![]() Any forces acting on the player while going through a portal will be applied upon exiting the portal. These portals are connected in space, thus entering one portal will exit the player through the other portal. The primary game mechanic in Portal 2 is the portal gun, which can create two portals. The goal of Portal 2 is to get to an exit door by using a series of tools. Players take a first-person role of Chell in the game and explore and interact with the environment. Portal 2 is the name of a popular linear first-person puzzle-platform video game developed and published by Valve Corporation. We then present the hypotheses of our research study. Second, we describe Lumosity in relation to the company's stated goals on their website as well as some of the game activities included in their suite of brain games. First, we describe Portal 2 and define our focal constructs (problem solving, spatial skill, and persistence) and their associated facets that may be improved by playing the game. We organize this section of the paper as follows. As such, our choice to use Lumosity as the control condition for the current study addresses and overcomes the main concern (i.e., differential expectations) raised by Boot, Simons, et al. This control game, with an explicit focus on improving the user's cognition, would generate expectations of improvement more than a simple game like Tetris, which is the game typically used to test game effects against. As a conservative control condition, we use a popular brain training game called Lumosity – widely advertised as supporting multiple core cognitive processes and skills such as problem solving, memory, attention, speed, and mental flexibility. In this study we examine the impact of playing Portal 2 for eight hours on two cognitive competencies (problem solving and spatial skills) and on a noncognitive attribute (persistence). We investigate a popular video game called Portal 2, a 3D puzzle game that has received numerous awards for its innovative design. This study seeks to extend the growing body of experimental research examining the relationships between video game play and cognitive and noncognitive skills. Despite the need to match expectations between treatment and control groups, few psychological interventions do so. Only then can we attribute differential improvement to the strength of the treatment. That is, Boot, Champion, et al., 2013, Boot, Simons, et al., 2013 argue that researchers need to compare any game/treatment condition with a similarly-active control group that has the same expectations of improvement as the experimental group. However, others have found a lack of transfer effects between action video game playing and basic cognitive functions and skills (e.g., Boot, Kramer, Simons, Fabiani, & Gratton, 2008) and have raised questions regarding the methodology of studies that observe transfer (Boot, Simons, et al., 2013, Kristjánsson, 2013). Digital games can also motivate students to learn valuable academic content and skills (e.g., Coller and Scott, 2009, Ventura et al., 2013 for a review, see Tobias and Fletcher, 2011, Wilson et al., 2009, Young et al., 2012). (2010) found that playing digital games with friends and family is a large and normal part of the daily lives of youth.īesides being a popular activity across gender, ethnic, and socioeconomic lines, playing digital games has been shown to be positively related to various competencies, attributes, and outcomes such as visual-spatial skills and attention (e.g., Green and Bavlier, 2007, Green and Bavelier, 2012, Ventura et al., 2013), openness to experience (Chory and Goodboy, 2011, Ventura et al., 2012, Witt et al., 2011), college grades (Skoric et al., 2009, Ventura et al., 2012), persistence (Ventura, Shute, & Zhao, 2012), creativity (Jackson et al., 2012), and civic engagement (Ferguson & Garza, 2011). These young people aren't playing in isolation, either Ito et al. The increase in digital game play can be seen in a Kaiser Foundation study (Rideout, Foerh, & Roberts, 2010) that found that 60% of individuals aged 8 to 18 played digital games on a typical day in 2009, compared to 52% in 2004 and 38% in 1999. Escobar-Chaves and Anderson (2008) further note that the amount of time spent playing digital games continues to increase, and has since the introduction of home computers and gaming consoles in the mid-1980s. The Pew Internet and American Life Project surveyed 1102 youth between the ages of 12 and 17 and found that 97%-both males (99%) and females (94%)-play some type of digital game (Lenhart et al., 2008). Most children and young adults gravitate toward digital games.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |