Print 43 comment(s) - last by MrBlastman.. on Jun 14 at 10:01 PM

Gamers outperformed non-gamers at every time interval in visual tests

Gamers who sit in front of their consoles all day may actually be gaining better visual and decision-making abilities over non-gamers. 

Duke University researchers, led by Greg Appelbaum (an assistant professor of psychiatry in the Duke School of Medicine), found that gamers were better at quick visual and decision-making tests than non-gamers. 

The study used 125 college participants who were either hardcore gamers or non-gamers. The participants were asked to play a certain game where eight letters were arranged in a circle. The letters only appeared for one-tenth of a second.

Once the letters vanished, an arrow would point to a certain area in the circle where a letter had been. It was up to the participants to remember which letter was in that position. 

According to the study's results, delays in decision-making ranged from 13 milliseconds to 2.5 seconds. Both gamers and non-gamers experienced a rapid decay in memory of where the letters had been, but one thing was for sure -- gamers were quicker to the draw than non-gamers at every time interval.

Appelbaum explained that our visual system analyzes and sifts information out from what the eyes are seeing. Data that isn't used decays quickly, and while gamers sift the unused data about as fast as anyone else, they seem to be starting with more information before they even begin.

Playing video games means paying close attention to the surroundings within the fictional world to either ward off enemies, find important items or travel to a certain destination. Appelbaum said that putting a lot of time into these kinds of games can increase experience, and allow the gamers to have a better sense of visual placement and decision-making. 

This led the researchers to conclude that gamers likely see better overall, and can make better decisions from the information they have. 

"Gamers see the world differently," said Appelbaum. "They are able to extract more information from a visual scene."

This study can be found in the June edition of Attention, Perception and Psychophysics.

Source: Science Daily

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Sure, but...
By V-Money on 6/12/2013 5:53:48 PM , Rating: 2
Really? Would you still feel this way if the XBO was purely digital distribution? How do you feel about Steam?

If you think Microsoft is going to have sales like Steam I think you are in error, I can't remember ever paying more than $15 for a game from steam, I even bought Borderlands 2 for $14 a couple weeks ago. Tell me where you can get that on the Xbox 360 right now for that price. Plus the reason I'm not buying an Xbox One is because of the required internet connection, which you can argue all you want but I go on submarines, i.e. no internet, i.e. F%^# Microsoft. Also, Steam allows you to play games offline, I do it all the time.

RE: Sure, but...
By inighthawki on 6/12/2013 8:55:34 PM , Rating: 2
Tell me where you can get that on the Xbox 360 right now for that price.

So your evidence supporting your theory that Microsoft would not do this is based on analysis of the current generation's model which is completely unrelated to the model that actually allows it to happen? Brilliant deduction.

The entire point is that the digital distribution model is something that CAN allow it. Will it happen? We won't know until after launch. Without this model, though, you will never have this good of sales. The entire reason steam can do this is because it is purely digital with no resell rights.

"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki