Video Games Found To Decrease Brain Activity

Richard C writes "A Japanese researcher, Akio Mori, from the Nihon University's College of Humanities and Sciences, claims to have found a link between the playing of video games and the balance of activity in the brain. It is also claimed that this effect can cause behavioural changes, such as lack of concentration, difficulty with social association, and short temper. These effects are also thought to be, to some extent, nonreversible." I was gonna say something witty and insightful here, but I can't think of anything. At least I can't make a windows machine stable enough to run Neverwinter or my brain would be toast.

Comments

Do research findings cancel each other out?

[Junta]

Haven't there been just as many studies showing the exact *opposite*? I guess it must mean that it does nothing at all in the end, since half of the reaearch shows one way, and half the other. I think it all depends on the agenda the researchs/financers start out to prove...

Has it occured to anyone...

[hackwrench]

that maybe the reason that it decreases brain activity is because the brain has gotten more efficient at doing tasks?

Which game(s)?

[Anarchos]

The first thing that I would like to know is which games were played? I would expect there to be a large difference in brain wave patterns between Pong and an RTS or Strategy game, which would require strategic thinking, game theory, and multitasking. Also, it seems as if the researcher may have had a negative attitude towards video games prior to the study.

Re:Which game(s)?

[afxgrin]

Well, from what I knew of previous studies regarding just 'games', chess was supposed to do the opposite of all the results this researcher made. Beta waves should increase in a game of head to head chess.

Let's put these chess players in the same situation, but on a computer without actually seeing each other. And then again on a computer, but they can see each other. And one more time playing against the computer.

A game of chess on a computer should be no different than a game of chess with actual pieces, just it lacks physical little pieces to play with and use to taunt your opponent.

But the one thing this study definitely needed to include was "What type of games." as you've mentioned. Many people would love to know more conclusive results, especially myself. I played video games a large portion of my life, and at one point, was rather obsessive with it. I am not an overly social person, but when it comes to talking to complete strangers I get along with them rather easily. I just might not have pursued talking to them. :-)

Maybe it's my time to do a computer-strike. Just not use a computer for an extended period of time. I'm thinking like a year ....

Re:or maybe the other way around?

[NetFu]

Exactly.

There are two many medical studies that draw direct conclusions from data when often the consistant occurrance of two effects together are caused by something completely different that the researcher never thought about.

For instance, people who drink one glass of wine a day have fewer heart attacks. But, maybe the real reason is that most of those wine drinkers they STUDIED make more money, take more vitamins, and generally watch their health better. Few doctors will mention that.

They also still don't know why EXACTLY Japanese women, before they move to America, have a lower rate of breast cancer than native Americans, and the descendants of those Japanese women also have a rate of breast cancer similar to other Americans (because they are native Americans at that point). Why? Because their Japanese? Because they eat more fish and less red meat than we do?

Also, with a controversial study like this, you always have to ask, "How many people DID you study and for how many years?". That important little fact seems to be absent from this article -- I've seen too many supposedly legitimate studies over the past 10-15 years that study 50 people over 2 years and call that "conclusive research" on humans. I hate to tell any scientists out there this, but accurate human research takes DECADES on a reasonable number of people (i.e. NOT 50).

When do scientists cross the line between science and tabloid news? I think more scientists need to learn...

Tradeoffs?

[kcbrown]

I have to wonder if there are also some benefits to playing videogames regularly, such as faster reflexes, increased ability to control vehicles, etc.

I also wonder if there is some correlation between the intensity and/or longevity of the effects and age (I would expect that the effects are more pronounced and long-lasting in kids than adults, for instance).