analyses

The full dataset used for all analyses to be presented, contained data from 34 participants. All participants attempted three parallel, computerized forms of the TOH at baseline and at the end of the intervention. Due to the nature of the task’s programming, if participants did not complete a TOH task, the total number of moves attempted was not output to the data file. This will be expanded upon in the results section by utilizing three analyses which included an independent t-test comparing the mean number of incomplete TOH games between the groups, an independent t-test comparing the mean gain score of TOH between the groups, and a multiple linear regression predicting max gain score of TOH by group, by gain score count, and by group, gain score count, and PISA gain. All analyses in sections below were completed in R, version 3.4.3. Packages used for data analysis include: dplyr , for data wrangling ( Wickham et al., 2019 ), and ggplot2 for visualizations ( Wickham, 2016 ), and MASS for stepwise regression analyses ( Venables & Ripley, 2002 ).

Assessing Group differences in Completion

Although groups differed on the overall number of incomplete TOH sessions at pre-testing (N COGNITIVE = 13; N GAMING = 8), an independent t-test of the average number of incomplete games by group, was not significant (p > .05). Furthermore, an independent t-test revealed no group differences for the overall number of incomplete TOH sessions at post-testing (N COGNITIVE = 3; N GAMING = 2; p > .05). A repeated-measures ANOVA revealed a significant time effect, F(1,32) = 13.386, p<.001. However, group, F(1,32) = 1.609, p=.214, nor group by time interaction were significant, F(1,32)=.837, p=.367. On average, participants completed an additional half TOH session (i.e., .47, SD = .53) after receiving either training package (M Pre = .62, SD = .70; M Post = .15, SD = .36). Table 3 shows the means and standard deviations for the pretest and posttest scores participants completed in the experimental ( Warcraft ) and control ( CogniFit ) groups. The mean scores in the table indicate how many moves on average each participant could successfully solve the puzzle per group. For this study, participants had 20 minutes to complete as many questions as possible for the pretest and 20 minutes to do the same for an isomorphic version of the posttest. Table 4 shows the means and standard deviations for the PISA pretest and posttest scores of participants in the experimental ( Warcraft ) and control ( CogniFit ) groups.

Pretest and posttest scores by group on the Tower of Hanoi

Pretest and posttest scores by group on the PISA Problem Solving Test

Quantifying Improvement in Performance

In order to quantify improvement after the intervention, gain scores were calculated by the following formula, for each instance of the TOH task encountered (i.e. three sessions):

Gain scores produced from this calculation can be interpreted as follows: negative gain scores indicating improvement (fewer total moves at post-testing), and positive gain scores indicating a decrement in performance (more total moves at post-testing). As a result of incomplete games not producing the number of moves, for some participants, no gain score calculation was possible. At pretesting, the cognitive training group had three missing gain scores for the second TOH and 10 for the third TOH whereas the game training group had one missing gain score for the second TOH and seven for the third TOH. To account for this, when calculating average gain scores for each participant, averages were weighted by the number of completed games (i.e. averaging by the number of incomplete sessions would result in an undefined calculation, as some participants completed all sessions). Table 5 shows the results of an unpaired t-test on the average weighted gain scores found no group differences in TOH gain scores ( p > .05). Additionally, an unpaired t-test on the average PISA gain scores found no group differences gain scores ( p > .05).

Problem solving performance compared across training groups

Sensitivity Analysis

Due to missing data issues discussed above, the final analysis involves a stepwise multiple linear regression (forward and backward; AIC used for final model variable selection conducted using R package MASS, function stepAIC; Venables & Ripley, 2002 ), predicting max gain score (max of all three potential gain scores) by group membership (WoW or Cognitive Training), total gain score count, and a gain score derived from pre and post measurements on the PISA task (2003). Based on the stepwise regression procedure analysis results in Table 6 , the best fitting, significant, multiple regression model was found to be a model predicting max gain score from gain score count (no predictor for group membership or PISA gain score; F(1,32) = 14.41; p < .001; R 2 = .3104; adjusted R 2 = 0.2889). Participants predicted max gain score is equal to −111.70 + 48.87 (Gain Count), where gain score is in the unit of number of moves. Max gain score increased by 48.87 for every one unit increase in gain score count (more gain scores, closer to 0; less improvement after the intervention). Gain score count was a significant predictor of max gain score (t=3.796; p < 0.001), indicating potential practice effects from repeated exposure to the task. Practice effects will be discussed in subsequent sections.

Stepwise regression model path, analysis of deviance table and the row with the best fitting model, using AIC as criterion, is highlighted in gray

Evidence for Research Question 1

The initial hypothesis regarding the first question was that a brain-training game would help participants improve their rule application component of problem-solving skill better than a roleplaying game after 20 hours of gameplay for several reasons. One reason is that the rules are more explicit during brain-training gameplay and because of claims made by CogniFit that brain-training gameplay will improve its users’ brain fitness or ability to rely on more than one problem-solving strategy. While both games require players to apply rules to solve problems, only CogniFit markets its product as a tool that can help users to solve problems in their daily lives ( CogniFit, 2019 ). This claim also suggests that brain-training gameplay can help users transfer skills learned in-game to novel problem-solving scenarios in the natural world. However, the results indicated that there was no significant difference in gain scores (i.e., in Post - Pre Gain scores) in terms of TOH performance (t-test comparing gain scores: p = .746) between the two gaming conditions (i.e., Warcraft and CogniFit ), though both groups improved from baseline to post-testing assessment, likely attributable to practice effects (see Figure 5 ). Overall, the results contradicted our initial hypothesis for Research Question 1; implications are discussed next.

Average number of moves in the Tower of Hanoi task across (up to 3) sessions per person, per timepoint. The left panel represents scores for the CogniFit (COG) group, and the right panel represents scores for the Warcraft (WOW) group.

Implications of Results for Research Question 1

Solving problems in an immersive game like Warcraft provided players with repeated practice of applying rules and using tools to find creative solutions to similar but varied problems. As players reflected on their choices, they learned how to use the tools by analyzing givens and constraints in unison to achieve maximum character performance and develop optimal solutions to general problems. CogniFit players did not experience immersive gameplay, but instead repeated problem-solving scenarios that were varied but required fewer tools and resources to be solved. Once CogniFit players knew how to use the paddle and the ball in unison, the only additional resources to use during gameplay were power-ups, bonus bricks, and traps. Roleplaying gameplay required players to solve problems using additional tools and resources efficiently which was a more complex task than using the ball and paddle during brain-training gameplay. Strategizing when and how to apply rules through varied but different problem scenarios with multiple tools and resources through immersive gameplay was beneficial for Warcraft participants. Moreover, players in Warcraft could receive feedback with help from other players learning when and how to apply tools and resources to solve problems. CogniFit players received feedback at the end of each level with an overall score and corrected mistakes through trial and error without additional support.

evidence for Research Question 2

The initial hypothesis regarding the second question was that training on an immersive, collaborative roleplaying video game for 20 hours would engender transfer of problem-solving skills to novel problem-solving scenarios on the PISA Problem Solving Test better than a brain-training video game. One reason is that research on MMORPGs including Warcraft indicates that players co-constructed knowledge by challenging and supporting novel ideas to in-game problem-solving scenarios through online discussion forums as well as discovering optimal solutions to in-game problems by combining multiple abilities and resources available to players ( Chinn & Malhotra, 2002 ; Steinkuehler & Chmiel, 2006 ). Efficiently using tools and resources is a component of problem solving and is central to the roleplaying gameplay experience ( Shute & Wang, 2016 ).

However, the results indicated that after 20 hours of gameplay of Warcraft or CogniFit there was no improved performance on the PISA (i.e., comparing PISA Gain Scores; p = .748). Overall, the mean scores for Warcraft participants were slightly better than CogniFit participants on the isomorphic versions of the PISA Problem Solving pretest and posttest - indicating baseline differences between the two groups in terms of performance. Overall, there were no significant differences found between roleplaying and brain-training gameplay on transfer of problem-solving skills (see Figure 6 ). The implications for the results from research question 2 are discussed next.

PISA Scores before and after the intervention. The left panel represents scores for the COG group, and the right panel represents scores for the WOW group.

Implications of Results for Research Question 2

Given that both video game training and “brain-training” did not significantly improve problem-solving skills has several implications. The gameplay behaviors exhibited by players in each condition were aligned with the problem-solving processes on the PISA Problem Solving Test. However, possible reasons for lack of transfer in this study in addition to small sample size include (a) collaborative, immersive roleplaying gameplay may help promote problem-solving skills related to in-game problem solving scenarios but not necessarily to improved performance on external problem-solving assessments, and (b) problem-solving during Warcraft gameplay may be too domain specific to transfer to novel problem-solving scenarios on the PISA Problem Solving Test.

The misalignment between the problem-solving domains of Warcraft and the PISA Problem Solving Test could have hindered the possibility of finding a transfer effect. As an example, Warcraft players must learn how to navigate an immersive environment, use complex tools efficiently and effectively to solve problems during gameplay and interact with both the environment and other characters to solve problems. However, solving problems on the PISA Problem Solving Test is not an immersive experience. It was also a solitary activity; participants did not collaborate or interact with each other while taking the test. The OECD designed the PISA Problem Solving Test to cover more general problem-solving skills to complement domain-specific skills ( Greiff et al., 2014 ). Selecting a problem-solving assessment which is embedded within an immersive environment that requires players to engage in collaborative problem-solving processes (i.e. experienced in video gameplay) using tools and resources efficiently could have been a more viable assessment to measure transfer of problem-solving skills in this study. Further research is still warranted to determine if video gameplay can promote transfer of problem-solving skills to novel scenarios. The limitations of this research study are addressed in the next section.

Limitations

Given time and resource constraints, the sample size of this study is small and lacks statistical significance to make claims regarding the general population. With more available resources, recruitment would have likely continued for an additional semester to raise the sample size for the study. Students that did not complete the study cited time constraints as the main reason they were unable to fulfill the 20 hours of video gameplay requirement. The optimal time to run the study would have been during Fall and Spring semesters instead of Spring and Summer. In Fall and Spring, more students would have been available for recruitment as well as increased scheduling flexibility and time to complete the intervention during the academic year for the participants. Given that the authors monitored participants during video gameplay in case any problems arose, there may have been expectancy effects that impacted participants. For example, participants’ gameplay experiences may have been negatively or positively affected when being monitored. The potential for participants to alter their behavior simply because they are being studied is known as the Hawthorne Effect ( Benedetti, Carlino & Piedimonte, 2016 ). In addition, the inclusion of a more immersive assessment that measures problem-solving skill transfer could have led to improved outcomes when compared to a more traditional assessment like the PISA Problem-Solving Test (2003).

Future Implications

The main goal of this study was to examine the impact of two distinct types of video gameplay; role playing ( Warcraft ) and brain-training ( CogniFit ) on problem-solving skills for undergraduates. Specifically, if video gameplay can improve the rule application component of problem solving and whether problem solving during gameplay transferred to novel problem-solving scenarios. This study addressed some of the methodological shortcomings found in previous video game training and transfer studies that failed to report recruitment methods, define study variables, and provide an active control group in which participants could expect receive equal improvement from competencies ( Baniqued et al., 2013 ; Boot et al., 2013 ). As a result, possible placebo effects are likely mitigated in this experiment improving upon methodological pitfalls affecting other video game training studies ( Anderson et al., 2010 ; Ferguson & Kilburn, 2009 ).

The results from this study suggest that neither a commercially available video game ( Warcraft ) or a commercially available “brain-training” package ( CogniFit ) resulted in improvements in the rule-based component of problem solving (as assessed by the TOH puzzle). Moreover, aside from a lack of improvement in the rule-based component, 20-hours of training did not promote transfer of problem-solving skills to novel scenarios (as assessed by the PISA Problem Solving Task), which is consistent with similar research findings on cognitive training and transfer ( Souders et al., 2017 ). Sensitivity analyses conducted found evidence for practice effects in gain scores, illustrating that rather than improvement due to the training packages, improvement seems related to multiple, closely spaced assessments. Future research can complement this study by increasing the sample size and testing similar immersive well-designed video games on participant knowledge, skills, and abilities, in addition to directly cuing participants to be aware of the strategies (i.e., perceptual and cognitive strategies) they might carry with them from the digital world to the real-world.

Acknowledgment

Nelson Roque was supported by National Institute on Aging Grant T32 AG049676 to The Pennsylvania State University.

Benjamin Emihovich is an Assistant Professor of Educational Technology in the Education Department at the University of Michigan-Flint and is the program faculty coordinator for the online Educational Technology (M.A.) program. He currently teaches undergraduate and graduate students in the areas of Instructional Design and Technology as well as curriculum and instruction. His research area focuses on the following; game-based learning, assessments for learning in immersive environments, and emerging learning technologies.

Nelson A. Roque is a NIA T32 Postdoctoral Fellow, at Penn State’s Center for Healthy Aging. Nelson earned his Ph.D. in Cognitive Psychology from Florida State University in 2018. Nelson has a strong background in visual attention, focusing on how to reliably measure it, how it relates to individual difference factors (e.g., age, sleep) and translating insights from theoretical work in visual attention to applied contexts (e.g. medication errors).

Justin Mason is a Postdoctoral Associate in Rehabilitation Science at the University of Florida. His research interests include interventions suitable for mitigating age-related cognitive and physical decline in older adults. Additionally, he’s interested in factors that influence older adults’ adoption and acceptance of emerging technologies.

Contributor Information

Benjamin Emihovich, University of Michigan - Flint, Flint, USA.

Nelson Roque, Pennsylvania State University, State College, USA.

Justin Mason, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.

• Ackerman PL, Kanfer R, & Calderwood C (2010). Use it or lose it? Wii brain exercise practice and reading for domain knowledge. Psychology and Aging, 25(4), 753–766. doi: 10.1037/a0019277 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Activision Blizzard. (2019). World of Warcraft [Digital Video Game]. Irvine, CA: Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson CA, Shibuya A, Ihori N, Swing EL, Bushman BJ, Sakamoto A, & Saleem M et al. (2010). Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in Eastern and Western countries. Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 151–173. doi: 10.1037/a0018251 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baniqued PL, Kranz MB, Voss MW, Lee H, Cosman JD, Severson J, & Kramer AF (2013). Cognitive training with casual video games: Points to consider. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1010. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baniqued PL, Lee H, Voss MW, Basak C, Cosman JD, DeSouza S, & Kramer AF et al. (2013). Selling points: What cognitive abilities are tapped by casual video games? Acta Psychologica, 142(1), 74–86. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.11.009 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Benedetti F, Carlino E, & Piedimonte A (2016). Increasing uncertainty in CNS clinical trials: The role of placebo, nocebo, and Hawthorne effects. Lancet Neurology, 15(7), 736–747. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(16)00066-1 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boot WR (2015). Video games as tools to achieve insight into cognitive processes. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 3. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00003 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boot WR, Blakely DP, & Simons DJ (2011). Do action video games improve perception and cognition? Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 226. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00226 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boot WR, Kramer AF, Simons DJ, Fabiani M, & Gratton G (2008). The effects of video game playing on attention, memory, and executive control. Acta Psychologica, 129(3), 387–398. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.09.005 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boot WR, Simons DJ, Stothart C, & Stutts C (2013). The pervasive problem with placebos in psychology: Why active control groups are not sufficient to rule out placebo effects. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(4), 445–454. doi: 10.1177/1745691613491271 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chinn CA, & Malhotra B (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175–218. doi: 10.1002/sce.10001 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• CogniFit. (2019). CogniFit [Digital Video Game]. CogniFit. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dede C (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science, 323(66), 66–69. doi: 10.1126/science.1167311 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Entertainment Software Association. (2018). 2018 Essential facts about the computer and video game industry. The Entertainment Software Association. Retrieved from https://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ESA_EssentialFacts_2018.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Eseryel D, Law V, Ifenthaler D, Ge X, & Miller R (2014). An investigation of the interrelationships between motivation, engagement, and complex problem solving in game-based learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(1), 42–53. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferguson CJ, & Kilburn J (2009). The public health risks of media violence: A meta-analytic review. The Journal of Pediatrics, 154(5), 759–763. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.11.033 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gee JP (2008). Learning and games. In Salen K (Ed.), The ecology of games: Connecting youth, games, and learning (pp. 21–40). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Green CS, & Bavelier D (2012). Learning, attentional control, and action video games. Current Biology, 22(6), 197–206. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.012 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Greiff S, Wüstenberg S, Csapo B, Demetriou A, Hautamäki J, Graesser AC, & Martin R (2014). Domain-general problem solving skills and education in the 21st century. Educational Research Review, 13, 74–83. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2014.10.002 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hart Research Associates. (2018). Falling short? College learning and career success. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hung W, & Van Eck R (2010). Aligning problem solving and gameplay: A model for future research and design. In van Eck R (Ed.), Interdisciplinary models and tools for serious games: Emerging concepts and future directions (pp. 227–263). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi: 10.4018/978-1-61520-719-0.ch010 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huyck CR, & Kreivenas D (2018). Implementing Rules with Artificial Neurons. In Bramer M & Petridis M (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Vol. 11311. Artificial Intelligence XXXV. SGAI 2018 (pp. 21–33). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-04191-5_2 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ifenthaler D, Eseryel D, & Ge X (2012). Assessment for game-based learning. In Ifenthaler D, Eseryel D, & Ge X (Eds.), Assessment in game-based learning. Foundations, innovations, and perspectives (pp. 3–10). New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-3546-4_1 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lieberman DA, Biely E, Thai CL, & Peinado S (2014). Transfer of Learning from Video Game Play to the Classroom. In Learning by Playing (pp. 189–204). Academic Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso bl/9780199896646.003.0013 [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayer R, & Wittrock M (2006). Problem solving. In Alexander P & Winne P (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 287–303). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Publishers. [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD. (2003). PISA 2003 Technical Report. Paris: OECD Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Oei AC, & Patterson MD (2014). Playing a puzzle video game with changing requirements improves executive functions. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 216–228. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.046 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rowe JP, Shores LR, Mott BW, & Lester JC (2011). Integrating learning, problem solving, and engagement in narrative-centered learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 21(1), 115–133. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schiff R, & Vakil E (2015). Age differences in cognitive skill learning, retention and transfer: The case of the Tower of Hanoi Puzzle. Learning and Individual Differences, 39, 164–171. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2015.03.010 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shute VJ, Ke F, Almond RG, Rahimi S, Smith G, & Lu X (2019). How to increase learning while not decreasing the fun in educational games. In Feldman R (Ed.), Learning Science: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 327–357). New York, NY: McGraw Hill. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shute VJ, Ventura M, & Ke F (2015). The power of play: The effects of Portal 2 and Lumosity on cognitive and noncognitive skills. Computers & Education, 80, 58–67. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.013 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shute VJ, & Wang L (2015). Measuring problem solving skills in Portal 2. To appear. In Isaias P, Spector JM, Ifenthaler D, & Sampson DG (Eds.), E-learning systems, environments and approaches: Theory and implementation. New York, NY: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shute VJ, & Wang L (2016). Assessing and supporting hard-to-measure constructs. To appear Rupp A, & Leighton J (Eds.), Handbook of cognition and assessment. New York, NY: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Simons DJ, Boot WR, Charness N, Gathercole SE, Chabris CF, Hambrick DZ, & Stine-Morrow EA (2016). Do “brain-training” programs work? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 17(3), 103–186. doi: 10.1177/1529100616661983 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Souders DJ, Boot WR, Blocker K, Vitale T, Roque NA, & Charness N (2017). Evidence for Narrow Transfer after Short-Term Cognitive Training in Older Adults. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 9, 41. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2017.00041 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spires HA, Rowe JP, Mott BW, & Lester JC (2011). Problem solving and game-based learning: Effects of middle grade students’ hypothesis testing strategies on learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(4), 453–472. doi: 10.2190/EC.44.4.e [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steinkuehler C, & Chmiel M (2006). Fostering scientific habits of mind in the context of online play. In Barab SA, Hay KE, Songer NB, & Hickey DT (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp 723–729). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stiller KD, & Schworm S (2019). Game-Based Learning of the Structure and Functioning of Body Cells in a Foreign Language: Effects on Motivation, Cognitive Load, and Performance. Frontiers in Education, 4, 18. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00018 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tower of Hanoi. (2019). Play Tower of Hanoi. The math is fun. Retrieved from https://www.mathsisfun.com/games/towerofhanoi.html [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Eck RN, Shute VJ, & Rieber LP (2017). Leveling up: Game design research and practice for instructional designers. To appear. In Reiser R & Dempsey J (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. [ Google Scholar ]
• Venables WN, & Ripley BD (2002). Modern applied statistics (4th ed.). Academic Press; doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-21706-2 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ventura M, Shute VJ, Wright T, & Zhao W (2013). An investigation of the validity of the virtual spatial navigation assessment. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–7. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00852 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Westera W (2019). Why and how serious games can become far more effective: Accommodating productive learning experiences, learner motivation and the monitoring of learning gains. Education Technology & Society, 22(1), 59–69. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wickham H (2016). ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wickham H, François R, Henry L, & Müller K (2019). dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation. R package version 0.8.3 Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dplyr [ Google Scholar ]
• View on publisher site
• PDF (1.4 MB)
• Collections

Similar articles

Cited by other articles, links to ncbi databases.

• Download .nbib .nbib
• Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

Add to Collections

Playing these 6 video games could help improve your problem-solving skills

Jane McGonigal , a world-renowned designer of alternate-reality games who has a Ph.D. in performance studies, wants to change people's conception of video games as " just escapist, guilty pleasures."

" My number one goal in life is to see a game designer nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize," McGonigal writes on her website . 

She tells Business Insider she wants people to realize that games can be "powerful tools to improve our attention, our mood, our cognitive strengths, and our relationships."

And research is on her side. 

Studies suggest that mainstream games like "Call of Duty" may improve our cognitive abilities significantly more than games specifically designed to do so by designers like Luminosity.

To help spread the truth about common misconceptions, seven neuroscientists from around the world signed the document "A Consensus on the Brain Training Industry from the Scientific Community" in 2014 to say they "object to the claim" that brainteaser games can improve cognitive abilities, as no scientific evidence has been able to confirm such a claim. 

Even better for gamers, research from North Carolina State University and Florida State University suggests that mainstream games geared toward entertainment can help improve attention, spatial orientation, and problem-solving abilities.

In her book, " Super Better ," McGonigal writes that the researchers she talked to about this seeming contradiction offered a simple explanation: "Traditional video games are more complex and harder to master, and they require that the player learn a wider and more challenging range of skills and abilities."

If you want to have fun and stimulate your mind, McGonigal recommends playing one of these six games three times a week for about 20 minutes.

McGonigal says playing fast-paced games like "Call of Duty," a first-person shooter game, can help improve visual attention and spatial-intelligence skills, which can lead to better performance in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

Another fast-paced game, "Forza," a car-racing game, may help improve your ability to make accurate decisions under pressure.

Taking on the role of a criminal in a big city in "Grand Theft Auto" may help train you to process information faster and keep track of more information — up to three times the amount as nongamers, some studies suggest — in high-stress situations.

Strategic games like "StarCraft," a military-science-fiction game, can also improve the ability to solve imaginary and real-life problems, possibly because they teach users to both formulate and execute strategic plans.

Games that require strategic thinking, like science-fiction third-person-shooter game "Mass Effect," also test and refine your information-gathering skills.

Lastly, "thinking games" like "Final Fantasy," a fantasy-role-playing game, can help train you to evaluate your options faster and more accurately.

• Main content

Our websites may use cookies to personalize and enhance your experience. By continuing without changing your cookie settings, you agree to this collection. For more information, please see our University Websites Privacy Notice .

Neag School of Education

Well-designed video games can enhance problem-solving skills and make learning more effective.

• May 29, 2013
• Community Engagement

The tragic December deaths of 20 first-graders and six school staff members in Sandy Hook, Connecticut, along with the Boston Marathon tragedy and other recent attacks, have brought the decades-old debate over the behavioral effects of video games back onto legislative floors throughout the nation. Citing the fact that gunman Adam Lanza, 20, played violent video games, members of the U.S. Congressional Gun Violence Prevention Task Force detailed their plans to address “our culture’s glorification of violence” through media, and commentary stemming from reports like Katie Couric’s May 2013 video game violence exposé has highlighted the need for greater clarification of how we should read and interpret video game research.

Clearly, it’s a complex and emotional issue further complicated by discussions that focus almost exclusively on the negative effects of gaming. The reality, however, is that there’s little research outlining whether or not violent video games beget actual violence: many existing studies, like one described in a recent edition of the UConn Today , focus on aggression without explicitly acknowledging the complex relationship between cognition, transfer, and real world behavior. This has led to two major problems, the combination of which throws a wrench in the socially and politically-charged rhetoric surrounding violence: 1) the dismissal of other, more influential factors common to violent criminals—biological predisposition to mental health issues, instability at home and/or work, lack of positive role models, having no one to confide in, access to weapons, and in-the-moment opportunity versus need; and 2) neglect for how learning in all types of games—violent or not—actually happens.

While the first problem may better fit sociologists and psychologists who have direct experience with individuals who commit violent crimes, the second is something that we as teachers, administrators, and researchers can tackle head on. There’s general consensus in the educational psychology community that the nature of environment-learner-content interactions is vital to our understanding of how people perceive and act. As a result, we can’t make broad assumptions about games as a vehicle for violent behavior without attending to how environment-learner-content interactions influence transfer—the way learning and action in one context affects learning and action in a related context.

It might help to think of transfer in terms of what we hope students will do with the information they learn in our classes. For example, you might teach geometric principles in your math class thinking that those techniques will help your students craft a birdhouse in shop. However, one of the most well-cited studies of the subject (Gick & Holyoak, 1980) showed that only one-fifth of college students were able to apply a particular problem solving strategy—using ‘divide-and-conquer’ to capture a castle—in another, almost identical context less than 24 hours after exposure to the first. Even with explicit direct instruction explaining how the same strategy could be used to solve both problems, fewer than 50% of students were able to make the connection. Though links between situations might seem self-evident to us as teachers, they usually aren’t as obvious to our students as we think they should be.

This gives us reason to believe that, regardless of subject, students—or in the case of video games, players—are rarely able to take something they’ve used in one context and independently apply it in a totally different one. Put another way, even if violent gaming raises general aggression, increased aggression doesn’t automatically translate to real world violent behavior . Gamers might use more curse words while playing Call of Duty , but they won’t learn to steal a car solely by playing Grand Theft Auto —there needs to be a mediating instructor who can provide well-guided bridging between the game and reality, especially for in-game activities that aren’t isomorphic with real world action (i.e., firing a gun).

This relationship between environment-learner-content interaction and transfer puts teachers in the unique position to capitalize on game engagement to promote reflection that positively shapes how students tackle real-world challenges. To some, this may seem like a shocking concept, but it’s definitely not a new one—roleplay as instruction, for example, was very popular among the ancient Greeks and, in many ways, served as the backbone for Plato’s renowned Allegory of the Cave . The same is true of Shakespeare’s works, 18th and 19th century opera, and many of the novels, movies, and other media that define our culture. More recently, NASA has applied game-like simulations to teach astronauts how to maneuver through space, medical schools have used them to teach robotic surgery, and the Federal Aviation Administration has employed them to test pilots.

To be clear, this is not a call for K12 educators to drop everything and immediately incorporate violent games like Doom or Mortal Kombat into their classrooms. Instead, it’s a call to consider how we can take advantage of game affordances (including those of violent games) to extend beyond predictable multiple-choice materials that leave students wishing they could pull out their smartphones. It’s a call for legislators to give greater consideration to the role of transfer before passing sweeping bans on violent video game play. It’s a call for all of us to use games as a vehicle to talk about racial, social, gender, and other inequities that are very much a part of the world we live in.

It’s a bold idea that can feel scary, but the potential benefits are beyond exciting. Research generated by people like Kurt Squire, Sasha Barab, and James Paul Gee suggests that interactive games can be used to teach children about history, increase vocabulary, challenge them to set and achieve goals, and enhance their ability to work in teams. They expose students to culturally diverse casts of characters in addition to providing instant feedback about goal-oriented progress. Most importantly, perhaps, they can be powerfully engaging, giving students a reason to pursue learning beyond the classroom.

To maintain a positive trajectory, teachers looking to make the most of the instructional affordances of video games should keep an eye out for games they feel comfortable playing alongside and discussing with their students, take advantage of opportunities to participate in university game-based learning research studies, and remain open to modifying their instructional approaches. Parents should connect with teachers for up-to-date research coming from organizations like Games+Learning+Society and have their children reflect on material they’ve been exposed to during play—for example, social and cultural stereotypes, gender roles, and ways of thinking presented in each game. Legislators should consult university researchers in both communications and educational psychology to get a wider perspective on how play and learning merge to generate behavior in the real world.

Our collective understanding of game-based learning is evolving at lightning speed, and we need to dispel false information that ignores how games actually affect player thinking and action. More work, involving teachers, administrators, researchers, designers, parents, and politicians, is needed. The next step is to enhance our collaboration by working to create multi-disciplinary games that incorporate not just academic content but educational practices that lead to broader critical thinking and problem solving. Though far from complete, our combined effort has the potential to move beyond the swamp of video game violence and excite kids about school before they say “game over.”

Stephen Slota is doctoral candidate in educational psychology at the University of Connecticut’s Neag School of Education as well as an unashamed gamer. An educational technology specialist and  former urban high school teacher, he has a bachelor’s in molecular and cellular biology and Master’s in curriculum and instruction. His research interests include the situated cognition underlying play, the effects of gaming on student achievement, and prosocial learning through massively multiplayer online role-playing games ( MMORPGs).

The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) accredits the Neag School of Education at the University of Connecticut. Read more about CAEP Accreditation, including the programs covered and the accountability measures .

Some content on this website may require the use of a plug-in, such as  Adobe Acrobat Viewer .

• Support the Neag School

Neag School of Education 249 Glenbrook Road, Unit 3064 Charles B. Gentry Building Storrs, CT 06269-3064

860-486-3815 [email protected]

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Your Gaming Skills Can Help You Shape Your Career

• Igor Tulchinsky

Video games are fast-moving, dynamic, and anything but static. Your career can be too.

Studies have shown the benefits of gaming — whether it’s better spatial awareness, faster cognitive processing, or improved mental health, social skills, and decision-making capabilities. Here are some ways you can harness the unique skills and lessons gaming has taught you to shape your future working life.

• Don’t settle. Video games are fast-moving, dynamic, and anything but static. Your career should be too. Every job requires some combination of problem-solving, strategy, and teamwork — just like every video game. But not every company you encounter will be as solutions-oriented, innovative, or collaborative as you might desire. Aim to find an organization that will value you and your skills.
• Challenge your beliefs. How often have you written off a video game before even playing it? We all have internal biases that can alter our perception of the world. The same is true for our careers — you likely have personal beliefs about certain companies, industries, and job titles. Just like you shouldn’t judge a game by its popular presentation, you shouldn’t with jobs either. Instead, take the time to speak to people on the inside.
• Try again. Fail again. Fail better. We’re often too afraid to fail in real life because we believe we won’t get a second chance. In some ways, that’s true — there are no extra lives here. But just like in video games, we can test hypotheses, experiment, process variables, and establish new ways of understanding our world.
• Have patience. Video games can be repetitive. The same can be said for work, and our lives in general. But that doesn’t have to be a bad thing. The patience and hard work are what make the glorious cut scenes, rare achievements, and final fights worth it. In your career, the work you put in now will pay off long-term, too.
• Think like a creator. Game developers often employ transformational creativity. This is when designers, often drawing on leaps forward in technology, drive revolutionary changes in the entire video game ecosystem. One way to cultivate transformational creativity in your work life is to embrace adjacency. If you’re struggling to come up with new ideas or find yourself making the same errors when addressing a task, try thinking about how other, adjacent disciplines might approach a similar problem.

Growing up in the golden age of video games, it was hard not to feel like you were living two lives at once.

• IT Igor Tulchinsky is the Founder, Chairman, and CEO of WorldQuant, LLC, a global quantitative asset management firm. He was previously a portfolio manager at Millennium.

Partner Center

• Open access
• Published: 03 February 2020

Commercial video games and cognitive functions: video game genres and modulating factors of cognitive enhancement

• Eunhye Choi 1 ,
• Suk-Ho Shin 2 ,
• Jeh-Kwang Ryu 3 ,
• Kyu-In Jung 1 ,
• Shin-Young Kim 1 &
• Min-Hyeon Park   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1731-1388 1  

Behavioral and Brain Functions volume  16 , Article number:  2 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

44k Accesses

49 Citations

60 Altmetric

Metrics details

Unlike the emphasis on negative results of video games such as the impulsive engagement in video games, cognitive training studies in individuals with cognitive deficits showed that characteristics of video game elements were helpful to train cognitive functions. Thus, this study aimed to have a more balanced view toward the video game playing by reviewing genres of commercial video games and the association of video games with cognitive functions and modulating factors. Literatures were searched with search terms (e.g. genres of video games, cognitive training) on database and Google scholar.

video games, of which purpose is players’ entertainment, were found to be positively associated with cognitive functions (e.g. attention, problem solving skills) despite some discrepancy between studies. However, the enhancement of cognitive functions through video gaming was limited to the task or performance requiring the same cognitive functions. Moreover, as several factors (e.g. age, gender) were identified to modulate cognitive enhancement, the individual difference in the association between video game playing and cognitive function was found.

Commercial video games are suggested to have the potential for cognitive function enhancement. As understanding the association between video gaming and cognitive function in a more balanced view is essential to evaluate the potential outcomes of commercial video games that more people reported to engage, this review contributes to provide more objective evidence for commercial video gaming.

Despite objective research findings which addressed both positive and negative sides of video game (VG) playing, the negativity of VG playing, such as the obsession with VG playing [ 1 ] and increased feeling and thoughts of aggression [ 2 ], has been more focused. The World Health Organization announced the inclusion of “gaming disorder” in the category of addictive behavior disorders in the 11th International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems [ 3 ]. However, violent VGs, which were reported to increase aggression [ 1 ], were found to be positively associated with visuo-spatial abilities without the influence on aggression [ 4 ]. It seemed because action video games (AVGs), which can include violent elements, do not always refer to violent VGs [ 5 ]. Consistent with the argument that VGs should be regarded as one type of learning [ 6 ], VGs were also found to enhance cognitive functions better than conventional methods of learning [ 7 ] by conveying information in a different way from traditional media [ 8 ]. Taken together, unlike the emphasis on the negativity on VG playing, VGs, which provide players with richer environment of cognitive, emotional and social experience, are suggested to enhance their cognitive functions [ 9 ] by simulating cognitive processes, which are activated in real world, in the process of completing VG tasks [ 10 ]. Thus, it is important to understand commercial VGs in a more balanced view. In order to deepen the understanding of commercial VGs, this study reviews genres of VGs, cognitive functions identified to be positively associated with VG playing, and factors for individual difference in the association between VGs and cognitive enhancement.

Literatures were searched on Google Scholar and database (e.g. PubMed, PsychInfo) without date restriction. All designs of studies, found through the search (e.g. cross-sectional studies, training studies and review papers), were included. Search terms for the first section, reviewing genres of VGs, were “genres of (video) games”. “Serious games” was additionally used search term to make the distinction between serious games and commercial VGs. In the second section discussing the association between VG playing and cognitive functions, search terms were “video game (playing)”, “cognitive function/training” and “the association between VG and cognitive function”. Searched literatures for commercial VGs were categorized as six different cognitive functions. As AVGs were found to be highly investigated among various genres of VGs in the search, more literatures for AVGs were included in the second section. Based on literatures for the second section and additionally searched literatures with search terms (e.g. “age and video game”), the last section discussed the factors that were considered as variables for the individual difference in the association of VGs with cognitive functions.

Genres of VGs

Cognitive trainings, having components of VGs (i.e. adapting the difficulty level based on the performance and instantly providing the feedback) [ 11 ], were found to be effective through the individualization of the training (see Table  1 ). Constant provision of feedback was helpful for self-monitoring of the progress in VGs [ 12 ] in that players were able to change their decisions based on the feedback [ 13 ]. VGs, which are suggested to have the potential to train cognitive functions, seem to be divided into two genres depending on the purpose of the development: serious games and commercial VGs. Serious games, which are developed for learning and changes of behavior in various areas such as business, education, healthcare and policies of the government [ 14 , 15 ], were found to be more effective learning methods compared to conventional methods of learning when people played multiple sessions in groups with supplementary instructions [ 16 ]. Unlike serious games, commercial VGs were designed for the entertainment of players [ 17 ]. Although it is not designed for learning, commercial VGs provide players with goal-driven environment that they face various challenges and conflicts [ 18 ]. Players were found to execute their cognitive skills in a more integrated way by playing commercial VGs [ 19 ]. Moreover, people are more motivated to play commercial VGs [ 20 ]. Taken together, the potential influence of commercial VGs on the enhancement of cognitive functions is suggested. Thus, this section focuses on the classification of commercial VGs.

Based on four literatures [ 17 , 22 , 23 , 24 ], five genres of VGs were identified (see Table  2 ). Firstly identified genre of commercial VGs is traditional games (TGs) such as puzzle, card and board VGs [ 23 ]. Secondly identified genre is simulation games (SGs) (i.e. sports or driving VGs [ 22 ], Sims building up towns or communities [ 24 ]). Thirdly identified genre is strategy video games (SVGs) referring to VG that players generally play in the global view by focusing on visual information [ 22 ] and planning the strategies [ 17 ]. As Table  2 shows, SVGs are sub-divided into real-time strategy (RTS) and turn-based strategy (FBS) depending on the way mental process occurs. In SVGs (e.g. Starcraft), expert play (i.e. the integration and contextualization of VG-world activities) is highly associated with the best possible outcomes of VGs [ 22 ]. Fourthly identified genre is action video games (AVGs) that are characterized by the existence of a static physical locator connecting gaze and actions of players in the game environment [ 22 ]. As shown in Table  2 , AVGs are divided into first-person shooters (FPS) and third-person games (TPG) depending on the perspective of the players in the game. The final genre identified in the literatures is fantasy games (FGs). They can be defined as VGs where players explore the game environment in relatively slow pace in order to solve problems [ 17 ] and that focus on the imagination by offering fantasy environment with rules to players [ 22 ]. Among described sub-genres of FGs in Table  2 , role-playing games (RPGs) are the starting point where the notion of VG community was formed [ 22 ]. Massive Multi-player Online RPGs (MMORPGs) are VGs where social and participatory aspects are emphasized by providing the VG itself as the social arena [ 22 ].

Although commercial VGs are classified as five genres in this review, the categorization of VGs seems to vary depending on the criteria for the classification (e.g. interaction type that players experience in VG environments) [ 17 ]. That is, same VGs can be classified as different genres depending on the aspect the researcher focused. For example, RPGs, which were categorized as ‘FGs’ based on characteristics of the VG environment [ 17 ], were categorized as ‘SVGs’ based on the way players performed in VGs [ 25 ]. Thus, more standardized categorizations of VGs are required by conducting further studies in order to more accurately investigate the association between VG playing and cognitive improvement. However, despite this limitation found in the genre classification, it is expected that different genres would be associated with different cognitive functions. It is because players face different designs of VG environments and show the different way of playing. Thus, the association of different VGs with cognitive function is reviewed in the next section.

Cognitive functions identified to be positively related to VG playing

Although cognitive functions are found to be trained through VG playing during relatively short period, enhanced type of cognitive functions depends on genres of VGs [ 20 ]. In this section, the association of different genres with cognitive functions is reviewed. The transfer effect of VGs (i.e. the extent to which cognitive improvement associated with VGs is transferred into untrained cognitive functions) is also discussed. Six cognitive functions are identified to be positively associated with VGs.

Firstly identified cognitive function is attention. Frequent VG players were better at sustaining attention [ 26 ], and players of working memory (WM) and reasoning casual VGs showed the improvement in divided attention [ 19 ]. Compared to other genres of VGs played with slow pace, AVGs were highly associated with improvement in selective attention [ 27 ] which refers to the allocation of attention to relevant information [ 28 ]. FPS players were found to efficiently allocate attention through the improvement in the top-down process of attention [ 29 ]. Although Leauge of Legends (LoL) top-ranking players were better at selective attention than players with lower level skills and less gaming experience, one hour of AVG session resulted in better selective attention in less skilled players [ 30 ]. Players of AVGs and adventure games also showed attenuated attentional blink [ 31 ], which refers to the failure to detect and process the target that was subsequently presented right after the previously processed target [ 32 ]. That is, the training of AVGs, but not other genres of VGs (e.g. TGs and SGs), improved the recovery from attentional blink [ 32 ]. Furthermore, the improvement in attention, found to be associated with VGs [ 33 , 34 ], accompany changes in brain regions. While dorsal fronto-parietal network, which is involved in top-down process of attention [ 35 ], was more activated with increased attentional demands in non-VG players or players of other genres (e.g. SVGs), AVG players barely recruited this network and showed reduced activation in visual motion sensitive area (MT/MST) of which activation results from moving distracters [ 34 ]. Changes in brain activation suggested that AVG players were better at filtering information and efficiently allocating attention to important information. Moreover, AVG experience was found to be positively associated with the plasticity of white matter network in regions (e.g. prefrontal cortex; PFC) [ 36 ] that involves in cognitive control (i.e. goal-directed neural process) [ 37 ]. Even older players showed increased activation in right dorsolateral PFC (DLPFC) [ 38 ]. Taken together, VG playing, especially AVG playing, is associated with the enhancement of visual attention that takes an important role in the efficient processing of information [ 39 ].

Based on the interaction between visual attention and WM [ 40 ], secondly identified cognitive function is WM that refers to the maintenance of presented visual stimuli [ 41 ]. When the association between casual WM reasoning games and cognitive function enhancement was investigated, the enhancement in WM was not found [ 19 ]. However, frequent VG playing was associated with the improvement in WM capacity [ 26 ]. The 20 h of training to play hidden-object and memory matrix VGs resulted in the improvement in spatial WM [ 32 ]. Although 20 h of AVG training did not enhance spatial WM [ 32 ], 30 h of AVG training during 1 month, compared to the training of SGs, resulted in the enhancement in visual WM [ 28 ]. Extensive experience of AVG playing was associated with better visual WM capacity [ 42 ]. FPS players showed more accurate and faster processing of relevant information with better WM capacity compared to non-players [ 43 ]. That is, AVG players showed more precise and detailed visual representation [ 44 ] and performed better in a change detection task than non-VG players [ 45 ]. When AVGs were played in long term, salience network, involved in the detection of visual stimuli (e.g. anterior cingulated cortex and anterior insula) and central executive network, involved in attentional control and WM such as DLPFC and posterior parietal cortex, were highly integrated [ 46 ]. AVG players showed improved WM capacity by efficiently allocating attention to important information [ 42 ]. These findings suggested that playing VGs, especially AVGs, is suggested to have the potential to enhance WM that is important for the learning of skills and the acquisition of knowledge [ 41 , 42 ]. However, as it is unclear whether the discrepancy between AVG training studies result from the different duration of trainings or different aspects of WM, further studies are required.

Thirdly identified cognitive function is visuo-spatial function referring to perception, recognition, and manipulation of visual stimuli (e.g. visuo-motor coordination, navigation skill) [ 27 ]. Enhanced spatial cognition was reported in players of Tetris [ 47 ], which can be classified as one of TGs, and playing TGs (i.e. logic/puzzle games) was associated with gray matter (GM) volume in bilateral entorhinal cortex [ 48 ] that is involved in navigation [ 49 ]. AVGs and SVGs were also found to be associated with the enhanced visuo-spatial function [ 50 ]. Ten hours of AVG training resulted in better navigation skills through the adoption of response strategy, which indirectly measure/indicate the volume of hippocampus and striatum [ 51 ]. Consistently, AVG players, who were trained to play SuperMario for 2 months, showed the improvement in the processing of spatial information and the coordination of visuo-motor function along with larger GM volume in brain regions (i.e. right hippocampus, right DLPFC and bilateral cerebellum) [ 52 ]. Moreover, increases in white matter connections between occipital and parietal areas were found in RTS players compared to non-video gamers [ 53 ]. Furthermore, adolescents with more experience of VG playing showed thicker cortex in left frontal eye-fields that engage in allocating visuo-spatial attention and integrating relevant visuo-motor information [ 54 ]. That is, playing VGs was found to be associated with neural plasticity in brain regions involved in navigation and visual attention (i.e. bilateral entorhinal cortex, hippocampal and occipital GM volume) [ 48 ]. Taken together, although the exact duration of VG training for the detection of structural changes in brain was not identified [ 54 ], VGs are suggested to be associated with the enhancement in visuo-spatial function.

Fourthly identified cognitive function is probabilistic learning that refers to the usage of declarative memory to resolve the uncertainty [ 55 ]. Fifty hours of AVG training in non-VG players increased the efficiency to use not only visually but also auditorily available information [ 56 ]. AVG players also showed higher activation in brain regions involved in visual imagery, semantic memory and cognitive control (e.g. hippocampus, precuneus, thalamus) compared to non-AVG players [ 55 ]. Higher activation in hippocampus in AVG players was related to more pronounced usage of declarative knowledge [ 55 ]. Moreover, the cortex of left DLPFC, involved in resolving the ambiguity by using the cues in the environments, was found to be thicker in adolescents reporting longer duration of VG playing, suggesting players became better at resolving the ambiguity efficiently through VG playing [ 54 ]. It can be concluded that VG playing could enhance the probabilistic learning through the efficient use of evidence presented in the environment of VG.

Fifthly identified cognitive function is problem solving skills. Problem solving skills were improved more through a puzzle VG compared to cognitive training game [ 57 ]. Adolescents, playing strategic VGs (i.e. SVGs, RPGs) more frequently during 4 years of high school period, also showed better skill to solve problems [ 25 ]. Playing strategic VGs, but not fast-paced VGs, was also found to be associated with better academic achievement in that improved problem solving skills mediated the positive association between playing SVGs and academic performance [ 25 ]. Moreover, playing commercial VGs enhanced graduate skills (e.g. problem solving skills, communication) in university students, suggesting the potential efficacy of VG-based learning [ 58 ]. However, gaming habits (e.g. frequency and time of video gaming, genres of VGs) was found to have no influence academic skills in high school students [ 59 ]. The inconsistency between findings seemed to be the different use of measurement for problem solving skills. While self-reports were used to measure problem solving skills in [ 25 ] and [ 58 ], the measurement of academic skills (e.g. mathematics, science) was used in [ 59 ]. Although the longitudinal design of [ 25 ] suggested the potential positive influence of strategic VGs on problem solving skill, further studies that investigate the extent to which problem solving skills can be enhanced through VG playing and examine changes in relevant brain regions should be conducted.

The last cognitive function that is identified to be positively associated with VG is second language (L2) learning in that not only serious games but also commercial VGs provide players with the opportunity for language practice and acquisition [ 60 ]. Among various genres, MMORPGs, which are full with the opportunity of interaction between players, and between players and the VG environment in target language [ 61 ], are suggested as the efficient method for speaking practice [ 62 ] and are reported to facilitate the learning of L2 [ 63 ]. Players engaging in frequent interaction in VG environments were found to show strengthened functional connectivity (FC) within brain regions involved in language processing (i.e. left anterior insular/frontal operculum and visual word form area) [ 63 ]. Moreover, the attentional bias toward information relevant to the task was identified as the possible mechanism for facilitated L2 learning in MMORPGs in that the activation in DLPFC, parahippocampal gyrus and thalamus was higher in players of MMORPGs in the response to VG-related cues compared to neutral cues [ 63 ]. That is, playing MMORPGs are suggested to support L2 learning.

Although not only AVG but also other genres were found to be associated with cognitive enhancement, the transfer effect of VG experience was limited to specific underlying cognitive demands that was trained through VG playing [ 19 , 20 , 32 ]. Among various VG genres, AVGs, which activated multiple cognitive functions (e.g. attention, WM, hand–eye coordination) by providing players with physically and mentally demanding environments [ 46 ], showed the most varied effect of transfer [ 32 ]. However, unlike the suggestion that AVGs seem to improve the skill to infer regularities of presented information in the environment instead of the improvement of specific skill [ 64 ], AVG playing was found to require various information processing skill at lower level such as visual perception, attention skills and change detection [ 20 ]. AVG players, who efficiently tracked multiple moving objects compared to players of other VGs, were better at tracking multiple static objects [ 32 ]. FPS experience was also associated with the improvement in WM capacity but not with the improved inhibitory control [ 43 ]. That is, AVG experience was associated with the activation of specific brain regions [ 65 ]. LoL playing experience was associated with the activation in the frontal lobe compared to the activity with lower working loads (e.g. movie watching, SG experience) [ 66 ]. Moreover, AVGs did not show the transfer to different modality (i.e. auditory detection) and only players of AVGs that require faster attentional switch showed faster recovery from attentional blink [ 67 ]. Furthermore, the improvement of complex verbal WM was found in not memory matrix VG but AVG and match-3 VG that require strategic planning [ 32 ]. These findings suggested that VG playing did not show far transfer (i.e. general improvement in cognitive function to learn new skills) [ 20 ], supporting the common demand hypothesis that the VG-associated cognitive enhancement showed near transfer [ 20 ].

Taken together, six cognitive functions were identified to be positively associated with VG playing despite some discrepancies between findings (see Table  3 ). Different genres of VGs was associated with different aspects of cognitive function [ 5 ]. While AVG training was associated with attentional improvement, the training of match-3 VG resulted in better spatial WM [ 32 ]. Although the weaker association between FPS experience and cognitive enhancement in the sample including players with less FPS experience [ 68 ] questioned the positive association between VG playing and cognitive function, the reduction of VG playing significantly decreased not only self-reported gaming skills but also brain activities [ 69 ]. That is, as certain amount of VG experience is required to show cognitive enhancement (Anguera et al. 2015), VG experience was suggested to have the potential to enhance cognitive function and to show near transfer effect. However, most reviewed research articles were cross-sectional and did not examine the persistency of cognitive enhancement associated with VG playing. Although one study [ 11 ] examined the persistency of VG-associated cognitive enhancement by following up 9 months, VGs used in this study was not commercial VGs. That is, the extent to which not only AVGs but also other genres of VGs showed the transfer and the extent to which cognitive enhancement through commercial VG playing was persistent have been less examined. Thus, more studies, investigating not only the extent of transfer but also the persistency of cognitive advantage associated with VG playing, should be conducted in order to deepen the understanding of transfer effect of VG experience.

• Modulating factors

The positive association between VG playing and cognitive function has been demonstrated. However, there is individual difference in the extent to which players show cognitive enhancement [ 70 ]. It is because some factors influence the plasticity and individual responses to the VG training [ 20 ]. Thus, this section reviews five factors that are identified to modulate the association between VG playing and cognitive enhancement through the review of searched literatures.

The first modulating factor is VG expertise. VG expertise influences cognitive processes that players adopted during VG play. While novice players are more likely to use top-down process where attentional resources were allocated through the strategic control of gaming behavior, VG experts are more likely to use bottom-up processes where attention is automatically allocated to psychologically salient gaming cues as a result of rich experience [ 63 ]. Players with better VG expertise also prioritized skills to strategize during LoL playing compared to lower-ranking players who prioritized action skills [ 65 ]. That is, VG expertise influenced the activation of different cognitive processes during VG play. Moreover, as VG expertise was found to be closely associated with the difference in the baseline speed of visual attention [ 33 ], it seemed to influence attentional benefits associated with VG playing.

Secondly identified modulating factor for the individual difference is age in that different media were used for longer time in younger children [ 71 ]. After peaking at the age of 13 or 14 years, the time of VG playing decreased with age [ 23 ]. Age-related difference in VG playing time suggests that the effect of video gaming potentially has more influence on cognitive function enhancement in younger adults than older adults [ 72 ]. Age also influences the engagement in VG training. As the specific population considered in designing AVGs is young adults [ 5 ], older adults reported lower engagement in AVG training compared to the training of other genres of VGs [ 73 ]. Moreover, age is closely related to cognitive functions and the performance of the task in that the functional connectivity of brain develops with age [ 74 ]. While substantial neuro-plasticity was found in younger children [ 5 ], age-related decline in cognitive control was found [ 75 ]. It was also found that the task performance of younger children with relatively slow and less precise attention process became better when their performance was supported by the provision of temporal cues for attentional responses [ 33 ].

As age is associated with cognitive function, thirdly identified factor is baseline cognitive function (e.g. reasoning skill, attentional skill). Baseline cognitive function influences the choice of VG engagement in that cognitive ability was better in players, who chose regular AVG playing, than in individuals who barely played VGs [ 5 ]. It also influences the extent to which cognitive function would be enhanced through VG playing. Children with more attentional deficits were found to gain greater attentional enhancement through the computerized training and to show persistent effect in 9 months [ 11 ]. Players with lower baseline reasoning skills were also found to gain more cognitive benefits, such as better divided attention and faster perception of stimuli [ 19 ]. However, consistent with the influence of baseline GM in striatum on the degree of skill acquisition in learners [ 76 ], young adults with higher level of baseline modularity in brain showed higher cognitive benefits after VG training where WM and reasoning function was involved [ 77 ]. It is plausible that the modulating role of baseline cognitive function depends on the aspect of cognitive function trained in VGs. Although further studies should be conducted to examine this idea, baseline cognitive function are suggested to modulate the cognitive benefit of VG playing by influencing the choice of VG genre and the extent of cognitive enhancement.

Cognitive function that was identified as one modulating factor was associated with gender in that males were better at inhibiting distracters and sustaining attention [ 26 ]. That is, fourthly identified factor is gender that influences gaming habits that were reported to be associated with the extent of enhancement and types of cognitive functions improved [ 26 ]. Although both female and male AVG players gained similar attentional advantage despite the asymmetric gender distribution in the frequency of gaming [ 33 ], gender influences gaming time and styles. While Huang et al. [ 26 ] found males more frequently engaged in VGs than females, Dindar [ 58 ] reported that females played VGs more frequently than males. Despite the discrepancy in the frequency of gaming between males and females, it was confirmed that the duration for VG play was longer in males than females [ 23 , 59 , 78 ] and that males preferred to play AVGs [ 26 ]. The increased playing time in males was associated with the genre of VGs (e.g. whether it is played by multi-players) [ 79 ]. Moreover, males chose computer as the gaming platform compared to females [ 26 ]. Although the difference in cognitive enhancement between gaming platforms (i.e. mobile and console) was not significant [ 26 ], the choice of gaming platform was found to be associated with the motivation (e.g. social interaction) for VG engagement. While males prefer to play VGs focusing on competition (e.g. AVGs or SGs), females like to play TGs [ 23 ]. Taken together, gender, which is associated with the engagement habits in VGs, indirectly modulates the association between VG playing and cognitive function enhancement.

Based on the gender difference in the choice of gaming platform, the last factor that is identified to modulate the association between VG playing and cognitive functions is motivation. Individuals with higher level of motivation engaged in trainings more voluntarily, performed better in trainings and showed improved WM than those with lower level of motivation [ 80 ]. Players, who were more motivated to communicate in VGs through the experience of social rewards (e.g. positive expressions) in gaming environments, also showed attentional bias to communication-relevant stimuli that was associated with promoted L2 learning [ 63 ]. Moreover, the existence of motivational factor during the VG playing appears to influence the functional changes of the brain associated with the training [ 81 ]. Players, who experienced more fun and relatively less frustration during VG playing with better performance, were more motivated to engage in VGs and showed more functional changes in the relevant brain regions [ 81 ]. However, when monetary reward was given for game playing, motivation was not found to significantly influence the effectiveness of VG training [ 19 ]. Taken together, although monetary reward minimized the role of motivation in gaming engagement, motivational factors were suggested to be considered in investigating the association of VG playing with behavioral and neural changes [ 63 ].

As five factors, identified to influence the individual difference in the association between VG playing and cognitive improvement, interact each other in the modulation of the association, it is difficult to conclude which factor exerts more influence on the individual difference in the association between playing of VGs and cognitive enhancement. Moreover, there are other factors that are not introduced in this section. For example, the personalities of players seem to influence the motivation for VG playing [ 9 ] and the expression of motivation during the VG play [ 82 ]. Personality traits can also influence learning effects in that introverted players can get more benefits of language learning from playing VGs where they simulate the practice more freely compared to the traditional learning [ 61 ]. Moreover, players showed the difference in the results of learning depending on their learning styles [ 24 ]. As the individual difference in VG gains seemed to be explained by not only the duration of VG paying but also the variation in learning trajectories [ 83 ], other factors excluded in this review should be considered and further studies, including all these factors, should be conducted in order to understand what modulates the association between VG playing and cognitive enhancement.

Conclusions

Unlike the emphasized negativity of VG playing, VGs are suggested to enhance cognitive functions. As VG playing has become one aspect of life in young people [ 84 ], it is important to understand the association between video gaming and cognitive function in a more balanced view toward VG playing. Thus, this paper discusses genres of commercial VGs, cognitive functions that are identified to be positively associated with VG playing and modulating factors. It is found that different genres of VGs are associated with different aspects of cognitive functions, that AVGs are identified as the VG genre resulting in most varied transfer, and that factors (e.g. age, gender) influence the association of VG playing with cognitive function. Moreover, despite the concern about the usage of VGs or computerized programs as the primary intervention for the improvement in brain function [ 19 ], VGs, demonstrating the association with structural changes in brain regions, have the potential to be used as an intervention program for patients showing decreased volume in brain regions such as hippocampus [ 36 , 52 ].

Although this review contributes to the understanding of commercial video gaming and its potential effect, the findings of the review should be interpreted by considering three identified research gaps. One identified research gap is the limited generalizability resulting from the absence of standardized definition for VG players. More studies have been conducted by focusing on AVGs compared to other genres of VGs and the criteria for the status of VG players were different between studies. While non-VG players were mostly defined as individual with less or no VG experience, non-AVG players were classified as non-VG players in some studies (e.g. [ 33 ], [ 34 ]). The different classification criteria seems to underestimate the potentially influence of other genres of VGs on cognitive functions and makes it difficult the comparison between studies difficult. The other identified gap is habits of VG playing were usually based on self-reports. As self-report measure is based on autobiographical memory, it could result in inaccurate report of their frequent behaviors [ 23 ]. In order to understand the link between VG playing and cognitive function, further studies, including more reliable measure for VG playing habits, should be conducted. Another identified gap is the scope of cognitive function that has been investigated in relation to VG playing. While more studies focused on attention, studies for higher cognitive functions have been less conducted. Although the enhancement in inhibition was not associated with frequent VG playing [ 26 ], cognitive control was positively associated with AVG experience [ 36 ]. The transfer into complex verbal WM in AVG and match-3 game training groups also suggested the potential of VG training in the enhancement of higher order executive processes [ 32 ]. As the change in some cognitive functions is slow [ 19 ], it is plausible that higher cognitive function requires more playing time for the change. In order to resolve the discrepancy between findings and to deepen the understanding of the association between VG and higher cognitive function, mores studies, investigating more various aspects of cognitive function, should be conducted. Therefore, more studies, considering these research gaps, should be conducted in future in order to deepen the understanding of the influence of VG playing on cognitive function.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

Video game(s)

Traumatic brain injuries

Sensory processing dysfunction

Attention deficit/hyperactivity dysfunction

Typically developing children

Traditional games

Simulation games

Strategy video games

Action video games

Fantasy games

Role-playing games

Massive multi-player online RPGs

Real-time strategy

Turn-based strategy

First-person shooters

Third-person games

League of Legends

Working memory

Prefrontal cortex

Dorsolateral PFC

Gray matter

Second language

Griffiths MD, Davies MN. Research note Excessive online computer gaming: implications for education. J Comput Assist Learn. 2002;18(3):379–80.

Article   Google Scholar  

Anderson CA, Bushman BJ. Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: a meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychol Sci. 2001;12(5):353–9.

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Good OS. ‘Gaming disorder’ officially on World Health Organization’s list of diseases. 2019. https://www.polygon.com/2019/5/25/18639893/gaming-disorder-addiction-world-health-organization-who-icd-11 . Accessed May 25 2019.

Ferguson CJ. The good, the bad and the ugly: a meta-analytic review of positive and negative effects of violent video games. Psychiatr Q. 2007;78(4):309–16.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bediou B, et al. Meta-analysis of action video game impact on perceptual, attentional, and cognitive skills. Psychol Bull. 2018;144(1):77–110.

Gee JP. What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Comput Entertain. 2003;1(1):20.

Vogel JJ, et al. Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: a meta-analysis. J Educ Comput Res. 2006;34(3):229–43.

Shaffer DW, et al. Video games and the future of learning. Phi delta kappan. 2005;87(2):105–11.

Granic I, Lobel A, Engels RC. The benefits of playing video games. Am Psychol. 2014;69(1):66.

Tobias S, et al. Review of research on computer games. Comput Games Instruct. 2011;127:222.

Google Scholar  

Anguera JA, et al. A pilot study to determine the feasibility of enhancing cognitive abilities in children with sensory processing dysfunction. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(4):e0172616.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Prensky M. Digital game-based learning. Comput Entertain. 2003;1(1):21.

Cameron B, Dwyer F. The effect of online gaming, cognition and feedback type in facilitating delayed achievement of different learning objectives. J Interact Learn Res. 2005;16(3):243–58.

Connolly TM, et al. A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Comput Educ. 2012;59(2):661–86.

Zyda M. From visual simulation to virtual reality to games. Computer. 2005;38(9):25–32.

Wouters P, et al. A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. J Educ Psychol. 2013;105(2):249.

Pinelle D, Wong N, Stach T. Using genres to customize usability evaluations of video games. In: Proceedings of the 2008 conference on future play: research, play, share. New York: ACM; 2008.

Song WH, Han DH, Shim HJ. Comparison of brain activation in response to two dimensional and three dimensional on-line games. Psychiatry Investig. 2013;10(2):115–20.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Baniqued PL, et al. Cognitive training with casual video games: points to consider. Front Psychol. 2014;4:1010.

Oei AC, Patterson MD. Are videogame training gains specific or general? Front Syst Neurosci. 2014;8:54.

Kelkar AS. Treating problem solving deficits in traumatic brain injury. 2014.

Apperley TH. Genre and game studies: toward a critical approach to video game genres. Simul Gaming. 2006;37(1):6–23.

Greenberg BS, et al. Orientations to video games among gender and age groups. Simul Gaming. 2010;41(2):238–59.

Khenissi MA, et al. Relationship between learning styles and genres of games. Comput Educ. 2016;101:1–14.

Adachi PJ, Willoughby T. More than just fun and games: the longitudinal relationships between strategic video games, self-reported problem solving skills, and academic grades. J Youth Adolesc. 2013;42(7):1041–52.

Huang V, Young M, Fiocco AJ. The Association Between Video Game Play and Cognitive Function: does Gaming Platform Matter? Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2017;20(11):689–94.

Palaus M, et al. Neural basis of video gaming: a systematic review. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017;11:248.

Blacker KJ, et al. Effects of action video game training on visual working memory. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2014;40(5):1992–2004.

Straube S, Fahle M. The electrophysiological correlate of saliency: evidence from a figure-detection task. Brain Res. 2010;1307:89–102.

Qiu N, et al. Rapid improvement in visual selective attention related to action video gaming experience. Front Hum Neurosci. 2018;12:47.

Wong NH, Chang DH. Attentional advantages in video-game experts are not related to perceptual tendencies. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):5528.

Oei AC, Patterson MD. Enhancing cognition with video games: a multiple game training study. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(3):e58546.

Dye MW, Green CS, Bavelier D. The development of attention skills in action video game players. Neuropsychologia. 2009;47(8–9):1780–9.

Bavelier D, et al. Neural bases of selective attention in action video game players. Vision Res. 2012;61:132–43.

Vossel S, Geng JJ, Fink GR. Dorsal and ventral attention systems: distinct neural circuits but collaborative roles. Neurosci. 2014;20(2):150–9.

Gong D, et al. Action video game experience related to altered large-scale white matter networks. Neural Plast. 2017;2017:7543686. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/7543686 .

Botvinick MM, et al. Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychol Rev. 2001;108(3):624–52.

Wang P, et al. Neural basis of enhanced executive function in older video game players: an fMRI study. Front Aging Neurosci. 2017;9:382.

Cardoso-Leite P, Bavelier D. Video game play, attention, and learning: how to shape the development of attention and influence learning? Curr Opin Neurol. 2014;27(2):185–91.

Astle DE, Scerif G. Interactions between attention and visual short-term memory (VSTM): what can be learnt from individual and developmental differences? Neuropsychologia. 2011;49(6):1435–45.

Baddeley A. Working memory, thought, and action, vol. 45. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.

Book   Google Scholar  

Blacker KJ, Curby KM. Enhanced visual short-term memory in action video game players. Atten Percep Psychophys. 2013;75(6):1128–36.

Colzato LS, et al. Action video gaming and cognitive control: playing first person shooter games is associated with improvement in working memory but not action inhibition. Psychol Res. 2013;77(2):234–9.

Sungur H, Boduroglu A. Action video game players form more detailed representation of objects. Acta Physiol. 2012;139(2):327–34.

Boot WR, et al. The effects of video game playing on attention, memory, and executive control. Acta Physiol. 2008;129(3):387–98.

Gong D, et al. Functional integration between salience and central executive networks: a role for action video game experience. Neural Plast. 2016;2016:9803165. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/9803165 .

Uttal DH, et al. The malleability of spatial skills: a meta-analysis of training studies. Psychol Bull. 2013;139(2):352–402.

Kühn S, Gallinat J. Amount of lifetime video gaming is positively associated with entorhinal, hippocampal and occipital volume. Mol Psychiatry. 2014;19(7):842–7.

Szabó C, Kelemen O, Kéri S. Low-grade inflammation disrupts structural plasticity in the human brain. Neuroscience. 2014;275:81–8.

Bavelier D, Green CS. Enhancing attentional control: lessons from action video games. Neuron. 2019;104(1):147–63.

West GL, et al. Habitual action video game playing is associated with caudate nucleus-dependent navigational strategies. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 1808;2015(282):20142952.

Kühn S, et al. Playing Super Mario induces structural brain plasticity: gray matter changes resulting from training with a commercial video game. Mol Psychiatry. 2014;19(2):265–71.

Kowalczyk N, et al. Real-time strategy video game experience and structural connectivity—a diffusion tensor imaging study. Hum Brain Mapp. 2018;39(9):3742–58.

Kühn S, et al. Positive association of video game playing with left frontal cortical thickness in adolescents. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(3):e91506.

Schenk S, Lech RK, Suchan B. Games people play: how video games improve probabilistic learning. Behav Brain Res. 2017;335:208–14.

Green CS, Pouget A, Bavelier D. Improved probabilistic inference as a general learning mechanism with action video games. Curr Biol. 2010;20(17):1573–9.

Shute VJ, Ventura M, Ke F. The power of play: the effects of Portal 2 and Lumosity on cognitive and noncognitive skills. Comput Educ. 2015;80:58–67.

Barr M. Video games can develop graduate skills in higher education students: a randomised trial. Comput Educ. 2017;113:86–97.

Dindar M. An empirical study on gender, video game play, academic success and complex problem solving skills. Comput Educ. 2018;125:39–52.

Pitarch RC. An approach to digital game-based learning: video-games principles and applications in foreign language learning. J Lang Teach Res. 2018;9(6):1147–59.

Bryant T. Using World of Warcraft and other MMORPGs to foster a targeted, social, and cooperative approach toward language learning. Academic Commons. 2006.

Kongmee I. et al. Using massively multiplayer online role playing games (MMORPGs) to support second language learning: action research in the real and virtual world. 2011.

Zhang Y, et al. Language learning enhanced by massive multiple online role-playing games (MMORPGs) and the underlying behavioral and neural mechanisms. Front Hum Neurosci. 2017;11:95.

Bavelier D, et al. Brain plasticity through the life span: learning to learn and action video games. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2012;35:391–416.

Gong D. et al. Electronic-sports experience related to functional enhancement in central executive and default mode areas. Neur Plast. 2019;2019.

Gong D, et al. The high-working load states induced by action real-time strategy gaming: an EEG power spectrum and network study. Neuropsychologia. 2019;131:42–52.

Oei AC, Patterson M. Enhancing perceptual and attentional skills requires common demands between the action video games and transfer tasks. Front Psychol. 2015;6:113.

Unsworth N, et al. Is playing video games related to cognitive abilities? Psychol Sci. 2015;26(6):759–74.

Gong D, et al. A reduction in video gaming time produced a decrease in brain activity. Front Hum Neurosci. 2019;13:134.

Wu S, et al. Playing a first-person shooter video game induces neuroplastic change. J Cognit Neurosci. 2012;24(6):1286–93.

Rideout VJ, Roberts DF, Foehr UG. Generation M: media in the Lives of 8–18 year olds. Executive Summary. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation: Menlo Park; 2005.

Wang P, et al. Action video game training for healthy adults: a meta-analytic study. Front Psychol. 2016;7:907.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Boot WR, et al. Video games as a means to reduce age-related cognitive decline: attitudes, compliance, and effectiveness. Front Psychol. 2013;4:31.

Gong D, et al. Enhanced functional connectivity and increased gray matter volume of insula related to action video game playing. Sci Rep. 2015;5:9763.

Anguera JA, et al. Video game training enhances cognitive control in older adults. Nature. 2013;501(7465):97–101.

Erickson KI, et al. Striatal volume predicts level of video game skill acquisition. Cereb Cortex. 2010;20(11):2522–30.

Baniqued PL, et al. Brain network modularity predicts cognitive training-related gains in young adults. Neuropsychologia. 2019;131:205–15.

Ogletree SM, Drake R. College students’ video game participation and perceptions: gender differences and implications. Sex Roles. 2007;56(7–8):537–42.

Billieux J, et al. Why do you play World of Warcraft? An in-depth exploration of self-reported motivations to play online and in-game behaviours in the virtual world of Azeroth. Comput Hum Behav. 2013;29(1):103–9.

Prins PJ, et al. Does computerized working memory training with game elements enhance motivation and training efficacy in children with ADHD? Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2011;14(3):115–22.

Gleich T, et al. Functional changes in the reward circuit in response to gaming-related cues after training with a commercial video game. NeuroImage. 2017;152:467–75.

Graham LT, Gosling SD. Personality profiles associated with different motivations for playing World of Warcraft. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2013;16(3):189–93.

Spence I, et al. Women match men when learning a spatial skill. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009;35(4):1097–103.

Rideout VJ, Foehr UG, Roberts DF. Generation M 2: media in the lives of 8-to 18-year-olds. San Francisco: Henry J Kaiser Family Foundation; 2010.

Download references

Acknowledgements

It was supported by a grant from Game Science Forum in South Korea.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychiatry, Eunpyeong St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 1021 Tongil-ro, Eunpyeong-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Eunhye Choi, Kyu-In Jung, Shin-Young Kim & Min-Hyeon Park

Dr. Shin’s Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Clinic, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Suk-Ho Shin

Institute for Cognitive Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Jeh-Kwang Ryu

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

EC, SS, SK and MP collected the data for the review. All authors contributed to literature reviews. EC and MP designed the structure of this review paper and contributed to writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Min-Hyeon Park .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Choi, E., Shin, SH., Ryu, JK. et al. Commercial video games and cognitive functions: video game genres and modulating factors of cognitive enhancement. Behav Brain Funct 16 , 2 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12993-020-0165-z

Download citation

Received : 30 August 2019

Accepted : 27 January 2020

Published : 03 February 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12993-020-0165-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Cognitive functions
• Commercial video games
• Genres of video games

Behavioral and Brain Functions

ISSN: 1744-9081

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]