video games and critical thinking

To revisit this article, visit My Profile, then View saved stories .

• The Big Story
• Newsletters
• Steven Levy's Plaintext Column
• WIRED Classics from the Archive
• WIRED Insider
• WIRED Consulting

What Gaming Does to Your Brain—and How You Might Benefit

To stay away from Azeroth—which is to remain unsubscribed from Blizzard Entertainment’s enduring MMORPG, World of Warcraft —is no simple task. In fact, the gaming community has long (and only half-jokingly) referred to the orc- and elf-filled game as “ World of Warcrack .”

As somebody who, over the past 14 years, has racked up more than 600 days played, the pull of WoW ’s constant new dungeons, raids, and battlegrounds is something I can attest to. When I’m at a loose end, the first thing that comes to mind is logging on my level-60 rogue. And if I don’t play for an extended period of time, I’ll, quite literally, see WoW in my dreams. On a conscious and subconscious level, I can’t quite escape.

Video game “addiction,” though, isn’t solely relegated to WoW ; it’s cross-genre and cross-platform . Neither is addiction the only neurological and psychological side effect of video games. So how, scientifically, do video games—from MMORPGs to shooters and RPGs—affect our brains? And despite the drawbacks, can the brain benefit from video games?

When the subject of how video games affect us crops up, the first thing that comes to mind is video game addiction —a field that’s being increasingly studied by psychologists and neuroscientists alike and is often played up for headlines more than it is an actual mental health threat on its face. “Roughly speaking, there are no big differences between video game addiction and other addictions,” says Marc Palaus, who holds a PhD in cognitive neuroscience from the Open University of Catalonia. “One key aspect to understand how addictions work is the reward system of the brain. The reward system mediates how pleasant stimuli (such as the presence of food, water, social interaction, sexual contact, or video games in this case) act as positive reinforcers for behavior.” Once our brains have been exposed to something pleasurable, we often want (and then set out to get) more—and video games are certainly no exception.

Considering WoW ’s longevity and impressive following (at the time of writing, there are around 5 million monthly players ), it’s no surprise that DIY support communities have surfaced. /r/nowow , a subreddit of over 1,000 members, functions as a safe space where struggling WoW addicts can discuss broken relationships, wasted time, hindered education, and relapses. 

It’s a place I’ve personally found reassuring and frightening in equal measure—the highly engaging and enjoyable world-away-from-our-own-world, with its daily and weekly quests and never-ending updates, has sucked many a gamer in.

Lee Chambers, an environmental psychologist I spoke to, is someone whose story is similar to those posting on /r/nowow. “I found World of Warcraft in my second year of university, and sadly at a time when I was struggling with my mental health,” he said. “The game gave me the social connection I needed, but I became dependent on it as my mental health became worse, and I became embroiled in the game and avoided life, leading to me being taken home by my parents after isolating myself for weeks.” Thankfully, Chambers has since come out the other side.

The high-octane environments of shooters are a world apart from the slower-paced grind of an MMORPG like WoW , Final Fantasy XIV , and Elder Scrolls Online . And it’s Epic Games’ Fortnite , the candy-hued survival shooter, that’s particularly interesting when it comes to video games and the brain, not least because it’s become a cultural phenomenon, especially among young gamers whose brains are still developing.

At its core, Fortnite is a quick-fire and inherently repeatable game, with co-op, battle royale, and sandbox modes catering to different play styles. ( Fortnite Battle Royale matches last about 20 minutes, but players can be eliminated shortly after games begin, depending on their skill level and/or luck.) The thrill of staying alive in pressured, digital life-or-death scenarios, in addition to obtaining pop-culture-referencing skins and post-ironic dances, can release dopamine—one of the brain’s neurotransmitters. And after a match in Fortnite , the more dopamine that your brain releases and the more pleasure you feel, the greater your desire to play another round.

Fortnite ’s ability to keep gamers playing—not addicted, but certainly glued to the screen for extended periods—is well documented. In 2018, a year after the game’s official release, a 9-year-old girl in the UK was taken to rehab after deliberately wetting herself in order to keep playing—it became an international news story. A year later, in 2019, a Montreal-based legal firm sought to launch a class-action lawsuit against Epic Games; the firm argued that Epic had intentionally designed the game to be addictive. Prince Harry—as in the royal who’s sixth in line to the British throne—proclaimed, during a media event, “ That game shouldn't be allowed. ”

Despite the bad press, Fortnite , and games like it, have proven brain-related benefits. First- and third-person shooters improve spatial reasoning, decisionmaking , and, contrary to popular belief, attention . In an article published by Men’s Health , writer Yo Zushi said that “even the heart-racing pressure you feel as your mate hunts you down in Fortnite Battle Royale turns out to be good for you: ‘Positive stress’ in the context of gameplay helps to motivate you while increasing your ability to focus IRL.”

Neurological and psychological research on video games is in its infancy—it’s in its early alpha stage, if you will. That’s because video games, as we know them, are modern inventions. And when assessing the research so far, studies show that it isn’t all warnings and worries. In fact, video games can be effective tools for upgrading our brains and our cognitive skill sets—especially in the long run.

Video game research truly kicked off in the late ’90s, with Daphne Bavelier and C. Shawn Green leading the charge while at the University of Rochester. They began to explore the unconventional idea that video games could impact and perhaps even aid with neuroplasticity—a biological process where the brain changes and adapts when exposed to new experiences.

After years of research, they found that action games in particular—games where reflexes, reaction time, and hand-eye coordination are challenged, like in the now-retro classics Doom and Team Fortress Classic —provided tangible cognitive advantages that help us in everyday life. As Bavelier and Green noted in the July 2016 issue of Scientific American : “Individuals who regularly play action games demonstrate improved ability to focus on visual details, useful for reading fine print in a legal document or on a prescription bottle. They also display heightened sensitivity to visual contrast, important when driving in thick fog … The multitasking required to switch back and forth between reading a menu and holding a conversation with a dinner partner also comes more easily.”

In Bavelier’s TEDxCHUV talk “ Your Brain on Video Games ,” she makes the case that playing action games like Call of Duty in reasonable doses is positively powerful. Instead of parents perceiving their kids’ virtual zombie and designated “bad” guy shooting as brainless, it should instead be viewed as brain-boosting, she claims.

Others, too, have touted the brain-related benefits of video games. For instance, researchers at UC Irvine found that 3D games can improve the functioning of the hippocampus , which is the part of the brain that’s involved with learning and memory. Meanwhile, researchers from Queen Mary University of London and University College London found that video games can aid mental agility and enhance strategic thinking . This correlates with what James Mitchell, a UX designer and avid gamer, told me when I asked how he thought video games have impacted him: “I definitely think that my critical thinking and strategy has improved, and I find it easier to predict certain movements, especially relating to other games, and even card games. I have also learned to be more unpredictable with my movements.”

Despite video game research being a recent phenomenon, it’s proven that video games do provide out-and-out brain gains—good news for those of us partial to a video game (or two, or three, or 400). They can, however, have the potential to suck us in to a degree that isn’t healthy, which could potentially manifest as video game addiction.

So what can be done so our brains benefit from +3 agility and +3 intelligence without suffering from –5 stamina? How can a healthy relationship with video games be sustained? As C. Shawn Green—who earned a PhD in brain and cognitive studies—said to WIRED: “What healthy gameplay might look like in practice may differ greatly across individuals, and across the lifespan (e.g., in children versus adults). In other words, there really aren’t any one-size-fits-all guidelines for healthy gameplay that will work for everyone-is-a-different-size human beings.” Generally speaking, though, it’s important to be aware of how gaming may impact other areas of our lives in the short and long term, Green says. “It’s a matter of thinking through the proximal and downstream consequences,” he said.

Granted, the fact that games are specifically designed to keep us playing makes following this advice harder. But by remaining cognizant of our own (and our families’) gaming habits, making sure to log off sometimes to do other things, and by ultimately playing video games in a way that doesn’t unrestrictedly keep us on the hedonic treadmill , there’s potential to leverage gaming to be mentally more resilient, quicker, and smarter IRL.

• 📩 The latest on tech, science, and more: Get our newsletters !
• What if doctors are always watching, but never there?
• Loki has always been Marvel's most queer character
• The best password managers to secure your digital life
• Tech companies want to tackle harassment in gaming
• Beware “smokescreen trolling,” a favorite Trumpist tactic
• 👁️ Explore AI like never before with our new database
• 🎮 WIRED Games: Get the latest tips, reviews, and more
• ✨ Optimize your home life with our Gear team’s best picks, from robot vacuums to affordable mattresses to smart speakers

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Dialogues Clin Neurosci
• v.21(3); 2019 Sep

Language: English | Spanish | French

Effects of computer gaming on cognition, brain structure, and function: a critical reflection on existing literature


Efectos de los juegos de computador en la cognición, y en la estructura y función cerebral: una reflexión crítica sobre la literatura actual, effets des jeux vidéo sur la cognition, la structure et la fonction cérébrales : une réflexion critique sur la littérature existante, simone kühn.

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, Germany; Lise Meitner Group for Environmental Neuroscience, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany

Jürgen Gallinat

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, Germany

Anna Mascherek

Video gaming as a popular form of leisure activity and its effect on cognition, brain function, and structure has come into focus in the field of neuroscience. Visuospatial cognition and attention seem to benefit the most, whereas for executive functions, memory, and general cognition, the results are contradictory. The particular characteristics of video games driving these effects remain poorly understood. We critically discuss major challenges for the existing research, namely, the lack of precise definitions of video gaming, the lack of distinct choice of cognitive ability under study, and the lack of standardized study protocols. Less research exists on neural changes in addition to cognitive changes due to video gaming. Existing studies reveal evidence for the involvement of similar brain regions in functional and structural changes. There seems to be a predominance in the hippocampal, prefrontal, and parietal brain regions; however, studies differ immensely, which makes a meta-analytic interpretation vulnerable. We conclude that theoretical work is urgently needed.


El efecto de los videojuegos -una forma popular de entretención- sobre la cognición y la estructura y el funcionamiento cerebral se ha centrado en el campo de la neurociencia. La cognición visoespacial y la atención parecen ser las más beneficiadas; en cambio, para las funciones ejecutivas, la memoria y la cognición general, los resultados son contradictorios. Las características específicas de los videojuegos que producen estos efectos siguen siendo poco conocidas. Se discuten de forma crítica los principales desafíos para la investigación existente, como la falta de definiciones precisas de los videojuegos, la falta de una elección clara de la capacidad cognitiva que se estudia y la falta de protocolos de estudio estandarizados. La investigación es pobre tanto para los cambios cognitivos como para los cambios neuronales que producen los videojuegos. Los estudios existentes revelan evidencia de la participación de regiones cerebrales similares para los cambios funcionales y estructurales. Aunque las regiones cerebrales hipocámpicas, prefrontales y parietales parecen estar más involucradas; los estudios difieren enormemente, lo que hace que una interpretación meta-analítica sea frágil. Se concluye que se requiere con urgencia de un adecuado trabajo teórico.

Les jeux vidéo, loisir populaire, ont attiré l’intérêt des neurosciences quant à leurs effets sur la cognition, la structure et la fonction cérébrales. Si l’attention et la cognition visuospatiales semblent en bénéficier le plus, les résultats sont contradictoires pour les fonctions exécutives, la mémoire et la cognition générale. Les caractéristiques particulières des jeux vidéo à l’origine de ces effets restent mal comprises. Nous analysons de façon critique les principales difficultés pour la recherche actuelle, c’est-à-dire le manque de définitions précises du jeu vidéo, le manque de choix clair de capacité cognitive à l’étude et le manque de protocoles d’étude standardisés. Les modifications neuronales et les modifications cognitives dues au jeu vidéo font l’objet de peu de recherche. L’hippocampe, les régions préfrontale et pariétale semblent les plus concernées. Cependant, une interprétation méta-analytique est fragilisée par la grande variabilité des études. En conclusion, il est urgent de faire un travail théorique.

Video gaming and cognition


Video gaming, as a popular, generally cognitively deman- ding form of leisure activity, has received attention in recent years in search of effective, yet affordable interventions to maintain or enhance cognitive abilities in individuals in different contexts. 1 - 6 The increasing scientific interest in video gaming as a training instrument may be driven by an inherent playfulness of video games in contrast to classical training programs, as well as substantial effects on brain structure and function within short training periods. This is the reason for reviewing the preexisting and quite heterogeneous literature on this new interventional instrument. In this article we, first, critically discuss existing methodological challenges in the field when it comes to drawing general conclusions about video gaming and cognition. We are aiming less at summarizing existing findings on the basis of existing meta-analyses and reviews once again, but rather at addressing the complex challenges when effects of video gaming are assessed in experimental setups. To learn more about specific results in detail we would like to refer the reader to existing excellent review and meta-analytic literature. 3 , 5 - 17 In the second section we turn to the effects of video gaming on brain structure and function reported in single studies, as reviews and meta-analyses are sparse.


To start with a summary, it generally has been established that video gaming has beneficial effects on cognition, eg, refs 4,5,7, but see ref 18). However, the devil is in the details. Looking closer in order to make a specific statement concerning specific cognitive domains, groups of individuals, video game genres, training intensity, and transfer effects, results are mixed. This is not only true for single studies, but, in particular also for the multitude of reviews and meta-analytic studies. Depending on the studies chosen, meta-analyses report contradictory results concerning the effects of video games, eventually leaving nearly as much room for interpretation as single empirical studies despite their good quality. It seems almost impossible to outline the effect of video gaming on cognition in a simple statement without mentioning numerous limitations. The abilities with the fewest limitations to name would, most likely, be visuospatial cognition and attention. 5 , 7 Concerning executive functioning, memory, and general cognition, results are way more complicated and are not suited for general conclusive statements. One conclusion that can be drawn from the variety of results, however, is that theoretical work is more urgently needed than yet another empirical study, however excellently conducted it might be. Instead, stepping back and taking a look from afar in order to conceptualize research, homogenize designs, and then start all over again to evaluate whether and what effects each type of video games has on cognition should be the watchword of the day. This call is less ideologic but instead pragmatic, as without a framework from which research questions and hypotheses can be derived, the interpretation of current findings and, ultimately, the understanding of underlying mechanisms, is hampered.


A major critical point in evaluating possible effects of video gaming on cognition lies in the definition of “video gaming” itself. Here, studies as well as meta-analyses and reviews do not draw on a consistent definition. “Video gaming” is only useful to broadly outline the scope of a question. However, video games comprise a multitude of very different activities and content as well as (cognitive) demands. While some studies have included “type of video game” as a moderating variable into their analyses, 11 others only included studies using narrowly defined games, for example action video games or exergames. 5 , 7 , 19 Others, again, only roughly define “video game” and include a rather broad spectrum of genres. 9 , 10 Additionally, the release date of games is important as well. Although Wang et al 7 and Bediou et al 5 both focused on narrowly defined action video games with similar underlying definitions, Bediou et al 5 excluded studies published before the year 2000, as they argue that technical development makes games from the 1980s and 1990s rather incomparable to games from 2000 on. Studies with games from before 2000 almost certainly use substantially different games, even if they formally meet the chosen definition. Hence, even studies applying similar definitions of video gaming might differ substantially due to the timespan considered. Although overall studies report a beneficial effect of the chosen video game on cognition, the exact understanding of the underlying mechanisms remains unclear. Inferences about what within a game truly drives enhancement will remain poorly understood, because gaming mechanisms cannot be isolated and experimentally manipulated in order to test effects.


Another difficulty concerns the question of the chosen cognitive domain under study. Studies differ in the specific cognitive domain they evaluate such as processing speed, memory, global cognition, executive functioning, learning, and attentional processes, and this is even true for meta-analyses and reviews. 5 , 7 - 11 Additionally, the very same constructs are defined differently across studies. While, for example, executive functioning is considered as an entity with no effects found in the study by Wang et al, 7 in Mansor et al’s 10 study it is defined and subdivided into different processes, according to Miyake et al 20 with effects on updating memory. In the study by Powers, 8 executive functions are categorized as a subdomain of information processing (for which an effect was found). In a subanalysis, executive functioning here comprises dual/multitasking, inhibition tasks, task-switching, working/short-term memory measures, intelligence tests, and executive functioning batteries resulting in negligible effects. Similar, while Sala and Gobet 18 argue that no effect can be found for general cognition, Stanmore et al 19 report a positive effect of exergames on general cognition, which is corroborated by Wang et al, 7 however, in a meta-analysis including only action video games. In yet another review, Cardoso-Leite and Bavelier 6 try to extract the effect of video gaming on attentional control as a proxy for enhancing the “ability to learn, enhance capacity for learning to learn” in children. They report effects of action video games on attentional control, but refrain from drawing general conclusions. Results cited here make it evident that, once again, generally some kind of effect on cognition is usually found, however, even on a meta-level, inferences enabling deeper understanding of underlying mechanisms are impossible. As an aside, if this is even evident on a meta-analytic level, we do not dare to discuss the tremendous heterogeneity und concomitant difficulty of operationalization issues on specific study levels (eg, cognitive domain under study, instruments chosen for assessment of domain, chosen video game to affect cognitive domain).


A third major challenge is inherent in the design of those studies and was raised by Green et al. 21 In an experimental setting, effects are evaluated in comparison with a specific control group. It is design immanent that effects are found and conditionally interpreted based on the (null)effects of the control group. However, depending on the control group chosen, a range of results are possible. There is no standardized approach which is generally applied. Reviews and meta-analyses differ in which studies they include as reference. Bediou et al 5 exclusively focused on studies that contrasted their action-game training group against an active control group, playing commercially available non-action games. Mansor et al, 10 on the other hand, explicitly excluded studies with an active gaming control group, resulting in a completely different selection of studies, yet both aiming at analyzing the effects of video gaming on cognition. In yet another meta-analysis, Wang et al, 7 only excluded studies with no control group at all. Although all meta-analyses report an overall moderate positive effect of gaming on cognition, inferences across studies contributing to understanding the underlying mechanisms of how and why effects are found are not warranted, as this would be like comparing apples and oranges. No one-fits-all solution exists for the choice of a control group; pro and con arguments can be found depending on the specific research question. However, coming full circle, with a basically mutually exclusive selection of studies, inferences must remain on a descriptive level instead of contributing to a deeper understanding of the how and why.


We consider the points discussed, that is, definition of video game, cognitive domain chosen, and control group, as crucial challenges, however, we would like to draw attention to yet another set of variables that make the interpretation of the results of existing reviews and meta-analyses difficult, as they differ between studies and their unique contribution has not yet been understood. Age, gender, and even education might influence results and, hence, render considerate sampling mandatory. Additionally, duration and frequency of training in an intervention study as well as differentiating between habitual players and novices needs careful consideration when designing and interpreting (quasi-)experimental studies.


Our points risen are neither new nor unacknowledged per se. Interestingly, existing meta-analytic literature not only contributes to the uncertainty, but also acknowledges the fact that the lack of theoretical framework and a standardized experimental protocol impedes interpretation, inferences and, in the end, accumulation of scientific knowledge (eg, ref 5). Nevertheless, up-to-date, intensified work on theoretical framework is only very slowly beginning, 22 and mainly still rather seems to generate study after study. The points risen do, also, not primarily pertain to reviews and meta-analyses, but need to be addressed at a study level. That they become visible in meta-analytic literature makes the problem only more distinct, and strongly emphasizes the call for standardized protocols as it underlines that it is not a problem of single studies but rather inherent in the system.


Video gaming and cognition at a brain structural and functional level


The reported potential improvements in cognitive domains after training with video games are accompanied and potentially caused by underlying changes in brain function and brain structure. However, at present, even less research has been conducted focusing on neural changes in addition to cognitive changes due to video game play. Only a single review on this topic has recently been published. 23 This review (in total covering n =116 articles) includes both cross-sectional designs in which habitual gamers are compared with participants who never or only seldom play video games and longitudinal intervention designs in which a randomized group is trained with a given video game and a control group is not. Moreover, it includes studies on video game-addicted populations. Here again, the challenge of the chosen control group becomes evident as effects cannot be attributed causally due to the tremendous heterogeneity of references chosen. The general conclusion might be along the lines of “video gaming has an effect on brain structure and function,” although the underlying mechanisms that drive these effects might not be inferred. To start with, including studies in reviews differing in design does have its place, but needs to be supplemented by studies or reviews allowing for more causal inferences on the long run. Nevertheless, it seems that in brain regions particularly related to attention and to visual spatial skills, an improvement in terms of brain function and brain structure due to video game training can be observed.


In the present review we would like to focus on longitudinal intervention studies, as causal effects of video gaming can only be inferred from designs in which brain function or structure is compared before and after a randomly assigned training intervention. Moreover, we would like to exclude studies on problem gamers or video game addiction, since our first goal is to understand the effects of video game exposure in the healthy population and in response to a moderate dosage of game play. We also excluded studies in which the immediate effects of acute video game exposure were investigated, that is, where participants were asked to play for a time frame of minutes to hours until changes were assessed. Based on these criteria we included 22 studies 24 - 45 (Table I) . However, it should be noted that multiple studies draw on the same sample of participants (eg, refs 29, 32, 36) all resulting from one study. All (n=8) 25 , 26 , 29 , 31 , 33 , 41 , 42 , 44 but one study 43 on brain structural changes over time showed increases in different brain regions, with a clustering of results on growth in prefrontal and temporal brain regions (especially hippocampus). The exception is a very recent paper showing that, generally, increases in hippocampus can be observed after training with a 3D platformer game, however, with differential results being found after training with action video games, depending on the navigation strategy of the participants (with response learners showing decreases of hippocampal volume, whereas spatial learners show increases). 44 In contrast, of the 15 studies focusing on brain functional changes, 7 23 , 24 , 30 , 32 , 37 , 38 , 40 report exclusive increases in brain function, be it measured at rest or during a task-based design; the other 8 27 - 29 , 33 - 36 , 39 studies report only or also decreases in brain function. Results are inconsistent or even contradictory, however. Due to differences in study design and chosen intervention, the results cannot be interpreted and integrated across studies with final conclusions drawn from them. There seems to be a strong preponderance of reported decreases of brain function in studies in which the task performed during measurement was closely related to the video game that was actually trained (n=6) 2 , 9 , 30 , 34 , 35 , 37 , 40 The direction of these results – namely decreases in brain activity due to training when the trained task is performed – are in line with previous studies on classical cognitive training in which the training tasks consist of adaptations of neuropsychological test batteries and where brain activity was measured before and after a considerable interval of training in exactly the trained task. 46 - 48 However, also in the later field some studies only report increases. 49 These inconsistencies could be due to the fact that the training duration and intensity differs across studies. Additionally, gains, measured by means of performance, and brain functional or structural changes are most likely not linear therefore this research field requires more studies with multiple measurement occasions so that the nonlinear trajectories of change can be observed. We have recently gathered evidence that not only may brain functional changes over the course of training show an inverted U-shape pattern, 46 but also brain structure (in this case examined during a motor training intervention), 50 showing initial increases after short-term training but decreases over longer training intervals. These first results once again strengthen the call for a theoretical framework, in which trajectories might be outlined and can then be tested in a strictly standardized research protocol.


In general, the existing studies on video game training-related brain changes that measure and report functional and structural brain data at the same time seem to reveal evidence for the involvement of similar brain regions in functional and structural changes. 29 , 30 However, it is difficult to conclude from the existing pool of studies whether brain changes observed across different studies occur at comparable locations in the brain. There seems to be a precedence of change observed in hippocampus, prefrontal, and parietal brain regions; however, the studies use very different genres of video games for training, which makes a meta-analytic interpretation of the brain regions that reveal changes very vulnerable. Since multiple studies use the video games Space Fortress or a 3D version of Super Mario for training, a continuous focus on these games is warranted and may then soon allow formal quantitative meta-analyses on the resulting brain changes. Moreover, the field desperately needs studies contrasting the behavioral and neural effects of video game training between different game genres. A first study to undertake this approach with a focus on brain structural alterations in the hippocampus compared the genres 3D platformer, action, and role play video games. 44 The authors report increases in hippocampal volume in response to 3D platformer training and decreases in response to role play game training, but most importantly they identify differential effects in particular for action video games when considering interindividual differences in navigation strategy. That is, depending on the individual’s navigation strategy applied in the video game, effects are either positive or negative with respect to hippocampal volume. This study paves the way to more targeted studies on the effects of video games, focusing on the exact working mechanisms. For the purpose of recommendations to the general public on which video games may be beneficial or detrimental in terms of brain health a comparison of different video game genres may be of interest. In order to identify and understand the exact game elements that cause specific neural changes more systematic studies are required. Here it would be helpful to compare training effects of several video games from a single genre with systematic variation of its separate elements (eg, 2D vs 3D navigation, first-person vs third-person perspective, presence vs absence of reward schedules). However, for this purpose either existing commercial video games would need to be adapted, or the focus would have to be put onto custom-made video games. When looking at the studies conducted on brain structural and/or functional changes, it becomes evident that meta-analytic inferences that causally link brain structure and function to specific cognitive abilities that are all effected by specific video game training intervention is not possible according to the multitude of current studies, however well-conducted each and every one might be. Important first steps have been made in order to understand the effects of video gaming; however, future research is needed to unravel the secret of the true underlying mechanisms and relations.


Conclusions


Based on the discussion of the results and studies above, we conclude that inferences will continue to alternate between the general notion of an effect of video gaming on cognition and related brain structure and function, and the inability to make specific recommendations in the field of specific therapeutic use or detailed analyses of underlying mechanisms, structures, and processes in the brain. Although disappointing for some, for the sake of accuracy, to date there seems to be no other option than being specific. This is especially important in practical settings, in which video gaming is used therapeutically. To date, therapeutic use of video games has not been based on strong scientific evidence besides the general notion that somehow, some video games have some beneficial effects on cognition in some individuals. Also, transferring exact experimental settings with clinical samples into real patient treatment might work - however, not on the basis of truly understanding the underlying mechanisms, but rather replicating a finding on descriptive level. Put that way, the need for standardized research protocols and theoretical frameworks against which hypotheses can be tested becomes clearly evident, analogous to the idea that a statement like “diseases can be cured” as a guiding principle for specific medical treatment of a specific disease in a specific group of patients could never be sufficient. A first important step was undertaken by Green and colleagues, aimed at establishing methodological guidelines for interventions for cognitive enhancement. 21 , 22 However, until this aspiration is fully met, recommendations concerning specific practical use in clinical settings or general application must be waived. As a closing remark we would like to draw attention to the fact that, besides criticizing the lack of knowledge concerning the underlying mechanisms, we state that video gaming has beneficial effects on cognition that are reflected in brain structure and function. However, even this must be considered differentially 44 and with caution until underlying mechanisms are truly and causally understood. Cognition, nevertheless, is only one aspect of well-being that needs to be considered when looking at “the big picture.” Possible other consequences on social, emotional, or physical well-being remain unconsidered in the present article. Nevertheless, they are important aspects to be taken into account when evaluating the overall value of video gaming. 51 - 54 


Acknowledgments

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. SK has been funded by two grants from the German Science Foundation (DFG KU 3322/1-1, SFB 936/C7), the European Union (ERC-2016-StG-Self-Control-677804), and a Fellowship from the Jacobs Foundation (JRF 2016-2018).

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Humor & Fun

Playing video games could boost brain function in children, suggests new study.

Vincent Acovino

Patrick Jarenwattananon

Juana Summers

NPR's Juana Summers talks to University of Vermont professor Bader Chaarani about why playing video games might actually have some positive effects on a child's cognition.

Copyright © 2022 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Intelligence

Can popular video games improve intelligence and iq, 3 tips to boost intelligence and executive functions with video games..

Posted May 24, 2022 | Reviewed by Michelle Quirk

• A recent study in "Scientific Reports" indicates that playing more video games was associated with gains in intelligence.
• Time spent on social media and passive screen time were not associated with any gains in intelligence.
• Practical, real world gains from video games require a more deliberate, intentional use of gaming that uses strategies to promote generalization.

Does your child spend hours playing Minecraft, Roblox, or Fortnite? Is it a complete waste of time? Probably not, according to a recent study published in Scientific Reports . The authors of this important new research conclude that children who played more video games at the age of 10 showed the greatest gains in intelligence and other cognitive skills at the age of 12. This study measured intelligence by assessing reading comprehension, vocabulary, executive functioning , attention , visual-spatial processing, and the capacity to learn over repeated trials. Essentially, kids who played more video games improved their intelligence and IQ scores. Interestingly, watching videos and involvement with social media did not have any positive impact on intelligence in this study. The study essentially stated that video games can make you smarter.

This study should be viewed with the understanding that kids are spending a lot of time playing video games and on their screens. Teens are spending nearly nine hours per day using video games, apps, social media, and other technologies. While some of this time is for school or research, most kids are spending almost four hours per day engaged in recreational screen use. Some of this is time is spent passively watching YouTube videos or bingeing on Netflix. These activities, according to the Scientific Reports study, may actually be related to lower levels of intelligence and cognitive functioning. Most of the remainder of recreational screen time is not shoot 'em up gameplay. Instead, most gaming is cognitively challenging using skills such as planning, organization, flexibility, and self-control , and the reason that your kids may learn from popular video gameplay.

From my perspective as a psychologist, the unleveraged brainpower required to beat video games could serve another purpose. After all, the best games—the ones kids want to play—are not easy and require problem-solving, critical thinking, and executive functioning skills. You need to use your brain! Because the popular games are fun, players are motivated to challenge themselves to reach new and higher levels and to use a variety of neurocognitive skills to get there. Cognitive skills such as multiple object tracking and resistance to visual interference are used in response to game demands and are among the many cognitive skills that may improve with gameplay. Evidence that gameplay improves cognitive functioning derives primarily from studies of action-based games where these skills are challenged. These cognitive changes essentially result from the engaging and repetitive exercise of specific brain-based skills.

Using Metacognition

However, there is a more powerful way to translate game time into improved cognitive skills. It’s a bit more work and requires the deliberate intention to learn from gameplay. This approach requires the use of metacognition , or "thinking about thinking." Metacognition is widely accepted as the single most important component of applied learning. Video game players who think about their gameplay, deliberately consider their game actions, and respond to game feedback are using skills that they can apply in the real world. This approach may be better suited for strategy, puzzle, sandbox, simulation, and role-playing games (RPGs) since these games directly demand the use of critical thinking and problem-solving.

3 Tips to Boost Intelligence and Executive Functions With Video Games

Video games provide a powerful opportunity for learning because of the level of children's attention, persistence, and resistance to frustration. The addition of these three additional steps is crucial to making game-based learning into real-world skills. These steps sound simple, but they require that gamers either intentionally take these actions or are guided in how to do so. They are based upon well-regarded, evidence-based research on teaching children with learning differences.

These three simple steps (detect, reflect, and connect) make intuitive sense to students, can also be applied to non–screen-based learning, and are easy to remember. If you want to learn something, you have to pay attention or identify (detect) what you are trying to learn, recognize and think about (reflect) how it is helpful, and then learn to use or apply (connect) this knowledge to many situations.

At its core, detect, reflect, and connect are the basis for the transfer or generalization of learning. Children learn real-world skills by being able to identify the skills they are using and then practice and use these skills in another setting. These types of skills are not robotic, automatic, or a simple response to a stimulus but are the skills necessary for children growing up in the 21st century.

The "detect" component is about identifying the skill. Some students readily see when they are using a specific soft skill and how it helps them. For example, children who organize their backpacks before starting homework recognize that this will help them find and complete all their work. Many others would need instruction in order to identify skills that may have helped them in the past. Before they can know how to use a skill in a new area, they need to be able to identify, or “detect,” when they used it successfully in the past.

The "reflect" step helps with evaluating decision-making and actions. This is a cognitive process that requires youngsters to assess how a skill has helped them in previous settings and how it might help them in other situations. Reflection helps with looking at the components of the skill, determining when it was applied, and making the connection with how those skills were effective in solving a particular problem. The action of the "reflect" step also involves the capacity to be flexible and learn from mistakes. Individuals who “reflect” use a metacognitive or “thinking about one's thinking” approach. Metacognition has been identified across dozens of studies as one of the most significant tools for learning, performing well on tests, and retaining knowledge.

The "connect" step facilitates the use of the acquired skill in a variety of situations. One of the biggest shortcomings of many learning opportunities is the inability of learners to take what they have learned in one situation and apply it to another. This application requires practice. The "connect" step helps people to take something they learned in one situation and use it effectively in another. Parents and educators often forget that the "connect" step is most effective when they guide kids in applying it in new settings.

Berard, A. V., Cain, M. S., Watanabe, T., & Sasaki, Y. (2015, March 25). Frequent video game players resist Perceptual Interference. PLOS ONE. Retrieved May 23, 2022, from https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.012…

Merrill, M. D. (2019, August 14). First principles of instruction. Retrieved May 23, 2022, from https://mdavidmerrill.wordpress.com/publications/first-principles-of-in…

Sauce, B., Liebherr, M., Judd, N., & Klingberg, T. (2022). The impact of digital media on Children’s intelligence while controlling for genetic differences in cognition and socioeconomic background. Sci Rep, 12. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/jtwk7

Veenman, M. V., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0

Randy Kulman, Ph.D. , is a child clinical psychologist, parent of 5, and founder of LearningWorks for Kids. He is the author of Train Your Brain for Success and Playing Smarter in a Digital World .

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Do Video Games Improve Cognitive Performance?

Photo:  Credit Pressmaster / Shutterstock

A study of nearly 2,000 children found that those who reported playing video games for three hours per day or more performed better on cognitive skills tests involving impulse control and working memory compared to children who had never played video games. Published in JAMA Network Open , this study analyzed data from the ongoing Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study, supported by NIDA.

“Numerous studies have linked video gaming to behavior and mental health problems,” said NIDA director Dr. Nora Volkow. “This study suggests there may also be cognitive benefits associated with this popular pastime, which are worthy of further investigation.”

Scientists at the University of Vermont, Burlington, analyzed data obtained when children entered the ABCD Study at ages 9 and 10 years old. The research team examined survey, cognitive and brain imaging data from nearly 2,000 participants from within the bigger study cohort. 

The three-hour threshold was selected as it exceeds the American Academy of Pediatrics screen-time guidelines, which recommend that video gaming time be limited to one to two hours per day for older children. 

Investigators found that the children who reported playing video games for three or more hours daily were faster and more accurate on cognitive tasks than those who never played. 

In the gamer group, functional MRI brain imaging analyses found higher brain activity in regions of the brain associated with attention and memory. This group also had more brain activity in frontal brain regions associated with more cognitively demanding tasks and less brain activity in brain regions related to vision. 

While prior studies have reported associations between video gaming and increases in depression, violence and aggressive behavior, this study did not find that to be the case. There were reports of higher mental health and behavioral issues in this cohort but the authors could not confirm whether this trend reflected a true association or chance. They note this will be an important measure to continue to track and understand as these children mature.

The NIH Record

The NIH Record , founded in 1949, is the biweekly newsletter for employees of the National Institutes of Health.

Published 25 times each year, it comes out on payday Fridays.

Associate Editor: Dana Talesnik [email protected] (link sends e-mail)

Assistant Editor: Eric Bock [email protected] (link sends e-mail)

Staff Writer: Amber Snyder [email protected] (link sends e-mail)

• NIH Record Home
• Current Issue
• Past Issues
• Submission Deadlines
• Privacy Policy
• Disclaimers
• Accessibility
• Freedom of Information Act
• No Fear Act
• HHS Vulnerability Disclosure
• Office of Inspector General
• '' Subscribe
• '' Facebook

NIH…Turning Discovery Into Health ®

National Institutes of Health 9000 Rockville Pike

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (link is external)

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 14 October 2021

Action video game play facilitates “learning to learn”

• Ru-Yuan Zhang 1 , 2 , 3   na1 ,
• Adrien Chopin 4 , 5 , 6   na1 ,
• Kengo Shibata 4 , 5 ,
• Zhong-Lin Lu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7295-727X 7 , 8 , 9 ,
• Susanne M. Jaeggi 10 ,
• Martin Buschkuehl 11 ,
• C. Shawn Green   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9290-0262 12 &
• Daphne Bavelier 4 , 5  

Communications Biology volume  4 , Article number:  1154 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

14k Accesses

24 Citations

61 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Cognitive control
• Human behaviour

An Author Correction to this article was published on 07 December 2021

This article has been updated

Previous work has demonstrated that action video game training produces enhancements in a wide range of cognitive abilities. Here we evaluate a possible mechanism by which such breadth of enhancement could be attained: that action game training enhances learning rates in new tasks (i.e., “learning to learn”). In an initial controlled intervention study, we show that individuals who were trained on action video games subsequently exhibited faster learning in the two cognitive domains that we tested, perception and working memory, as compared to individuals who trained on non-action games. We further confirmed the causal effect of action video game play on learning ability in a pre-registered follow-up study that included a larger number of participants, blinding, and measurements of participant expectations. Together, this work highlights enhanced learning speed for novel tasks as a mechanism through which action video game interventions may broadly improve task performance in the cognitive domain.

Similar content being viewed by others

Novel 3-D action video game mechanics reveal differentiable cognitive constructs in young players, but not in old

Mechanisms underlying training-induced cognitive change

Comparing models of learning and relearning in large-scale cognitive training data sets

Introduction.

A growing body of research indicates that training on action video games enhances performance, not just on the games themselves, but in a wide range of cognitive tasks (see meta-analyses in ref. 1 ). The broad generalization of skills generated by action video game play stands in contrast to the benefits induced by many conventional lab-based perceptual/cognitive training paradigms, which are often specific to trained features. For example, the benefits of perceptual training often disappear when minor changes are made to the trained stimulus, such as its orientation or position 2 , 3 , 4 .

The mechanisms underlying how learning generalizes from trained to untrained contexts is a fundamental issue in the study of learning. Starting from the seminal studies of Thorndike at the turn of the 20th century 5 , a number of distinct mechanisms that may promote broad performance improvements have been suggested. One such mechanism, termed “learning to learn” 6 , is at play when information or skills gained by experience on one task (or set of tasks) permits individuals to learn new tasks faster. Such a mechanism has been of interest in a variety of learning domains, including perceptual learning and novel shape categorization 7 , education 8 , and machine learning 9 . It has also recently been proposed as a possible route through which action video game play produces broad generalization 10 . According to this view, action video game training produces widespread cognitive enhancements at least partially by enhancing the players’ ability to learn new tasks, and, more specifically, by producing improvements in the ability to quickly extract task-relevant properties (e.g., templates for targets of interest or the timing of events).

Consistent with this framework, a few studies point to more efficient learning in habitual action video game players as compared to non-action video gamers on perceptual tasks 11 , 12 , 13 . However, these studies were cross-sectional (i.e., comparing individuals who choose to play action video games as part of their daily life against individuals who choose to seldom play video games). Therefore, they could not speak to whether a causal relationship exists between the act of playing action video games and faster learning. Furthermore, one of the key predictions based on the “learning to learn” framework is that its benefits should extend beyond the perceptual sub-domain. However, no work has examined whether such faster learning extends to domains other than learning in the perceptual domain. Here we directly assessed the hypothesis that action video game experience results in “learning to learn” in the context of both a “lower-level” perceptual learning task (a Gabor orientation discrimination task which we refer to below as the “orientation learning task”) and a “higher-level” cognitive learning task (a dual N -back task which we refer to below as the “working memory learning task”). A working memory learning task was chosen partially because such tasks are known to involve a number of core constituents of executive function, such as the maintenance of information and distraction inhibition 14 , 15 , 16 . Because individual differences in such functions predict a host of real-world outcomes (e.g., academic and job-related success, see refs. 17 , 18 ), and act as key behavioral markers of several psychiatric disorders 19 , 20 , methods to improve such functions may have significant translational utility.

Here we report the results of two intervention studies conducted at two distinct geographic locations, investigating whether action video game experience improves the ability to learn new tasks. The first study was a small-scale ( N  = 25) initial intervention study, while the second was a larger-scale pre-registered replication intervention study ( N  = 52) that extended the first study by implementing a number of methodological improvements such as experimenter blinding and assessments of participant expectations.

To summarize, we show that individuals who were trained on action video games subsequently exhibited faster learning in the two cognitive domains that we tested, as compared to individuals who trained on non-action games. In the follow-up study, we confirmed that the causal effect of action video game play on learning ability is not due to participant’s attention control, expectations, intrinsic motivation or flow state during the intervention.

Study 1—initial intervention study, establishing the causal impact of action video game play on “learning to learn” across cognitive domains

We investigated whether action video gaming facilitates “learning to learn” by selecting two representative learning tasks in cognitive science—an orientation learning task (perceptual, Fig.  1b ) and a working memory learning task (cognitive, Fig.  1d ). On both tasks, cross-sectional work has shown that habitual action video game players learn the tasks faster than non-video game players (orientation learning task data published in ref. 11 ; cross-sectional study using the working memory learning task, presented here in  Supplementary Notes   1 and 4 , Supplementary Fig.  S1 ). In order to assess whether this observed relation between action video game play and improved learning of new tasks is causal, we conducted two long-term intervention studies. In the initial intervention study, 33 participants were recruited at the University of Rochester and randomly assigned to play either a set of 3 action video games ( n  = 18) or a set of 3 control video games ( n  = 15) for 45 h (15 h per game). A total of 25 participants (14 in the action video game group and 11 in the control group) completed the initial intervention study. In order to assess the impact of training on learning abilities, all participants underwent a baseline motion learning task before training (to establish that no pre-existing differences in perceptual learning rate were seen between the randomly assigned groups), and then an orientation learning task (perceptual) and a working memory learning task (cognitive) after training (see Fig.  1 ). To quantify group differences on the learning tasks, we performed a hierarchical Bayesian analysis separately for each task. The learning curves for the orientation learning and the baseline motion learning tasks (Fig.  1c ) were modeled as a power function of training sessions with three free parameters: initial performance, final performance, and learning rate (adapted from ref. 21 ). The learning curve for the working memory learning task at post-training was modeled as a linear function with two free parameters (Fig.  1e ): learning rate (slope) and initial performance (intercept).

a illustrates the design of the protocol employed in both the initial (Study 1) and the replication (Study 2) intervention studies. During a pre-test, participants were assessed on a baseline motion learning task (perceptual), an attentional control task, and a baseline N -back task (Fig.  S1A for additional task detail). Participants were then randomly assigned to one of two training groups – the action video game training group or the control video game training group. In each group, participants underwent three games each of 15 h. After a 45-h video game intervention, participants were assessed at post-test on the same attentional control task and baseline N -back task administered at pre-test, followed by an orientation learning task ( b ) and a working memory learning task ( d ). In the orientation learning task ( b ), participants were presented with a Gabor stimulus in one of four quadrants of the screen, and the Gabor stimulus was preceded and followed by two noise patterns. Participants pressed a button to report the direction of rotation (i.e., clockwise or counterclockwise) relative to a reference angle. In the working memory learning task ( d ), participants monitored two streams of simultaneously presented information – one auditory (letters) and one visual (blue squares) stimuli. They were asked to indicate, for each stream, whether the current stimulus matched the stimulus presented N trials back in their respective sequences ( N =2 in the provided example). Stimuli marked by an arrow indicate targets, either because of a visual or an auditory match. We modeled the learning curve in the orientation learning task ( b ) as a power function with three parameters—learning rate ( ρ ), initial performance ( λ ), and final performance ( α ). The different curves in ( c ) illustrate the impact of different values of the learning rate parameter ( ρ ), as each curve has the same initial performance and final performance values, but different learning rates. Note that a learning rate of −1 corresponds to a linear progression, while values increasing from −1 to +infinity correspond to progressively steeper learning curves. The learning curve in the working memory learning task ( d ) was modeled as a linear function with two free parameters—slope ( a ) and intercept ( b ). The different curves in ( e ) have the same initial performance (i.e., intercept b ) but different learning rates (i.e., slope a ). “Learning to learn” predicts learning curves with steeper slopes at post-training in the action video game training group as compared to the control video game training group.

We first confirmed that the two training groups had comparable perceptual learning performance before video game training. In the baseline motion learning task at pre-test, none of the three estimated parameters differed between the groups (learning rate, t (23) = 0.29, p  = 0.77, Hedge’s g  = 0.12, BF 01  = 2.62; final performance, t (23) = 0.03, p  = 0.98, Hedge’s g  = 0.01, BF 01  = 2.704; initial performance, t (23) = 1.91, p  = 0.07, Hedge’s g  = 0.77, BF 01  = 0.751). The two groups also had comparable performance in the baseline N -back task ( t (23) = 0.98, p  = 0.34, Hedge’s g  = 0.41, BF 01  = 1.91; Supplementary Fig.  S2 ).

We then tested our core hypothesis that the action-trained video game group would show faster learning than the control-trained video game group following training. Consistent with the “learning to learn” hypothesis, action video game trainees showed higher learning rates than control video game trainees in the orientation learning task (Fig.  2a, b ; t (23) = 2.16, p  = 0.041, Hedge’s g  = 0.91, BF 01  = 0.536). Action video game trainees also performed better from the start on this task (Fig.  2c ; t (23) = 2.27, p  = 0.033, Hedge’s g  = 0.95, BF 01  = 0.458). However, there was no significant group difference in the estimated final performance, suggesting the two groups eventually reached equal performance (Fig.  2d ; t (23) = 1.95, p  = 0.064, Hedge’s g  = 0.82, BF 01  = 0.713). The action video game group also showed a higher learning rate than the control group in the working memory learning task (Fig.  2e, f ; t (23) = 4.42, p  = 0.0002, Hedge’s g  = 1.85, BF 01  = 0.009). Initial performance as measured by the intercept parameter was not statistically different between the two groups (Fig.  2g ; t (23) = 0.93, p  = 0.363, Hedge’s g  = 0.39, BF 01  = 1.974).

( a ) shows the impact of video game training on the orientation learning task (lower contrast thresholds represent better performance), while ( e ) shows the impact of video game training on the working memory learning task (higher N -back levels represent better performance). In ( a , e ), the dashed and solid lines are learning curves plotted using the group averaged estimated parameters (i.e., b – d , f , g ). The upper and lower bounds of the shaded area are learning curves plotted using the values of the group mean ± S.E.M. The same conventions are used in Fig.  3 and Fig.  S1 . Estimated learning parameters in the orientation learning task ( b – d) and the working memory learning task ( f – g ) confirm higher learning rates ( b , f) in the action video game trainees compared with the control video game trainees. Note that the learning rates in the orientation learning task are plotted against the baseline of −1 instead of 0 because −1 indicates a linear learning progression (see Fig.  1c ). Values varying from −1 to +infinity (or -infinity) indicate faster (respectively, slower) learning. All error bars are S.E.M. across participants. Significance conventions are * p  < 0.05; ** p  < 0.01; *** p  < 0.001. Black and gray circles correspond to each participant individual data. These conventions are kept for all figures in this paper.

These results are consistent with the view that action video game training facilitates “learning to learn”. In other words, playing action video games improves the speed of future learning to a greater degree as compared to control games.

Study 2—replication intervention study, larger-scale pre-registered follow-up of enhanced “learning to learn”

A number of methodological concerns ranging from small sample sizes to lack of experimenter blinding have recently been raised in the field of cognitive training 22 , 23 . To address these concerns, we thus sought to replicate the findings above using a similar protocol as the initial intervention study, but with a number of methodological improvements. First, we used a larger sample—69 participants were recruited at the University of Geneva, with 52 who completed the full study (27 in the action video game group and 25 in the control group). Second, the experimenters who collected participant data at the pre- and post-tests were blinded to participants’ group assignments. The participants were also blinded to the purpose of the study/intent of their assigned condition, as well as to the existence of any condition other than their own. Additionally, this replication study was pre-registered on an open science platform ( https://osf.io/629yx ) and the methods were executed according to the pre-registered plan, except for one aspect of the data analysis where the observed structure of the final observed dataset necessitated a divergence from the pre-registered analysis. Specifically, the pre-registered analysis was a 2(training group: action/control) × 2(time: pre-test/post-test) repeated measures ANOVA based upon the expectation that perceptual learning performance at pre-test (i.e., the baseline motion learning task) and post-test (i.e., the orientation learning task) would correlate (and thus could be considered as “repeated measures” of a common construct). Such a correlation between the two tasks was not observed (Supplementary Note  3 ). Given that the data violated the assumptions inherent in the pre-registered analysis, we instead opted to conduct a t-test on post-test measures only (i.e., the same analysis that was reported for the initial intervention study above; note that we nonetheless report the pre-registered analysis in Supplementary Note  3 to ensure compliance with our preregistration).

The same hierarchical Bayesian analysis used in the initial intervention study was applied to the data of the replication intervention study. We first confirmed that the two groups did not differ in the learning rates in the baseline motion learning task at pre-test ( t (49) = 0.11, p  = 0.92, Hedge’s g  = 0.03, BF 01  = 3.54) or in terms of final performance ( t (49) = 1.0, p  = 0.32, Hedge’s g  = 0.29, BF 01  = 2.36; Supplementary Fig.  S2 ). The two groups, however, were not perfectly matched at pre-test, as the action video game group exhibited better initial performance than the control group (Supplementary Fig.  S2 ; t (49) = 2.07, p  = 0.04, Hedge’s g  = 0.59, BF 01  = 0.64). We did not observe significant differences in the baseline N -back task prior to training ( t (50) = 0.92, p  = 0.36, Hedge’s g  = 0.26, BF 01  = 2.53).

Similar to Fig.  2 , ( a ) shows the impact of video game training on the orientation learning task, while ( e ) shows the impact of video game training on the working memory learning task. In both orientation ( b – d) and working memory learning ( f , g ) tasks, higher learning rates were observed in the action video game group compared with the control video game group ( b , f ). All error bars are S.E.M. across participants.

Consistent with the results of our initial study, after training, the action video game group showed significantly faster learning, as quantified by the learning rate parameter, compared to the control group in the orientation learning task (Fig.  3a, b ; t (50) = 2.95, p  = 0.005, Hedge’s g  = 0.83, BF 01  = 0.117). Parameter fits of initial and final performance were not significantly different across groups (Fig.  3c, d ; initial performance: t (50) = 0.03, p  = 0.974, Hedge’s g  = 0.02, BF 01  = 3.59; final performance: t (50) = 0.07, p  = 0.942, Hedge’s g  = 0.01, BF 01  = 3.584). The same outcome was found in the working memory learning task, where the action video game group showed a higher learning rate than the control group (Fig.  3e, f ; t (50) = 4.06, p  < 0.001, Hedge’s g  = 1.15, BF 01  = 0.007) with the same initial performance (Fig.  3g ; t (50) = 0.7, p  = 0.49, Hedge’s g  = 0.2, BF 01  = 2.941).

This replication substantiates the effects of action video games in enhancing “learning to learn”.

Controlling for the role of expectations in behavioral intervention studies

We next sought to examine the role of participant expectations and whether these could explain any of our results. Indeed, unequal game commitment or differences in expectations have been recently raised as possible confounds in video game training studies 22 , 24 , 25 . The design of the replication intervention study controlled for experimenters’ expectations but not necessarily for the participants’ expectations. Indeed, although the currently recognized best practices with respect to participant blinding in behavioral experiments were employed in the replication study (i.e., participants were not made aware of either the intent of their training or the presence of another training group), it is still necessarily the case that participants were aware of their actual video game experiences. As such, it is possible that they could have formed expectations with respect to the type of games that they played 23 . To examine whether such possibilities could have had an impact on our results, we administered a debriefing questionnaire to assess participants’ motivations and expectations at the completion of the initial intervention study. In the replication intervention study, a similar expectation questionnaire based on ref. 26 was administered, this time before the start of the intervention, but after having been introduced to their training game.

In the initial intervention study, we tested the subjects’ belief that learning improvements, or performance on each pre- and post-test task, were induced by or related to their respective assigned games. The proportions of specific responses to the questionnaire were compared between groups. Importantly, we found no significant group differences in such expectations about the two learning tasks (Fisher’s exact test, orientation learning, p  = 0.24, φ = 0.28, working memory learning, p  = 0.21, φ = 0.33; Supplementary Note  2 ). Such a result fails to support the contention that any observed differences in learning rates were caused by differences in expectation.

In the replication intervention study, we assessed participants’ expectations regarding the possible effects of training with their assigned video games in a variety of domains. Of primary interest here were expectations regarding the impact of training on their cognitive ability (the other domains assessed were mood, work productivity, and physical fitness; details in Supplementary Note  3 ). Participants self-reported their beliefs on the effects of the intervention on a Likert scale. Unlike in the initial study, a significant group difference was observed with regard to the expected impact on their cognitive ability. The individuals in the action group indicated a stronger expectation of improvement in cognitive ability as a result of playing their assigned game than did the individuals in the control group (t-test, t (50) = 3.27, p  = 0.002, Hedge’s g  = 0.91, BF 01  = 0.06). Given such a group difference in expectations, we then probed whether the expectations could potentially explain individual differences in the actual outcomes of interest by correlating expectations with learning rates at post-test. No significant correlations were found between expectations of cognition and actual learning rates (orientation learning task: r  = 0.08, p  = 0.67 in the action video game group, r  = −0.04, p  = 0.85 in the control video game group; working memory learning task: r  = −0.32, p  = 0.10 in the action video game group, r  = −0.06, p  = 0.76 in the control video game group). Finally, neither the nature of the motivation to play nor the presence of a flow state during gaming was associated with a faster learning rate at post-test (Supplementary Note  3 ). Taken together, our data do not provide evidence for the possibility that group differences in expectations induced the observed benefits of “learning to learn”.

Consistent with the “learning to learn” hypothesis, we found that action video game play induces higher learning rates on novel tasks in both lower-level perceptual and higher-level cognitive domains. The effects were consistent across two separate controlled intervention studies—an initial intervention study and a pre-registered replication intervention study. Evidence for such “learning to learn” invites a possible re-interpretation of a number of results in the literature on action video games. Specifically, the variety of cognitive domains impacted by action video game play may reflect the facilitation of learning new tasks within these domains, rather than heightened skill levels across all these domains from the outset. While the focus in much of the cognitive training literature to date has been on inducing immediate transfer, our results suggest that the capacity to learn to perform new tasks may be a useful and complementary target for future cognitive training studies.

Our work further speaks to a number of recent critiques questioning whether the positive effects of action video games observed in the literature to date are due to confounding factors, such as participant or experimenter expectations 24 , 27 , 28 . Here we followed several recommendations put forward in these critiques, such as experimenter blinding, participant blinding to conditions other than their own, and assessments of participant expectations. In particular, while participants did in some cases indicate expectations regarding the possible cognitive impact of their training conditions, these expectations were found to be unrelated to the actual learning improvements in the cognitive task used. Furthermore, we followed our pre-registered methodology, except for one analysis that diverged. This divergence highlights a key difficulty that is inherent to assessing the impact of training on learning rates in new tasks—namely that different learning tasks must be employed at pre- and post-tests to be considered novel tasks. While our expectation was that learning performance on the perceptual learning tasks at pre- and post-tests would be reasonably well correlated, this was not in fact the case. As such, although the groups were matched in terms of learning rate on the pre-test measure, it is impossible to confirm that they would have been similarly matched on the post-test measure in the absence of any training. A possible way forward to address this difficult methodological issue could be to more systematically include a no-training control, test-retest group in all training studies, as discussed in ref. 23 .

The increased learning rate that we report is indicative of “learning to learn” as a consequence of action video game training; yet, one intriguing question concerns the cognitive constructs underlying this mechanism. We did not find consistent and conclusive evidence supporting the role of (i) attention control (measured by the Multiple Object Tracking task, (ii) the flow state during the intervention (measured by the Flow State Scale), or (iii) intrinsic motivation following the intervention (measured by the Intrinsic Motivation Questionnaire) in greater learning rates across studies, training groups, and/or tests ( Supplementary Notes   2 and 3 ). Similarly, our measures of expectations suggest that possible differences in expectations concerning the training are unlikely to account for the differences in the learning rate that we report. In previous work, we have proposed that increased attention control could be one of the mechanisms through which improved learning occurs, whether for perceptual or cognitive learning 10 , 29 . In this view, attentional control processes, which encompass cognitive flexibility and working memory, act as a guide to identify and to keep track of task-relevant features, and thus facilitate learning 23 . This is in line with recent computational approaches to learning which also highlight the pivotal role of attention 30 . Here, however, we did not find evidence that improved learning, as measured by learning rates, was correlated with improved attention control, as measured by the Multiple Object Tracking task. While the role of attentional control on learning rate remains a promising avenue, it could also be the case that a general learning ability exists, that is involved in many unrelated tasks, including orientation and working memory learning tasks 31 . It will be for future studies to further address these important issues.

In sum, the present work documents a pathway for cognitive training to act whereby cognitive training facilitates learning in new tasks. It also highlights the importance in future studies of considering both immediate skill performance and learning rate as potentially independent and complementary ways that cognitive enhancements may be promoted in practical applications.

Initial intervention study

Participants.

36 participants were recruited for this study, with the idea of recruiting as many as possible in an experimental timeframe between September 2014 and December 2015. Prior to being enrolled, all participants were contacted through flyers mentioning playing video games and screened for (i) video game usage; (ii) normal or corrected to normal vision; and (iii) media multitasking index (MMI). Participants were excluded if they did not have normal or corrected-to-normal vision or if they qualified as high media multitaskers (media multitasking index >5.9 as defined by ref. 29 ). Three participants were excluded due to high MMI. In addition, to qualify for this initial intervention study, participants needed to have logged (1) no more than 1 h/week playing first/third-person shooter, action/action sport games or simulation games in the past year and in the year before; (2) no more than 3 h/week of play in any other video game genres in the past year; (3) no more than 5 h/week of play of any other video game genres in the year before the past year. After enrollment, participants were assigned to either the experimental (action video game) training regimen or the control (life/business simulation video game) training regimen. The assignment was done in a pseudo-random fashion so as to balance gender across training groups. Six participants failed to comply with the at-home video game training protocol; one action trainee withdrew due to game-induced motion sickness; one control trainee was excluded because of technical problems with the apparatus. The final sample thus consisted of 14 participants in the action video game group (7 women; 18–34 years old, mean age 23 years) and 11 participants (9 women; 19–56 years old, mean age 24.3 years) in the control video game group. Data from one session of the orientation learning task was missing in one action video game trainee due to a technical issue: we interpolated the missing data by duplicating the data from the preceding session. This study was run under a protocol approved by the University of Rochester Research Subjects Review Board. Informed written consent was obtained from participants during their first visit to the lab.

All participants were pre-tested in the laboratory in three 1-h sessions over 3 days, and then asked to play their assigned video games at home for a total of 45 h over a period of about 10 weeks. Finally, participants were post-tested again in the laboratory in seven 1.5-h sessions distributed over 7 days.

Video game training and questionnaires

Participants completed their 45 h of training by playing 15 h on each of the three assigned games administered in a randomized order (Action trainees - Call of Duty: Black Ops 1, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, and Half-life 2; Control trainees—Sims 3, Zoo Tycoon 2013, and Viva Piñata 2006). Participants were asked to play for about 5 h per week with at least 3 h and at most 8 h per week, distributed over at least 4 different days. Gaming progress was monitored through an experimenter-assigned Microsoft Xbox account from which the participants were required to play. In addition, participants were asked to complete an online questionnaire after every play session. Participants were also asked to log the session date, starting time, ending time and a brief statement about the game experience they had. Their game play was thus monitored throughout the training period via the online game log and their Microsoft Xbox online game statistics.

In addition, participants’ gaming skills were evaluated by assessing their gaming ability on assigned games at several points throughout the study. These pre- and post-training measures were obtained in the laboratory at the following time points: (1) on Day 3 of pre-test, before the 1st game training day, (2) after 15 h of training, when the participants switched from the first to the second training game, (3) after 30 h of training, when the participants switched from the second to the third training game, and (4) on Day 1 of post-test, i.e., after having completed their third training game assignment.

Given the story-based structure of the action games, the gaming performance of action video games was evaluated by tabulating checkpoints achieved during a 30-min session of a pre-selected game episode. We chose the fifth episode (S.O.G) in Call of Duty: Black Ops 1, the third episode (Old Scar) in Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, and the fourth episode (Water Hazard) in Half-life 2 as the testing regimes, based on their moderate difficulties and full coverage of necessary skills. For the control games, we initiated a completely new character in The Sims 3 and recorded how many “challenges” participants could achieve within 30 min. For Zoo Tycoon and Viva Piñata, the number of animals that participants created, purchased, and/or attracted within 30 min of play was tabulated. These game-based parameters were used to quantify the participants’ gaming improvement once training was completed, and they provided an additional check that participants indeed had played their assigned games.

The attentional control task, the baseline motion learning task, and the orientation learning task were programmed in MATLAB using Psychophysics Toolbox 30 , 31 . The baseline N -back and the working memory learning tasks were programmed in E-prime 1. All pre- and post-test tasks were run under a Windows XP operating system and presented on a CRT monitor (22-inch MITSUBISHI-Diamond Pro 2070SB, 1024 × 768 resolution, 85 Hz) with linearized gamma. A video switcher was used to combine two 8-bit output channels of the graphics card so that the display system could produce gray levels with 14 bits of resolution 32 . Participants were tested in a dimly lit room, with the mean display luminance set to 58 cd/m 2 . Monitor gamma was calibrated by fitting the best power function to the measured luminance level (Minolta Chromameter, CS-100) of 10 different gray-level settings (from 0 to 240) of the monitor (full field). Viewing was binocular at a 58 cm distance (around 2.3 arcmins per pixel) and enforced using a chin and forehead rest.

Pre-test stimuli and procedures

The 3 days of pre-testing consisted of a baseline motion learning task in Days 1 and 2 and then on Day 3, an attentional control task followed by a baseline N -back task intended as a baseline for the working memory learning task. These tasks are described in turn below.

Baseline motion learning task: We measured baseline motion learning by repeating a motion identification task that was identical to the one used in ref. 33 . The target stimulus consisted of a parafoveally presented drifting grating embedded in white 16%-RMS-contrast Gaussian image noise. Each stimulus frame lasted for 5 frames of 33 ms (165 ms) and the next stimulus always appeared 600 ms after the last response button press. The stimulus was a noisy grid (spatial frequency = 3 cycle/degree, diameter = 1.55 degrees, speed = 2.5 degrees/sec) drifting leftward or rightward. Participants indicated the direction of movement (left/right) using a keypress and received auditory feedback (high pitch if correct, low pitch if incorrect). Stimulus contrast across trials was adaptively adjusted by randomly interleaved 2/1 and 3/1 staircases (160 trials each), allowing us to derive a 75% accuracy threshold. In the first session, the initial contrast was set to 0.76 Michelson contrast for each staircase. Thereafter, for each session, the initial contrast values of the two staircases were set as the final contrast values of the two staircases from the previous session. Participants performed eight such sessions (four sessions on Day 1 and four sessions on Day 2). The dependent measure was contrast threshold.

Baseline N -back task: The baseline N -back task measures working memory ability. It was identical to the one used in ref. 34 . It consisted of a series of yellow shapes (among 8 different complex shapes) sequentially presented at the center of the screen. Each shape lasted 500 ms and was followed by a 2500 ms ISI. Participants had to indicate for each shape whether or not it matched the shape that was seen N trials before using key ‘A’ if it matched and key ‘L’ otherwise. Each keypress was given a neutral auditory feedback tone. Each test block consisted of 20 +  N stimuli (i.e., trial), which included 6 target trials. Participants completed three levels of difficulty (2-back, 3-back, and 4-back) with three blocks at each N -back level administered in a sequential order. The dependent variable was the proportion of hits minus the proportion of false alarms averaged across all three N -back levels. Before the task, participants went through practice trials consisting of one block of each level of difficulty (2-back, 3-back, and 4-back) in a sequential order.

Attentional control task: The attentional control task was a Multiple Object Tracking (MOT) task using similar parameters as the ones described in ref. 35 , except for a few changes listed below. Briefly, participants monitored 1 to 6 targets among a total of 16 moving stimuli. Targets were initially cued as blue sad moving faces (smileys; radius = 0.4 degree, speed = 5 degrees/s) among yellow happy moving faces for the first 2 s of a trial. Targets then turned into yellow happy faces for 4 s. Participants were asked to continue tracking the initially blue sad targets throughout a trial. The dots moved within a circular area (diameter = 20 degrees), avoiding a central area (diameter = 4 degrees). The dots followed a random trajectory, where at each frame a dot had a 60% chance of changing direction by an angle drawn from a normal distribution with a standard deviation of 12 degrees. Colliding dots and dots reaching area limits reverted directions (i.e., the dots “bounced” off one another and the aperture edge). At the end of a trial, one of the faces was cued and participants indicated by keypress whether it was among the blue sad targets cued in the beginning of the trial. A method of constant stimuli was used, with the task consisting of 65 trials in total, with 12 trials at set sizes of 2–6 targets, and 5 trials at set size of 1 target (randomized order of trial). No feedback was given, except the average score after 16 trials. All participants started with a short practice session before the measurement session. The practice session consisted of 8 trials with 2 trials at each set size from 2 to 5, presented in sequential order. The dots moved at 2 degrees per second and instant feedback was provided. The dependent measure was performance accuracy.

Post-test stimuli and procedures

After having completed their 45 h of video game training, participants returned, at least 48 h after the end of their training and no more than a week later, to the laboratory for a series of post-tests distributed over 7 days. On post-test Day 1, participants were administered the attentional control task followed by the baseline N -back task (both in the same manner as during the pre-test). The orientation learning task, as described in ref. 11 , was then administered on post-test Days 2 and 3 (see details below). On post-test Day 4, one session of a pilot task that measured the transfer of orientation learning across stimulus orientation and location were administered (this exploratory session is not reported here), followed by the first session on the working memory learning task. From Days 5 to 7, participants continued the working memory learning task, with 2 sessions per day, for a total of 7 sessions. Finally, after having completed their last working memory learning session, participants were given a debriefing expectation questionnaire.

Orientation Learning Task: The orientation learning task measures how participants learn an orientation identification task that was identical to the one in ref. 21 . A 2.1-deg-diameter circular Gabor signal temporally sandwiched between two 3-deg-diameter external noise circular patches (RMS contrast: 16%), each lasting 33 ms. The 64×64 pixel noise patch was made of individual 2×2 pixel elements. It was presented in the visual periphery (eccentricity = 5.67 degrees) at one of two locations (in the NE or SW quadrants for half the participants and in the NW or SE quadrants for the other half). Participants were presented with a 2-cpd Gabor stimuli oriented at ±12° around a reference angle of either −35° or 55° (counterbalanced across participants) and were asked to decide if the Gabor was oriented clockwise or counter-clockwise relative to the reference angle. Auditory feedback was provided after the participants’ choice (high pitch noise for correct, low pitch noise for incorrect). The contrast of the Gabor stimuli across trials was adapted with high precision via two independent and randomly interleaved staircases at each of the two positions (i.e., one ‘1-up-2-down’ 72-trials staircase and one ‘1-up-3-down’ 84-trials staircase at both positions). During the session, signal contrast was decreased by 10% of its value after two or three successive correct responses (depending on the staircase) and increased signal contrast by 10% of its value after every error. In the first session, the initial contrast value for all staircases was set at 0.9 Michelson Contrast. For each subsequent session N , the initial contrast was set to the average contrast of all reversals (except the first three) from session N –1 (computed separately for each staircase type). The overall contrast threshold for each session was computed by averaging the thresholds across all four staircases—thereby converging to the 75% correct threshold. Each participant underwent a total of eight sessions, four sessions per day over 2 days, with 312 trials per session, with 10 additional practice trials at session 1. In addition, one single transfer session using a different Gabor orientation and different locations was carried out in the initial intervention study (but not in the replication intervention study) and will not be reported here.

Working memory learning task: The working memory learning task measures how participants learn a dual-stream N -back task. It duplicated parameters from the procedures of previous studies 34 , 36 . Participants had to perform two independent N -back tasks in parallel, one in the auditory modality (listening to a stream of letters) and one in the visual modality (viewing a square moving from one location to another on the screen). The letters and squares were synchronously presented at the rate of 3 s per stimulus (duration = 500 ms, ISI = 2500 ms). Participants had to indicate for each trial whether the current stimulus matched the one that was presented N trials back in the sequence. Participants responded with key ‘A’ for visual targets, and key ‘L’ for auditory targets; no response was required for non-targets. Participants were informed of the N -back level at the beginning of each block with the N -back level remaining fixed within a block. Each block consisted of 20 + N trials that included 6 targets per modality, with the first N trials being discarded for scoring (e.g., 22 trials for a 2-back block—the first two trials would not be counted for performance due to the absence of targets). The N -back level was adapted across blocks such that it increased by 1 if participants made fewer than three errors in both modalities, and decreased by 1 if they made more than five errors in either modality. In all other cases, the N -back level remained the same as in the previous block. A session included 15 such blocks and lasted about 25 min. Note that the first block of the first three sessions started at a 1-back level, with the following blocks changing in difficulty level according to the adaptive procedure described above. From session 4 onward, the first block of each session started at a 2-back level. The averaged N -back levels across the 15 blocks per session served as the dependent variable.

Debriefing Questionnaire: We developed a short questionnaire to assess the extent to which participants’ expectations were related to their performance in this study. The questionnaire was administered after participants completed all experimental tasks on the last day of post-test.

Replication intervention study

Our pre-registered target sample size was 50 participants. We sent invitations every month to 20 eligible participants, and we stopped offers when 64 participants had completed the pre-test part of the study, which allowed for an attrition rate of approximately 20%.

Over 300 participants were contacted through flyers mentioning playing video games, and screened for (i) video game usage; (ii) vision; and (iii) media multitasking index. Participants were not included if they did not have normal or corrected-to-normal vision as defined by binocular vision better than 20/32 on the 3m-distant SLOAN chart. They were also not included if they qualified as high media multitaskers (media multitasking index > 5.9 as defined by ref. 29 ). Participants who qualified as tweeners (an intermediate profile between action video gamers and non-video gamers) were selected using the Bavelier lab video game questionnaire. Note that this questionnaire was updated mid-recruitment with an experimenter error occurring during this update, resulting in three different questionnaires being used (22 using questionnaire #1, 3 using questionnaire #2 and 50 using questionnaire #3). The questionnaires and criteria are available on the project registration website: https://osf.io/4xe59/ . All participants with psychiatric disorders, taking significant psychotropic medications or with high levels of alcohol consumption (>40 units per week) were ineligible for this study. We only selected participants who were first or second language French speakers, and those with an English comprehension self-rated at 7 out of 10 at least, as most of the experiment was conducted in French but some computer tasks required understanding English. Included participants needed to be in the age range of 18 to 35 years old.

After screening, we contacted 80 participants and 69 agreed to participate in the study. Eight participants dropped out during the study, six were excluded before training as they demonstrated no learning in the motion discrimination task (pre-training estimated learning rate of 0), another 3 had to be excluded (1 because of age outside of decided limits, 1 because they were not naive to the conditions, and 1 because they failed to comply with the procedures of the study), leaving 52 participants. The final sample thus consisted of 27 participants in the action video game group (11 women; 19–35 years old, mean age 23 years) and 25 participants (11 women; 18–33 years old, mean age 22.8 years) in the control video game group. One participant was removed from the analysis of the results in the baseline motion learning task because of a technical issue at the end of their first session; testing continued with session 2 but we could not interpolate the result of session 1. This study was run under a protocol approved by the University of Geneva Research Subjects Review Board. Informed written consent was obtained from the participants during the first visit to the lab.

Participants were assigned to either the experimental (action video game) training or the control (life/business simulation video game) training. Training group assignment was randomized using the minimization method. We applied the Efron’s biased coin technique separately for each of the four following strata combining age and gender: 18–26-year-old males, 27–35-year-old males, 18–26-year-old females, 27–35-year-old females. Two independent groups of experimenters were involved in the study to ensure that the experimenters assessing performance at pre- and post-test were blinded to participant assignment. One group of experimenters (unblinded) assigned participants to training groups after pre-test, during the at-home visit (gaming material installation and start of the training). They also administered the video game training and the questionnaires. The other group of experimenters (blinded) collected all pre- and post-test outcome measures. Additionally, participants were kept naive to the existence of different training groups, and unaware of the other games that they could have been assigned to.

All participants were pre-tested in the laboratory in two 1.5-h sessions over 2 days, and then asked to play their assigned video games at home for a total of 45 h (see video game training procedure below). Finally, participants were tested again in the laboratory in two 1.5-h sessions followed by three one-hour sessions distributed over 5 days.

The recruitment, training and laboratory measurements were conducted between January 2018 and June 2018.

The complete preregistration details can be accessed via https://osf.io/629yx . This preregistration website and the project website ( https://osf.io/4xe59/ ) also contains all administered questionnaires (e.g., video game experience questionnaire, expectation questionnaires) and participant’s recruitment criteria for both intervention studies.

We conducted the same training procedures as that in the initial intervention study, except for the following points. Unlike the initial intervention study in which questionnaires were collected after post-test, we administered several questionnaires over the course of the video game training. First, we administered expectation questionnaires based on a translated-to-French version of ref. 26 before the participants started the video game training. We asked the participants to watch the trailer videos of each of the three games that they were assigned to, and assessed with the questionnaire their expectation on how playing these games would affect their cognition, their mood, their productivity at work and their physical fitness. We were only interested in the responses about the cognition domain but probed participants in the other domains to prevent them from guessing what was our main interest. Second, we collected the Intrinsic Motivation Questionnaire (IMI questionnaire) and Flow State Scale questionnaires after a participant completed a training game (15 h of gaming), yielding three samples of the two questionnaires in total for each participant. Finally, despite informing the participants that gaming progress was monitored through a Microsoft Xbox account from which they were assigned to play, we could not access these data and monitored the self-reported logs instead.

All tasks were generated in MATLAB 2016a using the Psychophysics Toolbox and were run under a Windows 7 operating system and presented on a linearized high-performance industrial LCD glass monitor (22.5-inch ViewPixx monitor, 1920(H) × 1080(V) pixels, 120 Hz). We used the Viewpixx’ M16 mode allowing to combine two 8-bit output channels of the graphics card so that the display system could produce gray levels with 14 bits of resolution 32 . Participants were tested in dimly lit light, with a mean display luminance of 58 cd/m 2 . Monitor gamma was calibrated by fitting the best power function to the measured luminance using a photometer at 10 different gray-scale levels. Viewing was binocular at a distance of 58 cm from the monitor, enforced using an adjustable chin and forehead rest.

Pre-test stimuli and Procedures

We used the same pre-test tasks as those in the initial intervention study albeit a different task arrangement. The pre-test here spanned 2 days and was run by the experimenters who were blind to group assignment. Because group assignment occurred only after pre-test, the participants were also blind to their group assignment during the pre-test. On Day 1 of pre-test, participants first completed the attentional control task and then four sessions of the baseline motion learning task. Similarly, on Day 2, participants first completed the baseline N -back task and four sessions of the baseline motion learning task. The details of the attentional control and baseline N -back tasks are documented above. In the motion learning task, signal and noise were spatially but not temporally interleaved, while in the initial intervention study or ref. 33 , it was both spatially and temporally interleaved.

The post-test was conducted at least 48 h after a participant completed their 45 h of gaming intervention, and at most 36 days after (mean: 7 days). We used the same tasks as those in the post-test phase of the initial intervention study but with a number of differences in the task arrangement. First, the post-test here spanned 5 days and was run by experimenters who were blind to the participants’ group assignment. Second, on post-test Day 1, participants first completed the attentional control task and continued with four sessions of the orientation learning task. On Day 2, the baseline N -back task was administered and another four sessions of the orientation learning task were run. Third, on Day 3 to Day 5, participants completed 2 sessions of the working memory learning task per day, yielding a total of only six sessions of this task. Fourth, we did not run the transfer session of the orientation learning task as we did in the initial intervention study. Fifth, different from the initial intervention study, we reprogrammed the baseline N-back and working memory learning tasks using the Psychtoolbox 3.0 in Matlab R2017a.

Data analysis, hierarchical Bayesian analysis of orientation and working memory learning tasks

We performed a hierarchical Bayesian analysis to quantify all learning tasks. The analysis was performed separately in each group, in each task, and in each intervention study. The method of modeling for perceptual learning (orientation and baseline motion learning tasks) applies to the initial intervention study and the replication intervention study. The method of modeling for the cognitive learning (working memory learning task) applies to all three studies (i.e., the two intervention studies presented in the main text as well as the cross-sectional study presented above).

Orientation/motion learning

We tested the participants’ ability to learn two perceptual learning tasks: orientation and motion identification. We used a power learning function to capture the decreasing trend of contrast threshold as learning proceeds because of a clear floor in the learning curves of both perceptual learning tasks (see Fig.  3 in the main text). Power learning curves have been used in the literature on perceptual learning 21 . The power function of the i th participant includes three parameters (1) ρ i - learning rate; (2) λ i —initial performance (at the first session); (3) α i —final performance (at the last session). The threshold level ( n i,t ) of the i th participant as a function of session ( t ) can be expressed as

where m is the maximum session number (e.g., m = 8 for the initial intervention study). Three hyper distributions with six hyperparameters ( ρ i ~ Normal( ρ u , ρ σ ), λ i ~ Normal( λ u , λ σ ), α i ~ Normal( a u , a σ )) were set accordingly to constrain the three individual learning parameters. We also gave flat priors in the range (−18, 8), (0, 13), (0, 1), (0, 4), (0, 1), (0, 4) to the six hyperparameters, respectively.

Furthermore, the psychometric function of the perceptual learning tasks was described with the commonly used Weibull function:

where  p i , t , k indicates the probability of the i th participant making a correct response in the k th trial of the t th session . const i,t,k is the contrast of the stimulus in this trial. n i,t is the i th participant’s contrast threshold in the t th session. Chance level c was set to 0.5. The steepness s of the psychometric function was set to 2 37 . w was calculated by

where θ is the performance level that defines the threshold. In our perceptual learning tasks, θ was 0.75 from the average of one 3/1 staircase and one 2/1 staircase.

In the model, free parameters include learning parameters at both the group and the individual levels. For example, in the initial intervention study, 14 action trainees produced 42 (3 ρ i / λ i / a i x 14 participants) estimated parameters at the individual level and 6 ( ρ u , ρ σ , λ u , λ σ , a u , a σ ) estimated parameters at the group level.

Equations  1 – 3 specify the complete generative model of behavioral choices when performing the orientation learning task. Leveraging the generative process, we inferred the free parameters in this hierarchical model using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method implemented in the statistical package Stan and its python interface 38 . The hierarchical Bayesian analysis was separately applied to each group. In the fitting process, four independent Markov Chains were established, with each drawing 130,000 samples of each free parameter. The first 15,000 samples were discarded as the burn-in period, resulting in 115,000 valid samples. We found that 130,000 samples for each parameter were sufficient, as evidenced by the fact that the split R-hat statistics of all parameters for both groups were 1 (a value below 1.1 indicates a successful sampling process for a parameter, see ref. 38 ). Broad uniform priors were given to the group-level hyperparameters in order to avoid bias: ρ u ~ uniform(−18, 8), ρ σ ~ uniform(0, 13), λ u ~ uniform(0, 1), λ σ ~ uniform(0, 4), a u ~ uniform(0, 1), σ ~ uniform(0, 4). We also bound ρ i to (−18, 8), λ i to (0, 5) and a i to (0, 2), in order to promote the MCMC sampling efficiency. Note that all model settings were identical for the two groups in order to ensure no additional bias was introduced. Thus, any difference between groups should be attributed to the existing differences in the data.

We computed the learning parameters (i.e., ρ i , λ i , and a i ) of a participant by averaging the total 460,000 samples (4 chains × 115,000 valid samples) of each parameter. Statistical differences across groups on learning rate, initial, and final performance were assessed by two-sample t -tests (two-tailed) implemented in the scipy python package (see results in the main text).

Working memory learning

The working memory learning task measures how participants learn an adaptative dual N -back task. Individual participants’ progress was indexed in term of N -back levels (e.g. 2-back, 3-back) which were modeled using a linear function:

where n i,t is the N -back level of the i th participant in the t th session (a session is 25 blocks). Two free parameters specify the learning curve of this participant: (1) a i —learning rate (the slope of the linear function); (2) b i —initial performance (the intercept of the linear function). The first three blocks of each session were removed from the analysis because each session started back to N -back level 1, and therefore no or less variability in the N -back level reached was observed during these blocks. Given the range of our data (see Fig.  2 in the main text) and our focus on detecting group difference, a linear function (only 2 degrees of freedom) appeared sufficient to capture the characteristics of learning in this task.

Furthermore, we used a hierarchical Bayesian approach assuming that all learning parameters ( a i and b i ) of individuals follow hyper normal distributions that represent the group-level characteristics of learning: a i ~ N ( A u , A σ ), b i ~ N ( B u , B σ ).

Since a participant faced different N -back difficulty levels in different blocks within a session, we described the probability of a correct response in a trial using a power psychometric function:

where p i , t , j , k indicates the probability of the i th participant making a correct response in the k th trial of the j th block of the t th session. Similarly, T i,t,j is the N -back level that the participant faced in the j th block. g is the gain factor of the psychometric function. We set g to 0.45, which is equivalent to set the guessing rate to 0.05, to account for the observed guessing even in the easiest 1-back task. c is the chance level 0.5. S i,t is the steepness of the psychometric function in the t th session. The steepness is related to the participant’s N -back threshold n i,t and therefore changes session by session:

where θ is the accuracy corresponding to the N-back threshold, which was 0.85 in this task given the adaptive stimulus setting in the experiment.

In the model, free parameters include learning parameters at both the group and the individual levels. For example, in the initial intervention study, 14 action trainees produced 28 (2 a i / b i x 14 participants) free parameters at the individual level and 4 ( A u , A σ , B u , B σ ) free parameters at the group level. Uniform priors were given to the four hyperparameters with parameter values (0, 3), (0, 2), (0, 5), (0, 3) respectively.

Each of 4 Markov chains drew 130,000 samples, with the first 30,000 samples discarded as the burn-in period. We found 130,000 samples were sufficient for all Markov chains for this model to converge, as evidenced by the fact that the split R-hat statistics for all parameters in both groups were equal to 1.

Other statistics and reproducibility

For all statistics, n = 25 in the initial intervention study and n = 52 in the replication intervention study, except for the baseline motion learning task for which n = 51. All correlations were Spearman correlations, and statistical tests were two-tailed tests with alpha level at 5%.

Reporting summary

Further information on research design is available in the  Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article.

Data availability

All the data used to generate the statistics provided here are available at https://osf.io/4xe59 .

Code availability

All the codes used to generate the statistics provided here are available at https://osf.io/4xe59 . Matlab R2017a and SPSS 12.0 were used for most analyses. All Bayes factors for two-sample comparisons were calculated using the Bayes Factor Toolbox ( https://klabhub.github.io/bayesFactor/ ). We used the function bf.ttest2 when investigating differences between paired groups, and bf.anova with one between-subject factor when investigating differences between independent groups, because this design is equivalent to a t-test. Results were verified using the statistical software JASP 0.14 and the two tools agreed. For the hierarchical model involving the Markov Chain Monte Carlo method, we use the statistical package Stan and its python interface.

Change history

07 december 2021.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-021-02913-5

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

Article   Google Scholar  

Maniglia, M. & Seitz, A. R. Towards a whole brain model of Perceptual Learning. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 20 , 47–55 (2018).

Sagi, D. Perceptual learning in Vision Research. Vis. Res. 51 , 1552–1566 (2011).

Watanabe, T. & Sasaki, Y. Perceptual learning: toward a comprehensive theory. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 66 , 197–221 (2015).

Thorndike, E. L. & Woodworth, R. S. The influence of improvement in one mental function upon the efficiency of other functions: III. Functions involving attention, observation and discrimination. Psychol. Rev. 8 , 553–564 (1901).

Harlow, H. F. The formation of learning sets. Psychol. Rev. 56 , 51–65 (1949).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Kattner, F., Cochrane, A., Cox, C. R., Gorman, T. E. & Green, C. S. Perceptual learning generalization from sequential perceptual training as a change in learning rate. Curr. Biol. 27 , 840–846 (2017).

Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C. & Day, J. D. Learning to learn: on training students to learn from texts. Educ. Researcher 10 , 14–21 (1981).

Lake, B. M., Salakhutdinov, R. & Tenenbaum, J. B. Human-level concept learning through probabilistic program induction. Science 350 , 1332–1338 (2015).

Bavelier, D., Green, C. S., Pouget, A. & Schrater, P. Brain plasticity through the life span: learning to learn and action video games. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 35 , 391–416 (2012).

Bejjanki, V. R. et al. Action video game play facilitates the development of better perceptual templates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111 , 16961–16966 (2014).

Schenk, S., Lech, R. K. & Suchan, B. Games people play: How video games improve probabilistic learning. Behav. Brain Res. 335 , 208–214 (2017).

Schenk, S., Bellebaum, C., Lech, R. K., Heinen, R. & Suchan, B. Play to win: action video game experience and attention driven perceptual exploration in categorization learning. Front. Psychol. 11 , 933 (2020).

Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A. & Reichle, E. D. Working memory and executive function: evidence from neuroimaging. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 10 , 195–199 (2000).

Baddeley, A. Working memory: looking back and looking forward. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 4 , 829–839 (2003).

Baddeley, A. Working memory: theories, models, and controversies. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 63 , 1–29 (2012).

Alloway, T. P. & Alloway, R. G. Investigating the predictive roles of working memory and IQ in academic attainment. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 106 , 20–29 (2010).

Titz, C. & Karbach, J. Working memory and executive functions: effects of training on academic achievement. Psychol. Res. 78 , 852–868 (2014).

Rose, E. J. & Ebmeier, K. P. Pattern of impaired working memory during major depression. J. Affect. Disord. 90 , 149–161 (2006).

Silver, H., Feldman, P., Bilker, W. & Gur, R. C. Working memory deficit as a core neuropsychological dysfunction in schizophrenia. Am. J. Psychiatry 160 , 1809–1816 (2003).

Jeter, P. E., Dosher, B. A., Petrov, A. & Lu, Z. L. Task precision at transfer determines specificity of perceptual learning. J. Vis. 9 , 1–13 (2009).

Boot, W. R., Blakely, D. P. & Simons, D. J. Do action video games improve perception and cognition? Front. Psychol. 2 , 226 (2011).

Green, C. S. et al. Improving methodological standards in behavioral interventions for cognitive enhancement. J. Cogn. Enhancement 3 , 2–29 (2019).

Boot, W. R., Simons, D. J., Stothart, C. & Stutts, C. The pervasive problem with placebos in psychology: why active control groups are not sufficient to rule out placebo effects. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 8 , 445–454 (2013).

Kristjansson, A. The case for causal influences of action videogame play upon vision and attention. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 75 , 667–672 (2013).

Barth, J., Kern, A., Luthi, S. & Witt, C. M. Assessment of patients’ expectations: development and validation of the Expectation for Treatment Scale (ETS). BMJ Open. 9 , e026712 (2019).

Sala, G., Tatlidil, K. S. & Gobet, F. Video game training does not enhance cognitive ability: a comprehensive meta-analytic investigation. Psychol. Bull. 144 , 111–139 (2018).

Simons, D. J. et al. Do “Brain-Training” programs work? Psychol. Sci. Public Interest. 17 , 103–186 (2016).

Ophir, E., Nass, C. & Wagner, A. D. Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106 , 15583–15587 (2009).

Pelli, D. G. The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. Spat. Vis. 10 , 437–442 (1997).

Brainard, D. H. The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spat. Vis. 10 , 433–436 (1997).

Li, X., Lu, Z. L., Xu, P., Jin, J. & Zhou, Y. Generating high gray-level resolution monochrome displays with conventional computer graphics cards and color monitors. J. Neurosci. Methods 130 , 9–18 (2003).

Lu, Z. L., Chu, W. & Dosher, B. A. Perceptual learning of motion direction discrimination in fovea: separable mechanisms. Vis. Res. 46 , 2315–2327 (2006).

Jaeggi, S. M. et al. The relationship between n-back performance and matrix reasoning—implications for training and transfer. Intelligence 38 , 625–635 (2010).

Yung, A., Cardoso-Leite, P., Dale, G., Bavelier, D. & Green, C. S. Methods to test visual attention online. J. Vis. Exp. 96 , e52470 (2015).

Google Scholar  

Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., Jonides, J. & Perrig, W. J. Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105 , 6829–6833 (2008).

Hou, F. et al. qCSF in clinical application: efficient characterization and classification of contrast sensitivity functions in amblyopia. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 51 , 5365–5377 (2010).

Carpenter, B. et al. Stan: a probabilistic programming language. J. Stat. Softw. 76 , 1–29 (2017).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are indebted to Olga Pikul and Alyse Stegman for their invaluable help throughout these studies. We also thank Sylvie Denkinger, Marta Martins, Patricia Poma and Jérémie Todeschini for their help in data collection. We thank Long Ni and Dr. Weiji Ma for helpful discussions on computational modeling. This work was supported by an Office of Naval Research award N00014-14-1-0512 (DB&CSG) and N00014-17-1-2049 (CSG), a Swiss National Foundation Grant 100014_178814 (DB), a National Eye Institute EY020976 (DB), a Center of Visual Science training grant EY001319 (U. of Rochester Center for Visual Science), a National Eye Institute Grant EY017491 (ZLL), Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai 21ZR1434700 (RYZ), the research project of Shanghai Science and Technology Commission (20dz2260300) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (RYZ), National Natural Science Foundation of China 32100901 (RYZ), and a National Institute on Aging Grant 1K02AG054665 (SMJ).

Author information

These authors contributed equally: Ru-Yuan Zhang, Adrien Chopin.

Authors and Affiliations

Institute of Psychology and Behavioral Science, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 200030, Shanghai, China

Ru-Yuan Zhang

Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 200030, Shanghai, China

Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and Center for Visual Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, 14628, USA

Faculté de Psychologie et Science de l’Éducation, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

Adrien Chopin, Kengo Shibata & Daphne Bavelier

Campus Biotech, Geneva, Switzerland

Sorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, Institut de la Vision, Paris, France

Adrien Chopin

Division of Arts and Sciences, NYU Shanghai, Shanghai, China

• Zhong-Lin Lu

Center for Neural Science and Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, NY, 10003, USA

NYU-ECNU Institute of Brain and Cognitive Science at NYU Shanghai, Shanghai, China

School of Education and School of Social Sciences (Department of Cognitive Sciences), University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, 92697, USA

Susanne M. Jaeggi

MIND Research Institute, Irvine, CA, 92617, USA

Martin Buschkuehl

Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53706, USA

• C. Shawn Green

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Research Question: D.B., C.S.G., R.Y.Z., A.C.; Study Design—orientation and baseline motion learning: Z.L.L., R.Y.Z. & D.B.; Study Design—working memory learning: S.M.J., M.B., R.Y.Z. & D.B.; Data Collection—Initial Study: R.Y.Z.; Data Collection—Replication Study: A.C., K.S.; Data Collection-cross-sectional working memory learning: S.M.J., M.B.; Data analyses: R.Y.Z., A.C., K.S. with C.S.G. & D.B.; R.Y.Z., A.C. and K.S. wrote the first draft of manuscript, D.B. and C.S.G. provided significant revision and all other authors provided comments on the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daphne Bavelier .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare the following competing interests: D.B. is a founding member and scientific advisor to Akili Interactive Inc, whose mission is to develop therapeutic video games. M.B. is employed at the MIND Research Institute whose interest is related to this work. S.M.J. has an indirect financial interest in the MIND Research Institute. Z.L.L. is a co-founder of and has intellectual property and personal financial interests in Adaptive Sensory Technology, Inc. (San Diego, CA). The remaining authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Communications Biology thanks Takeo Watanabe and the other, anonymous, reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editors: Stefano Palminteri and Luke Grinham. Peer reviewer reports are available.

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

Supplementary information

Transparent peer review file, supplementary information, reporting summary, 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 license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license 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 license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Zhang, RY., Chopin, A., Shibata, K. et al. Action video game play facilitates “learning to learn”. Commun Biol 4 , 1154 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-021-02652-7

Download citation

Received : 28 April 2021

Accepted : 09 September 2021

Published : 14 October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-021-02652-7

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

This article is cited by

Estimating the trial-by-trial learning curve in perceptual learning with hierarchical bayesian modeling.

• Jiajuan Liu

Journal of Cognitive Enhancement (2024)

Longitudinal Dynamic Relationships Between Videogame Use and Symptoms of Gaming Disorder and Depression Among Chinese Children and Adolescents

• Mengmeng Zhang
• Zhaojun Teng

Journal of Youth and Adolescence (2024)

Modeling Perceptual Learning as a Continuous Function of Time-on-Task Increases Theoretical Specificity and Statistical Power

• Aaron Cochrane

Neuroplasticity enables bio-cultural feedback in Paleolithic stone-tool making

• Erin Elisabeth Hecht
• Justin Pargeter
• Dietrich Stout

Scientific Reports (2023)

Global visual attention SPAN in different video game genres

• Marc Argilés
• Xavier González-Fortuny
• Bernat Sunyer-Grau

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

• U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

• Virtual Tour
• Staff Directory
• En Español

You are here

News releases.

News Release

Monday, October 24, 2022

Video gaming may be associated with better cognitive performance in children

Additional research necessary to parse potential benefits and harms of video games on the developing brain.

On Monday, April 10, 2023, a Notice of Retraction and Replacement published for the article featured below . The key findings remain the same. The press release has been updated, in line with the retracted and replacement article, to clarify that attention problems, depression symptoms, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) scores were significantly higher among children who played three hours per day or more compared to children who had never played video games.

A study of nearly 2,000 children found that those who reported playing video games for three hours per day or more performed better on cognitive skills tests involving impulse control and working memory compared to children who had never played video games. Published today in JAMA Network Open , this study analyzed data from the ongoing  Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study , which is supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and other entities of the National Institutes of Health.

“This study adds to our growing understanding of the associations between playing video games and brain development,” said NIDA Director Nora Volkow, M.D. “Numerous studies have linked video gaming to behavior and mental health problems. This study suggests that there may also be cognitive benefits associated with this popular pastime, which are worthy of further investigation.”

Although a number of studies have investigated the relationship between video gaming and cognitive behavior, the neurobiological mechanisms underlying the associations are not well understood. Only a handful of neuroimaging studies have addressed this topic, and the sample sizes for those studies have been small, with fewer than 80 participants.

To address this research gap, scientists at the University of Vermont, Burlington, analyzed data obtained when children entered the ABCD Study at ages 9 and 10 years old. The research team examined survey, cognitive, and brain imaging data from nearly 2,000 participants from within the bigger study cohort. They separated these children into two groups, those who reported playing no video games at all and those who reported playing video games for three hours per day or more. This threshold was selected as it exceeds the American Academy of Pediatrics screen time guidelines , which recommend that videogaming time be limited to one to two hours per day for older children. For each group, the investigators evaluated the children’s performance on two tasks that reflected their ability to control impulsive behavior and to memorize information, as well as the children’s brain activity while performing the tasks.

The researchers found that the children who reported playing video games for three or more hours per day were faster and more accurate on both cognitive tasks than those who never played. They also observed that the differences in cognitive function observed between the two groups was accompanied by differences in brain activity. Functional MRI brain imaging analyses found that children who played video games for three or more hours per day showed higher brain activity in regions of the brain associated with attention and memory than did those who never played. At the same time, those children who played at least three hours of videogames per day showed more brain activity in frontal brain regions that are associated with more cognitively demanding tasks and less brain activity in brain regions related to vision.  

The researchers think these patterns may stem from practicing tasks related to impulse control and memory while playing videogames, which can be cognitively demanding, and that these changes may lead to improved performance on related tasks. Furthermore, the comparatively low activity in visual areas among children who reported playing video games may reflect that this area of the brain may become more efficient at visual processing as a result of repeated practice through video games.

While prior studies have reported associations between video gaming and increases in violence and aggressive behavior, this study did not find that to be the case. Though children who reported playing video games for three or more hours per day scored higher on measures of attention problems, depression symptoms, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) compared to children who played no video games, the researchers found that these mental health and behavioral scores did not reach clinical significance in either group, meaning, they did not meet the thresholds for risk of problem behaviors or clinical symptoms. The authors note that these will be important measures to continue to track and understand as the children mature.

Further, the researchers stress that this cross-sectional study does not allow for cause-and-effect analyses, and that it could be that children who are good at these types of cognitive tasks may choose to play video games. The authors also emphasize that their findings do not mean that children should spend unlimited time on their computers, mobile phones, or TVs, and that the outcomes likely depend largely on the specific activities children engage in. For instance, they hypothesize that the specific genre of video games, such as action-adventure, puzzle solving, sports, or shooting games, may have different effects for neurocognitive development, and this level of specificity on the type of video game played was not assessed by the study.

“While we cannot say whether playing video games regularly caused superior neurocognitive performance, it is an encouraging finding, and one that we must continue to investigate in these children as they transition into adolescence and young adulthood,” said Bader Chaarani, Ph.D., assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont and the lead author on the study. “Many parents today are concerned about the effects of video games on their children’s health and development, and as these games continue to proliferate among young people, it is crucial that we better understand both the positive and negative impact that such games may have.”

Through the ABCD Study, researchers will be able to conduct similar analyses for the same children over time into early adulthood, to see if changes in video gaming behavior are linked to changes in cognitive skills, brain activity, behavior, and mental health. The longitudinal study design and comprehensive data set will also enable them to better account for various other factors in the children’s families and environment that may influence their cognitive and behavioral development, such as exercise, sleep quality, and other influences.

The ABCD Study, the largest of its kind in the United States, is tracking nearly 12,000 youth as they grow into young adults. Investigators regularly measure participants’ brain structure and activity using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and collect psychological, environmental, and cognitive information, as well as biological samples. The goal of the study is to understand the factors that influence brain, cognitive, and social-emotional development, to inform the development of interventions to enhance a young person’s life trajectory.

The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study and ABCD Study are registered service marks and trademarks, respectively, of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

About the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA): NIDA is a component of the National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIDA supports most of the world’s research on the health aspects of drug use and addiction. The Institute carries out a large variety of programs to inform policy, improve practice, and advance addiction science. For more information about NIDA and its programs, visit www.nida.nih.gov .

About the National Institutes of Health (NIH): NIH, the nation's medical research agency, includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH is the primary federal agency conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and is investigating the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit www.nih.gov .

NIH…Turning Discovery Into Health ®

  B Chaarani, et al.  Association of video gaming with cognitive performance among children .  JAMA Open Network.  DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.35721 (2022).

Connect with Us

• More Social Media from NIH

Video Games Make You Smarter: Backed up by Research

Many people claim that video games make you smarter. However, intelligence is a broad concept, and we don’t know what effect video games have on it. Even then, lots of research has shown that video games can have a tangible impact on cognition. Let’s explore these in detail and answer the question, “Do video games make you smarter?”

Video games increase your attention span, improve decision making and problem-solving capabilities in competitive environments, and improve memory and learning. Video games improve the cognitive abilities that society values.

Take this quiz to understand your problematic relationship with video games:

Read further to learn how video games affect our cognitive capabilities.

Effect of Video Games on Attention

• A study by Green and Bavelier found that action video games enhance attentional control. According to this study, action games involve high-speed gameplay and contain objects that quickly pop in and out of the visual field. They seem to have the broadest benefits to perceptual and attentional abilities.

• Most action games require the player to keep their attention focused on specific objects or entities. These objects or entities can be presented in isolation or amongst other irrelevant distractions. As a result, action games notably boost selective attention, i.e., a person’s ability to focus on one particular stimulus.
• Gamers who play action games can track independently moving objects faster and better than non-video-game players. They demonstrate a higher degree of spatial awareness compared to their non-gamer counterparts.
• A test often used in the screening of ADD found that gamers had faster responses than those that did not play video games. Moreover, they did not sacrifice accuracy for speed. It is also important to note that the test recognized their responses as being anticipatory. That means that gamers relied on prediction rather than reaction. As a result, the study concluded that video game players are faster but not more impulsive than non-gamers.
• A study that compared 27 expert gamers with 30 amateur ones found that action games correlated with higher gray matter volume in the brain.

How Video Games Affect Memory and Learning

Memory is closely related to attention. Therefore, since games improve attention, they would have an impact on memory as well. Let’s take a look at some research.

• A study conducted by McDermott et al. compared the memory of action video game players with non-gamers. They found that action video game players excelled over non-gamers in tasks that involved retaining many memories. They also demonstrated higher precision with visual-spatial short term memory tasks.
• A study done by Ferguson, Cruz, and Rueda found that video game playing correlated positively with accuracy in visual memory. The study hypothesized that this was because video games primed the player to be sensitive to visual cues.
• According to researchers from the University of California , playing 3D video games can boost the formation of memories and improve hand-eye coordination and reaction times.
• A study conducted by Gnambs et al. found that while playing video games can result in a tiny hit to school performance, they don’t affect a child’s intelligence.
• According to some preliminary research, strategy games can increase older adults’ brain functions, and perhaps even protect against dementia and Alzheimer’s .
• A study by Lorenza et al. suggests that gaming trains the brain to be more flexible in updating and monitoring new information. Therefore, it enhances the memory capacity of gamers.

Video Games and Problem Solving

Most video games require a large amount of problem-solving. However, different games require different kinds of problem-solving.

• A l ongitudinal study conducted in 2013 found that playing strategy games correlated positively with problem-solving abilities and school grades in the following year. That means that adolescents that reported playing more strategy games tended to display better problem-solving ability.
• Scholars at Michigan State University did a study of about 500 12-year-olds. They found that the more kids played video games, the more creative they were in tasks such as drawing pictures and writing stories. However, the use of the internet, cellphones, and computers (aside from playing video games) was unrelated to creativity. Moreover, the increase in creativity was not related to whether the game was violent or non-violent.
• A University of Glasgow trial found that gaming improved communication skills, resourcefulness, and flexibility as video games increase critical thinking and reflective learning ability. These traits are central to graduates and are desirable to employers seeking to hire people out of university.

Video Games and Spatial Intelligence

Most video games, especially 3D ones, require gamers to develop excellent spatial skills to navigate complex environments. Let’s look at some studies that have looked at the relationship between video games and spatial intelligence.

• A 2007 study by Green and Bavalier found that video games significantly increased an inexperienced gamer’s ability to rotate complex shapes in their mind. It also found that subjects trained in action video games showed an increase in their ability to identify a single object, among other distracting ones.
• Another study confirmed that video game players showed a faster response time for easy and difficult visual search tasks than non-gamers.
• Avid action-video-game players were able to identify a peripheral target among many distracting objects more accurately than non-action-video-game players. The researchers showed them a sequence of objects, each of which they presented very briefly. They found that gamers were able to process this visual stream more efficiently than non-gamers. They were also able to track more objects than non-video-game-players.
• An fMRI study by Granek et al. found that extensive gaming alters the network in our brain that processes complex visual tasks. It makes the circuitry more efficient.

How Video Games Impact Decision Making

Video games, especially action games, require quick, on-the-fly decision-making capabilities. Avid gamers can make decisions under pressure. Here are some findings from relevant research.

• A study split participants aged 18 to 25 into two groups. One group played 50 hours of Call of Duty 2 and Unreal Tournament , and the other group played 50 hours of Sims 2 . The action game players made decisions 25% faster in a task unrelated to playing video games without sacrificing accuracy.
• One study explored ways to improve traditional training methods that aim to reduce people’s bias and improve their decision-making capabilities. They found that interactive video games improved general decision-making abilities both in the short term and long term. Susceptibility to bias was reduced by 31% in immediate tests, and after three months, the reduction will still more than 23%

Video Games and IQ

What is iq how much does it matter.

IQ is short for intelligence quotient. Researchers developed it to measure how well someone can use information and reasoning to answer questions or make predictions. IQ tests measure short-term and long-term memory and how quickly one can solve puzzles and recall information. It helps researchers check whether they are testing for the same “kind” of intelligence. However, it does not encapsulate the complexity of the mind. Other factors, such as social and economic status, influence IQ. Emotional Intelligence (EQ) is also a significant contributor to success.

IQ is a predictor of many things, but it does not define intelligence. It is generally a good predictor of a person’s success in life since the more intelligent a person is, the more likely they are to solve problems, learn new things, and get ahead in life. However, it can only predict how well people will do in particular situations, such as science, engineering, and art. Success in life requires more than just intelligence — it depends on persistence, ambition, opportunity, and luck.

Do Video Games Increase IQ?

Games select and filter for higher fluid IQs because games adequately, intellectually challenge us as kids when school was not enough. There are studies that children crave challenge and mastery, which games provide for them, and that creates a feedback loop.

What Does the Research Say?

A study conducted at the University of York found a correlation between young people’s skill at two popular video games (Dota 2 and League of Legends) and high intelligence levels.

The study set up two groups: the first group demonstrated their skill at League of Legends and then took a standard pen-and-paper intelligence test. They split the second group into Dota 2 players and gamers who played shooting games (Destiny and Battlefield 3).

The first group found that MOBA players tended to have higher IQs – a correlation seen in more traditional strategy games such as chess. In the second group, the researchers found that while MOBA players’ performance and IQ remained consistent as they got older, while the shooter game players’ performance declined after their teens.

While games can be good at indicators of a person’s IQ, that does not necessarily mean that they boost IQ.

Does Higher IQ Correlate with Risk of Addiction?

Smarter people are more likely to get addicted to video games because they may not be adequately challenged in school or at work, and video games fulfill this need for them. To recognize and overcome gaming addiction, you need to acknowledge who you are as a gamer. Gamers are, in fact, smarter than the average person. While we value intelligence in society, being smart is not enough to be successful.

Gamers use their high IQ to justify their lack of success, and it becomes an ego boost. Therefore, high intelligence becomes a justification for not needing to work hard and aim for success in life. That is how intelligence leads to avoidance.

Check out this video in which Dr. K talks about how intelligence leads to avoidance:

Issues with Video Game Studies

Some factors that influence video game training studies might bring the accuracy of these studies into question. A paper by Boot et al. discussed game training studies that tell the participants about the nature of the study. That can easily lead to bias, as the participants know whether they are in the experimental group or the control group.

For example, let’s assume that a study that aims to test the impact of action games on decision-making recruits gamers and non-gamers. It discloses the nature and aim of the study to the participants. It also tells them whether they will be in the experimental group or the control group.

The experimental group trains on an action game while the control group trains on a strategy game. After training, the researchers administer a test to both groups. It aims to measure the speed and accuracy of their decision-making. Since both groups know the aim of the study, the experimental group believes that they will do well on the test. Therefore, it creates a self-fulfilling prophecy, and they try their hardest. Meanwhile, the control group does not put in as much effort because they think that they are expected to match up to the experimental group. As a result, they don’t try hard and don’t perform too well.

Such an experiment does not control well for placebo. Unfortunately, many video game training studies are structured this way.

Intelligence is complicated and not understood very well. Therefore, it is hard to measure if video games make you smarter. However, we can measure aspects of our cognition and how video games affect it. It is also unclear to what degree video games boost our cognition. That is because they select for people whose attentional, memory, learning, problem-solving, and decision-making abilities are already above average. Despite all that, it is safe to say that gamers tend to rank higher for these cognitive abilities than the rest of the population.

If you feel that your gaming habit is affecting your life, we can help. Sign up to work with a HealthyGamer Coach, trained by Dr. Alok Kanojia himself. HealthyGamer Coaches are gamers who have taken control of their life, and know exactly what you’re going through.

SIGN UP FOR COACHING

If you’re a parent seeking help with your child’s video game addiction, check out our Family Programs .

Build the Life You Want to Live

Mental Health Newsletter

Get the latest in mental health research, industry updates, and more, latest posts, hg at the american psychiatric association annual conference 2022.

HG High-Level Research Methodology

The scientific benefits of touching grass.

Work with an HG Coach

Explore dr. k's guide to mental health, quick links, dr. k’s guide to parenting gamers.

Parent Coaching

Connect with us

Video game play may provide learning, health, social benefits, review finds

February 2014, Vol 45, No. 2

Print version: page 10

Playing video games, including violent shooter games, may boost children's learning, health and social skills, according to a review of research in American Psychologist .

The study comes out as debate continues among psychologists and other health professionals regarding the effects of violent media on youth. An APA task force is conducting a comprehensive review of research on violence in video games and interactive media and will release its findings later this year.

"Important research has already been conducted for decades on the negative effects of gaming, including addiction, depression and aggression, and we are certainly not suggesting that this should be ignored," says Isabela Granic, PhD, of Radboud University Nijmegen in The Netherlands, lead author of the article. "However, to understand the impact of video games on children's and adolescents' development, a more balanced perspective is needed."

While one widely held view maintains that playing video games is intellectually lazy, such play actually may strengthen a range of cognitive skills such as spatial navigation, reasoning, memory and perception, according to several studies reviewed in the article. This is particularly true for shooter video games, which are often violent, the authors found. A 2013 meta-analysis found that playing shooter video games improved a player's capacity to think about objects in three dimensions just as well as academic courses designed to enhance these same skills, according to the study.

"This has critical implications for education and career development, as previous research has established the power of spatial skills for achievement in science, technology, engineering and mathematics," Granic says.

This enhanced thinking was not found when playing other types of video games, such as puzzles or role-playing games.

Playing video games may also help children develop problem-solving skills, the authors said. The more adolescents reported playing strategic video games, such as role-playing games, the more they improved in problem solving and school grades the following year, according to a long-term study published in 2013. Children's creativity was also enhanced by playing any kind of video game, including violent games, but not when the children used other forms of technology, such as a computer or cell phone, other research revealed.

Simple games that are easy to access and can be played quickly, such as "Angry Birds," can improve players' moods, promote relaxation and ward off anxiety, the study said. "If playing video games simply makes people happier, this seems to be a fundamental emotional benefit to consider," said Granic. The authors also highlighted the possibility that video games are effective tools for learning resilience in the face of failure. By learning to cope with ongoing failures in games, the authors suggest that children build emotional resilience they can rely upon in their everyday lives.

Another stereotype the research challenges is the socially isolated gamer. More than 70 percent of gamers play with a friend, and millions of people worldwide participate in massive virtual worlds through video games such as "Farmville" and "World of Warcraft," the article noted. Multiplayer games become virtual social communities, where decisions need to be made quickly about whom to trust or reject and how to lead a group, the authors said. People who play video games, even if they are violent, that encourage cooperation are more likely to be helpful to others while gaming than those who play the same games competitively, a 2011 study found.

— Lisa Bowen

Letters to the Editor

• Send us a letter

Search form

• Methodology

How Games Can Boost Your Learning

Did you know that playing games can make you smarter, happier, and more creative?

In this article, we will explore how games can enhance your learning and pedagogical skills in various ways. Games are not only fun and entertaining, but also powerful tools for stimulating your brain, enhancing your memory, improving your problem-solving skills, fostering your creativity, and motivating you to achieve your goals. We will also discuss some of the challenges and opportunities of using games for learning and pedagogy in different contexts and settings. Whether you are a student, a teacher, a parent, or a lifelong learner, you will find some useful tips and insights on how to use games to boost your learning and creativity.

In Keith Bowen’s Stanford class EDU 391 (Engineering Education and Online Learning), I recently spoke about Heather Browning’s excellent book chapter where she discusses her MDAO Framework for designing serious games, which is seminar to our work on Game Design Thinking.

But she also surfaces work by Gentile and Gentile (2008) who suggested a list of seven “exemplary dimensions of video games”. At the time, they were looking at violent video games as a response to much of the previous literature around whether video games were harmful for children. But in the interim researchers have discovered that in fact video games have many positive and prosocial qualities for children and young adults.

In this article, we will explore some of the reasons why games are good pedagogical tools, based on these points:

Active and Participatory Learning

One of the main advantages of games as pedagogical tools is that they require players to be active and participatory in their learning process. Unlike passive forms of instruction, such as lectures or readings, games involve players in making decisions, solving problems, collaborating with others, and creating outcomes. These activities engage players cognitively, emotionally, socially, and physically, stimulating multiple senses and modes of learning.

By being active and participatory , players also take ownership over their actions and choices. They are not simply following instructions or rules, but rather exploring possibilities and consequences. This ownership fosters a sense of agency and autonomy , which are key factors for intrinsic motivation and self-determination .

One example of a video game that involves active and participatory learning is Minecraft, a sandbox game that allows players to create and explore virtual worlds made of blocks. Minecraft can be used to teach various subjects and skills, such as math, science, art, history, and programming.

In Minecraft, players are active and participatory in their learning process because they have to make decisions, solve problems, collaborate with others, and create outcomes. For example, players can design and build structures, such as houses, castles , bridges, or monuments, using different types of blocks and materials. They can also experiment with physics, chemistry, electricity, and logic by creating circuits, machines, or contraptions using redstone , a material that can transmit power and signals. They can also explore different biomes, such as forests, deserts, oceans, or caves, and encounter various creatures, such as animals, monsters, or villagers.

By being active and participatory in Minecraft, players take ownership over their actions and choices. They can see the impact of their decisions on the game world and their own progress. They can also compare their results with those of other players or with their own expectations. For example, players can share their creations online or in multiplayer servers, where they can receive feedback, praise, or criticism from other players. They can also set their own goals and challenges, such as surviving in a hostile environment, finding rare resources, or completing quests.

Ownership and Connection

When players take ownership over their actions in games, they also feel a greater sense of connection to their results. They can see the impact of their decisions on the game world, the characters, the story, and their own progress. They can also compare their results with those of other players or with their own expectations. This connection provides players with a sense of meaning and purpose for their learning.

Moreover, games can create emotional connections between players and the content they are learning. Games can elicit various emotions , such as curiosity, excitement, joy, frustration, anger, fear, or empathy. These emotions can enhance memory retention and recall, as well as influence attitudes and behaviors. For example, games that simulate real-world scenarios can help players empathize with different perspectives or situations.

One video game that involves ownership and connection is Animal Crossing, a life simulation game that allows players to create and customize their own characters, homes, and islands. Animal Crossing can be used to teach various subjects and skills, such as art, design, economics, and social studies.

In Animal Crossing, players have ownership and connection over their actions and choices. They can see the impact of their decisions on the game world and their own progress. They can also compare their results with those of other players or with their own expectations. For example, players can design and decorate their homes, gardens, or shops, using different types of furniture, clothing, or items. They can also trade or sell items with other players or with in-game characters, using a currency called Bells . They can also explore different seasons, events, or activities, such as fishing, gardening, or celebrating holidays .

By having ownership and connection in Animal Crossing, players also feel a greater sense of meaning and purpose for their learning. They can express their creativity, personality, and preferences through their creations. They can also learn about different cultures, customs, or lifestyles by interacting with other players or with in-game characters. They can also develop social and emotional skills, such as communication, cooperation, empathy, or responsibility.

Clear Objectives and Self-Efficacy

Another benefit of games as pedagogical tools is that they provide clear objectives that function as unequivocal markers of success. Games usually have explicit goals that players need to achieve in order to progress or win. These goals can be short-term or long-term, individual or collective, concrete or abstract. They can also be aligned with specific learning outcomes or competencies.

By having clear objectives, games help players monitor their performance and evaluate their progress. They also provide feedback on how well players are doing in relation to the objectives. This feedback can be positive or negative, immediate or delayed, verbal or non-verbal. It can also be adaptive or personalized to the player’s level of skill or knowledge.

Feedback is essential for enhancing self-efficacy, which is the belief in one’s ability to perform a task or achieve a goal. Self-efficacy influences motivation, effort, persistence, resilience, and achievement. Games can increase self-efficacy by providing players with opportunities to succeed at challenging tasks, by rewarding them for their achievements, by modeling successful strategies or behaviors, and by offering them support or guidance when needed.

One video game that involves clear objectives and self-efficacy is Super Mario Bros, a platform game that requires players to control the character Mario as he runs and jumps through various levels to rescue Princess Peach from the villain Bowser. Super Mario Bros can be used to teach various subjects and skills, such as math, physics, logic, and coordination.

In Super Mario Bros, players have clear objectives that function as unequivocal markers of success. They have to reach the end of each level within a time limit, avoiding or defeating enemies and obstacles along the way. They also have to collect coins, power-ups, and extra lives that can help them in their quest. They can also find hidden secrets , such as warp zones or bonus rooms, that can reward them with shortcuts or extra points.

By having clear objectives, Super Mario Bros helps players monitor their performance and evaluate their progress. It also provides feedback on how well players are doing in relation to the objectives. This feedback can be positive or negative, immediate or delayed, verbal or non-verbal. It can also be adaptive or personalized to the player’s level of skill or knowledge. For example, Super Mario Bros can show players how many coins, points, or lives they have, how much time they have left, how many levels they have completed, or how many times they have died.

Feedback is essential for enhancing self-efficacy, which is the belief in one’s ability to perform a task or achieve a goal. Self-efficacy influences motivation, effort, persistence, resilience, and achievement. Super Mario Bros can increase self-efficacy by providing players with opportunities to succeed at challenging tasks, by rewarding them for their achievements, by modeling successful strategies or behaviors, and by offering them support or guidance when needed.

Variable Difficulty Levels

Games can also adjust their difficulty levels according to the player’s performance. This feature allows games to match the player’s level of skill or knowledge, and to provide them with optimal challenges that are neither too easy nor too hard. This way, games can effectively eliminate boredom and frustration, which are responses to tasks with inappropriate difficulties and can interfere with continued participation.

By providing variable difficulty levels, games can also promote the concept of “ zone of proximal development ” (ZPD), which is the range of tasks that are slightly beyond the current level of competence but can be accomplished with some assistance. Games can act as scaffolds that support players within their ZPD, by providing hints, clues, tips, or other forms of help that enable them to overcome obstacles and reach higher levels of performance.

One video game that involves variable difficulty levels is The Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild, an open-world adventure game that requires players to control the character Link as he explores the vast land of Hyrule, solves puzzles, and fights enemies to defeat the evil Ganon. Breath Of The Wild can be used to teach various subjects and skills, such as geography, history, ecology, and critical thinking.

In Breath Of The Wild, players can choose from two difficulty levels at the start of the game: Normal or Master Mode. Master Mode is a DLC (downloadable content) Hard Mode that increases the rank, health, and intelligence of enemies, adds floating platforms with enemies and treasure, and makes enemies regenerate health in combat. Master Mode also adds a new rank of enemy, the Gold Rank, which is even tougher than the Silver Rank.

However, Breath Of The Wild also has a feature that adjusts its difficulty level according to the player’s performance. This feature is called adaptive difficulty or dynamic difficulty adjustment (DDA), and it works by monitoring various factors, such as the number of enemies defeated, the number of shrines completed, the number of divine beasts freed, and the time spent in the game. Based on these factors, the game can increase or decrease its difficulty by changing the spawn rate, type, and behavior of enemies, the amount and quality of items and weapons found in chests or dropped by enemies, and the weather and environmental hazards.

By providing variable difficulty levels, Breath Of The Wild can match the player’s level of skill or knowledge, and provide them with optimal challenges that are neither too easy nor too hard. This way, Breath Of The Wild can effectively eliminate boredom and frustration, which are responses to tasks with inappropriate difficulties and can interfere with continued participation.

Breath Of The Wild can act as a scaffold that supports players within their ZPD, by providing hints, clues, tips, or other forms of help that enable them to overcome obstacles and reach higher levels of performance.

Immediate Feedback and Practice

Games also provide immediate feedback to players as they practice skills, allowing them to continually advance their practice by instantly applying the knowledge gained. Practice is essential for learning, as it helps consolidate information in long-term memory , enhance recall and retrieval, and transfer skills to new contexts. Games can facilitate practice by providing repeated opportunities to apply skills in different situations, by varying the types and levels of difficulty of the tasks, by increasing the complexity and challenge of the tasks over time, and by providing feedback and reinforcement for correct or incorrect responses.

One video game that involves immediate feedback and practice is Rock Band, a rhythm game that requires players to press buttons on a different controllers which look like a bass or rhythm guitar, a drum set, or a microphone, in sync with musical notes that scroll on the screen. Rock Band can be used to teach various subjects and skills, such as music, coordination, memory, and concentration.

In Rock Band, players receive immediate feedback on their performance by hearing the sound of their instruments, seeing the score and the accuracy meter, and getting cheers or boos from the crowd. The feedback can be positive or negative, depending on how well the player matches the notes. The feedback can also be personalized to the player’s level of skill or knowledge, as the game can adjust the speed, number, and complexity of the notes according to the difficulty level chosen by the player.

By providing immediate feedback, Rock Band helps players monitor their performance and evaluate their progress. It also provides reinforcement or correction for their actions, which can enhance their motivation, confidence, and learning. Rock Band also facilitates practice by providing repeated opportunities to apply skills in different songs, genres , and modes. The game also encourages players to practice beyond the point of mastery and create automaticity, as they can unlock new songs, levels, or features by achieving high scores or completing challenges.

Over Learning and Automaticity

Games also encourage players to “over learn”, continuing their practice beyond the point of mastery and creating automaticity. Automaticity is the ability to perform a skill without conscious effort or attention, which frees up cognitive resources for other tasks or higher-order thinking. Games can foster automaticity by requiring players to perform skills under time pressure or distraction, by increasing the speed or accuracy of the responses, by combining multiple skills in a single task, and by providing rewards or incentives for optimal performance.

One video game that involves overlearning and automaticity is Dance Dance Revolution, a rhythm game that requires players to step on a dance pad in sync with musical arrows that scroll on the screen. Dance Dance Revolution can be used to teach various subjects and skills, such as music, coordination, memory, and fitness.

In Dance Dance Revolution, players practice skills beyond the point of mastery and create automaticity by repeating the same actions over and over again. Dance Dance Revolution can foster automaticity by requiring players to perform complex and fast-paced dance moves under time pressure or distraction, by increasing the speed or accuracy of the arrows, by combining multiple moves in a single song, and by providing rewards or incentives for optimal performance.

Flow State and Learning

Finally, games can induce a flow state in players, which is a psychological state of optimal experience characterized by intense focus, immersion, enjoyment, and motivation. Flow occurs when the challenge of a task matches the skill of the performer, and when there is clear feedback and a sense of control. Flow also promotes learning, by increasing self-efficacy and readiness to experiment with new ways of using learned skills, by enhancing creativity and problem-solving abilities, and by facilitating intrinsic motivation and interest.

One video game that involves flow state and learning is Tetris, a puzzle game that requires players to manipulate falling blocks of different shapes and colors to create horizontal lines without gaps. Tetris can be used to teach various subjects and skills, such as math, geometry, logic, and spatial reasoning.

Tetris can create these conditions of flow by providing players with clear goals, immediate feedback, variable difficulty levels, and minimal distractions.

By inducing a flow state, Tetris also promotes learning, by increasing self-efficacy and readiness to experiment with new ways of using learned skills, by enhancing creativity and problem-solving abilities, and by facilitating intrinsic motivation and interest. Tetris can also improve cognitive functions, such as attention, memory, perception, and mental rotation.

How To Design Using These Principles

An practitioner who is not making a game can still take advantage of the main points from this article by applying some of the principles and practices of game design to their learning products or experiences. For example, an edtech designer could:

• Provide clear objectives and feedback to learners, so that they know what they are expected to do and how well they are doing it. This could be done by using learning outcomes, rubrics, quizzes, badges, or progress bars.
• Provide variable difficulty levels to learners, so that they can choose or adjust the level of challenge that suits their skill and knowledge. This could be done by using adaptive algorithms, branching scenarios, scaffolding, or hints.
• Provide immediate feedback and practice to learners, so that they can learn from their mistakes and improve their performance. This could be done by using interactive simulations, animations, videos, or exercises.
• Provide overlearning and automaticity to learners, so that they can master and apply skills without conscious effort or attention. This could be done by using spaced repetition, retrieval practice, or interleaving.
• Provide flow state  to learners, so that they can experience optimal engagement, enjoyment, and motivation. This could be done by using storytelling, personalization, choice, or collaboration.

As we have seen, games are not only fun and entertaining, but also powerful tools for learning and pedagogy. They can stimulate your brain, enhance your memory, improve your problem-solving skills, foster your creativity, and motivate you to achieve your goals.

However, using games for learning and pedagogy also requires careful planning, design, and evaluation to ensure that they are effective, engaging, and appropriate for the intended audience and context.

And we can use many of these principles for creating digital learning experiences that don’t involve games at all.

I am indebted to Heather Browning’s seminar chapter on Guidelines for Designing Effective Games as Clinical Interventions: Mechanics, Dynamics, Aesthetics, and Outcomes (MDAO) Framework as it introduced me to the work of Gentile and Gentile and taught be so much about expanding the MDA Framework of game design.

• Maps & Directions
• Search Stanford
• Terms of Use
• Emergency Info

© Stanford University .  Stanford , California 94305 . Copyright Complaints     Trademark Notice

• Mental Health

Are There Mental Health Benefits of Video Games?

There are many misconceptions about video games and the impact they have on mental health. The truth is that video games have many benefits, including developing complex problem-solving skills and promoting social interaction through online gaming. Video games can be a great way to stimulate your mind and improve your mental health. 

Benefits of Video Games

Playing video games has numerous benefits for your mental health. Video games can help you relieve stress and get your mind going. Some benefits include: 

Mental stimulation. Video games often make you think. When you play video games, almost every part of your brain is working to help you achieve higher-level thinking. Depending on the complexity of the game, you may have to think, strategize, and analyze quickly. Playing video games works with deeper parts of your brain that improve development and critical thinking skills.

Feeling accomplished. In the game, you have goals and objectives to reach. Once you achieve them, they bring you a lot of satisfaction, which improves your overall well-being. This sense of achievement is heightened when you play games that give you trophies or badges for certain goals. Trying to get more achievements gives you something to work toward. 

Mental health recovery. Regardless of the type, playing games can help with trauma recovery. Video games can act as distractions from pain and psychological trauma. Video games can also help people who are dealing with mental disorders like anxiety, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) , and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Social interaction. Multiplayer and online games are good for virtual social interaction. In fast-paced game settings, you’ll need to learn who to trust and who to leave behind within the game. Multiplayer games encourage cooperation. It’s also a low-stakes environment for you to test out talking to and fostering relationships with new people. 

Emotional resilience. When you fail in a game or in other situations, it can be frustrating. Video games help people learn how to cope with failure and keep trying. This is an important tool for children to learn and use as they get older. 

Despite what people may think, playing video games boosts your mood and has lasting effects. Whether you’re using gaming to spend time with your friends or to release some stress, it's a great option. 

Playing for Your Well-Being

Playing video games has been linked to improved moods and mental health benefits. It might seem natural to think that violent video games like first-person shooters aren’t good for your mental health. However, all video games can be beneficial for different reasons.

Try strategic video games. Role-playing and other strategic games can help strengthen problem-solving skills. There’s little research that says violent video games are bad for your mental health. Almost any game that encourages decision-making and critical thinking is beneficial for your mental health. 

Set limits. Though video games themselves aren’t bad for your mental health, becoming addicted to them can be. Spending too much time gaming can lead to isolation. You may also not want to be around people in the real world. When you start to feel yourself using video games as an escape, you might need to slow down.

If you can’t stop playing video games on your own, you can contact a mental health professional .  

Play with friends. Make game time fun by playing with friends. There are online communities you can join for your favorite games. Moderate gaming time with friends can help with socialization, relaxation, and managing stress. 

Limits of Video Games as a Mood Booster

Video games stop being good for you when you play an excessive amount. More than 10 hours per week is considered “excessive.” In these cases, you may:

• Have anxious feelings
• Be unable to sleep
• Not want to be in social settings

Another troubling sign is using video games to escape real life. As noted above, this type of behavior can lead to video game addiction, which then leads to other negative behaviors. Too much gaming can become a problem, but in moderation, it can do great things for your mental health.

Top doctors in ,

Find more top doctors on, related links.

• Mental Health Home
• Mental Health News & Features
• Mental Health Reference
• Mental Health Quizzes
• Mental Health Slideshows
• Mental Health Blogs
• Mental Health Videos
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Anxiety & Panic Disorders
• Bipolar Disorder
• Crisis Assistance
• Eating Disorders
• Health & Balance
• Personality Disorders
• Schizophrenia
• Social Media and Mental Health
• Stress Management
• Substance Abuse & Addiction
• More Related Topics

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

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 A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Can playing video games improve cognition and adaptability?

A recent study by ADL with Sheppard Air Force Base has shown that a video game having specific design features (i.e., implicit rules, implicit rule changes, dynamic shifting environments, open endedness, and implicit feedback) can enhance specific cognitive capabilities after playing for 12 consecutive hours as compared to games without those features. This was determined by having airmen play either Portal 2™ (a game that has the design features) or Windows 7 Microsoft™ games (Solitaire, Minesweeper, Mahjong, and Hearts, all games lacking the five design features) bookended by pre- and post-play cognitive testing. Those playing Portal 2™ scored significantly higher on focused attention – in both signal detection (correctly recognizing and interpreting the information) and response latency (the amount of time taken to respond to the information). Scoring higher on these tests means that one can more easily and quickly detect what’s important from what isn’t important when solving problems.

Another very interesting finding was that playing video games for 19 hours a week or more may significantly increase cognitive capabilities in the areas of spatial working memory, spatial sequencing, and cognitive planning. This was discovered by grouping test results by those who identified themselves as playing 19 hours of video games per week (high gamers) or those playing less than that (low gamers). The differences on the cognitive tests were all significant (p=.001, p=.003, p=.001) with increased scores in high gamers. In other words, this means that playing video games seems to enhance spatial abilities such as remembering and tracking objects in space – i.e., creating a cognitive map – as well as the processes involved in the formulation, evaluation, and selection of a sequence of thoughts and actions to achieve a desired goal.

Why do we care? Spatial abilities are important in navigating from one place to another in the virtual or the real world – driving in traffic, getting to the office, going home; or if you’re a lab rat, learning the location of food at the end of a maze. However, they are also frequently noted as important to language acquisition and mathematical comprehension, and are important components of higher order thinking skills such as problem solving and critical thinking (Osberg, 1997). Cognitive planning makes use of these abilities as an individual thinks through the steps and sequence of steps to solve problems. This is a critical skill to reason out problem solutions and evaluate results, and supports cognitive adaptability as one mentally “tries out” various solutions to a novel problem before acting. An increase in spatial abilities and cognitive planning in combination with an increase in quality and quickness of signal detection, suggests that frequency of video game playing generally, as well as specifically playing games with the above mentioned features, can increase cognitive capabilities in the players and specifically those capabilities important to being cognitively adaptable.

Osberg, K. (1997). Spatial cognition in the Virtual Environment. Seattle: University of Washington.

5 video games to help tweens and teens boost reasoning skills

By Amanda Morin

Expert reviewed by Jessica Millstone, EdM, MPS

You may worry that your teen or tween plays too many video games. But there are some great games for building critical-reasoning skills. Those skills help kids become good decision makers and problem solvers.

The object of SimCity and SimCity Creator is to build a civilization from the ground up. Players have to plan and anticipate what the city will need as it evolves. A society that begins with hunters can quickly grow into one that needs factories and school. Players need to know zoning laws and municipal codes as they build. They also must use problem-solving skills to find ways to meet the challenges of supply and demand.

Scribblenauts

Scribblenauts is much less action packed than some other video games. But it uses critical reasoning in a unique way. Players have to solve the spatially oriented obstacles the hero encounters going through the levels. And they do it by literally writing the solution and having it appear. Players can write simple things, such as “ropes.” Or they can write crazier things, such as “Yeti the snowman-like creature on a lawnmower.”

Portal is set in a 3D world called Aperture Science Enrichment Center. Players work together to get around obstacles that keep characters from getting out of Aperture. Tasks get harder as players improve. They range from putting an object in the right place in order to open a door to getting through multiple portals in a short time. Schools often use Portal 2 because it’s a fun way to think about spatial reasoning and basic physics.

Minecraft is a video game that your teen or tween can customize. Players must figure out ways to use virtual blocks to build communities. They also must mine the materials they need to make tools, food, clothing, and whatever else they need to sustain their environment. Multiple modes of game play give players a chance to see how different plans pan out. If one doesn’t work, players can rebuild from scratch.

The Legend of Zelda

In this series, players attempt to save kingdoms, battle monsters, and follow a story line. They must use flexible thinking, planning, and working memory skills as they navigate the game. They also need to solve puzzles, learn how to master swordplay, and deal with other characters. All of this goes on with distractions in the background. The game doesn’t have voiceovers, so your tween or teen will be practicing reading skills as well.

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Top Video Games That Could Make You Smarter

by Ronaldo Tumbokon Updated July 9, 2023

Playing video games is not usually associated with improving the brain or making one smarter, but this is what many studies suggest.  Many kids love playing video games. It is one of the most fun and engaging childhood activities.  Kids will do anything to win, including giving their brains a strenuous workout.

This strenuous mental workout consists of mastering a lot of cognitive as well as motor demands.  As players work with the intellectual and motor skills needed to win a game, their brains adapt to the pressure by learning, as well as by physically growing, according to many studies.  Indeed, many researchers think that playing video games is a form of weightlifting for the brain .

When playing video games, the players’ brains are stressed and adapt to the kind of challenges they face. Researchers have found that this learning and mastering a challenging task can actually change the brain.

“Videogames change your brain,” according to University of Wisconsin psychologist C. Shawn Green , “So does learning to read, playing the piano, or navigating the streets of London, which have all been shown to change the brain’s physical structure. The powerful combination of concentration and rewarding surges of neurotransmitters like dopamine strengthen neural circuits in much the same the way that exercise builds muscles… Games definitely hit the reward system in a way that not all activities do.”

Not all video games are played the same, therefore different video games present different cognitive challenges and emphasize different thinking skills.  The differences in the way the game is played categorizes video games into genres.  The more popular video game genres are first person shooters, strategy games, simulation games, and puzzle games.

Below are the most popular game genres and the cognitive and motor challenges they present, which forces the players’ brains to adapt, learn, change, and become smarter.  Note that a game can belong to more than one genres and may involve the use and development of multiple skills:

Strategy Games

Strategy games requires the brain to plan, strategize and manage limited resources and logistics.  When playing a strategy game, the player has to be flexible and should be quick to change tactics when something unexpected suddenly happens, just like in the real world.  Playing a strategy game also involves making fast analysis and quick decisions, sometimes with incomplete information.

Complex, strategy-based games can improve other cognitive skills, including working memory and reasoning.

• Crusader Kings III

Crusader Kings III puts players in control of a medieval dynasty, requiring them to make intricate decisions that shape their family’s legacy. With a focus on decision-making, the game challenges players to navigate complex family dynamics, manage vassals, forge alliances, and wage wars. It encourages strategic planning and adaptability as players must plan long-term goals, succession strategies, and territorial expansion while responding to unexpected events. Negotiation and diplomacy also play a significant role, fostering skills in managing relationships and forging alliances. With its immersive and intellectually demanding gameplay, Crusader Kings III provides a rich and rewarding experience that enhances critical thinking, problem-solving, and strategic skills.

In Humankind, players guide a civilization’s evolution from ancient times to the modern era. Through strategic planning, decision-making, and resource management, players shape their civilization’s cultural and technological development. Players must plan and execute strategies for city development, resource management, and expansion. They need to consider terrain, trade routes, and rival civilizations to thrive and achieve victory. The game fosters critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity as players navigate challenges, adapt to a dynamic world, and devise innovative strategies. With its emphasis on historical strategy and the cultivation of various mental skills, Humankind provides a captivating and educational experience.

• Phoenix Point

Phoenix Point is set in a post-apocalyptic world overrun by alien creatures, the game is a turn-based tactics experience where players lead a squad of soldiers in challenging battles. Tactical decision making plays a crucial role as players strategically position their soldiers, utilize cover effectively, and carefully select weapons and abilities to counter the alien threats. Resource management is also key, as players must efficiently allocate and manage resources, including research, manufacturing, and personnel, to develop advanced weaponry and technology. This resource management aspect requires efficient allocation of limited resources, fostering skills such as prioritization, organization, and problem-solving. The game further enhances mental skills by presenting players with complex scenarios and strategic challenges that demand critical thinking, planning, reasoning, and spatial awareness to overcome. Phoenix Point offers a dynamic and intellectually enriching gaming experience for players to sharpen their tactical acumen and problem-solving prowess.

“Starcraft,” is a science fiction real time strategy game where different alien species fight for dominance.  Each specie has different fighting units available and requires different tactics to win.  The game involves resource management to build and sustain units.  A study has found that playing Starcraft can increase a player’s “brain flexibility,” the ability to allocate the brain’s resources under changing circumstances, which the scientists described as “a cornerstone of human intelligence.”

• XCom Enemy Unknown

XCOM enemy unknown, a science fiction turn-based strategy game, allows players to control the fate of the human race by creating and managing a fully operational base, researching alien technologies, planning combat missions and controlling soldier movement in battles.

• Civilization

Civilization 6 is a strategy game that is recognized as one of the greatest strategy franchise of all time.  Players strategize to become Ruler of the World by creating and advancing civilization from the dawn of man and into space age.  It involves waging wars, conducting diplomacy, discovering new technologies, and going head-to-head with some of history’s greatest leaders.

First Person Shooters

A player needs a developed hand-eye coordination to be a good first person shooter.  In almost every second of the game, a player keeps track of the position of the enemy, his speed, where the gun is aiming, and so on.  The player simultaneously works these factors out in his head, and coordinates his brain’s interpretation and reaction with the movement in his hands and fingertips.  He also needs to think fast, making decisions that are accurate under stressful situation.

In trying a combination of weapons and power to defeat an enemy, the player’s mind goes through the process of hypothesis testing, which is an important foundation for scientific thinking.

Playing first person shooters is found to strengthen a range of cognitive skills such as spatial navigation, reasoning, memory and perception, according to several studies reviewed in the article .

• Doom Eternal

Doom Eternal is an intense first-person shooter that immerses players in a fast-paced and adrenaline-pumping battle against hordes of demons. The game demands quick reflexes, hand-eye coordination, precision aiming, and strategic thinking as players navigate labyrinthine levels and engage in frenetic combat. It offers a challenging experience that requires split-second decision-making, spatial awareness, and problem-solving to effectively maneuver through the chaotic environments and defeat powerful enemies. It presents players with challenging combat encounters and environmental puzzles that require analytical thinking and creative problem-solving skills to overcome. Doom Eternal’s relentless action and complex level design push players to stay engaged, react swiftly, and employ tactical strategies, making it a great video game for the brain as it enhances reflexes, cognitive agility, and strategic decision-making skills.

• Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War

Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War is an immersive first-person shooter that thrusts players into the high-stakes world of Cold War espionage and military operations. The game offers a compelling narrative, intense multiplayer battles, and a captivating Zombies mode. With its fast-paced gameplay and dynamic environments, it challenges players to think quickly, strategize, and make split-second decisions under pressure. The game promotes critical thinking, situational awareness, and hand-eye coordination as players engage in tactical combat, navigate complex maps, and work collaboratively with teammates. Additionally, the multiplayer mode encourages teamwork, coordination, communication, and adaptability, fostering social and cognitive skills to achieve objectives.

According to a University of Rochester study , shooting bad guys in video games can unexpectedly give players better vision.  In a 2009 study, expert action gamers who played first-person shooting games like “Call of Duty” saw a boost in their “contrast sensitivity function,” or the ability to discern subtle changes in the brightness of an image. Considered one of first of the visual aptitudes to diminish over time, the ability to pick out bright patches is key to tasks like driving at night.

Valorant is a highly competitive and tactical first-person shooter that demands precise aim, strategic planning, and teamwork. Set in a futuristic world, the game pits two teams against each other in intense, objective-based matches. Players must utilize a combination of reflexes, communication, and critical thinking to outsmart their opponents and secure victory. Valorant promotes cognitive skills such as situational awareness, decision-making, and quick adaptation to ever-changing scenarios. It requires players to analyze the map, coordinate strategies, and execute precise shots to succeed. The game’s emphasis on teamwork further enhances social and communication skills, fostering collaboration and coordination. With its challenging gameplay and focus on strategic thinking and precision, Valorant provides an engaging and mentally stimulating experience that strengthens cognitive abilities and promotes strategic problem-solving

Overwatch is a stylized online multiplayer team-based first-person shooter set on earth in the near future and pits a diverse cast of fighters with distinct personalities which include soldiers, mercenaries, scientists and other oddballs. The action is intense, and it requires players to continuously assess and react, and make moment by moment decisions based on positioning, map layout, abilities, character selection, enemy position, and more. Available weapons range from a realistic handgun to over-the-top futuristic weapons, but the player’s most powerful weapon is his brain. The game involves a lot of fast strategic and tactical thinking, decision-making and hand-eye coordination.

• Battlefield 4

In Battlefield 4, the player control Sgt. “Reck” Recker who leads a squad of soldiers.  The battles are in land, air and sea, complete with intense water-based vehicle combat.  Playing involves the use of a heads-up-display that shows a min-map of the battlefield.  Players can use a variety of weapons and use a variety of survival capabilities. Playing games such as Battlefield enables players to effectively judge what information should be stored in their working memory and what can be discarded considering the task at hand, according to a study published in the Psychological Research.

Titanfall is a multiplayer first-person shooter where players control “pilots” and their mech-style Titans, and fight in six-on-six matches set in war-torn outer space colonies.  It features fast-paced future warfare, and enables players to have the tactical ability of x-ray vision, invisibility cloaking and regenerating speed boosts.  Players employ tactics that they can change quickly on the fly.

In Destiny, players become the Guardian of the last city on Earth, able to wield incredible power, exploring the ancient ruins of our solar system and defeating Earth’s enemies. It boasts an unprecedented variety of first person shooter gameplay, and players are able to customize with nearly unlimited combination of armor, weapons, and visual customization.  The game integrates a number of differing genre elements – aside from being a first person shooter, it is also a role playing and massively multiplayer online (MMO) game.

Action Role Playing Games

• Cyberpunk 2077

Cyberpunk 2077 is an immersive open-world role-playing game set in a dystopian future. It combines elements of action, exploration, and decision-making to create a rich and complex gaming experience. The game encourages players to think critically, make moral choices, and navigate intricate storylines filled with deep characters and political intrigue. It involves managing resources, such as weapons, cybernetic upgrades, and consumables. Players need to make strategic decisions on how to allocate and utilize these resources effectively. Cyberpunk 2077’s expansive world offers multiple paths to explore, fostering problem-solving and adaptability as players tackle challenges through various approaches. Players must adapt to the consequences of their decisions and make choices that align with their desired playstyle. The game’s deep customization options and character development systems also promote strategic thinking and long-term planning.

• Assassin’s Creed Valhalla

Assassin’s Creed Valhalla is an epic action-adventure game that transports players to the Viking Age, immersing them in a rich historical setting. The game combines exploration, combat, and stealth elements to create a compelling and mentally engaging experience. It offers a vast open world to explore, requiring players to observe their surroundings, uncover secrets, and discover hidden treasures. Players must employ critical thinking and problem-solving skills as they navigate complex quests, strategize raids, and uncover the secrets of the open world. Valhalla’s emphasis on stealth and assassination requires players to analyze environments, plan their approach, and execute precise movements. It also requires time management skills as the game features a day-night cycle and dynamic events. Players must manage their time effectively to complete quests, engage in activities, and make strategic decisions based on the time of day. Furthermore, the game’s historical accuracy and attention to detail encourage players to learn about Viking culture, history, and mythology, promoting a sense of curiosity and expanding knowledge.

• Monster Hunter Rise

Monster Hunter Rise is an exhilarating action role-playing game that transports players to a vibrant and dangerous world filled with majestic creatures. As hunters, players embark on thrilling quests to track and slay these formidable beasts, requiring strategic thinking, precise timing, and resource management. The game promotes cognitive skills such as observation, problem-solving, and decision-making as players analyze monster behavior, exploit weaknesses, and adapt their strategies on the fly. Monster Hunter Rise also encourages effective communication, teamwork and coordination in its multiplayer mode, fostering social and communication skills. With its intricate combat mechanics, complex monster encounters, and the need to strategize and adapt.

The player controls the protagonist, Geralt of Riva, a monster hunter known as a Witcher, in his quest to find his missing adopted daughter. It takes players in an awe-inspiring open world adventure, completing side quests and acquiring experience points and gold that he can use to buy or repair stuff he needs to succeed. Players engage the game’s monsters and other dangers with weapons, magic, and potions. The game requires from players a lot of decision making, eye-hand coordination and flexibility in the face of ever-changing situations. It also teaches goal attainment and efficient resource management.

In Diablo, players choose one of many character classes – like witch doctor, barbarian, wizard, crusader – and aim to defeat the Lord of Terror, Diablo.  It involves exploring, acquiring, and trading weapons, armor and magic items and battling hordes and demons.

• The Elder Scrolls

Players (playing with a first or third person perspective) freely roam over the land of Skyrim, an open world consisting of wilderness expanses, dungeons, cities and towns.  Players navigate by riding horses or using a fast-travel system to warp to previously discovered locations.  The objective is to develop the player’s character so that it is able to cope with the quests it pursues.  The character also chooses from a variety of weapons, armor and magic that he acquired to be effective in combat.

• Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor

This is an open world video game where the player controls a Ranger named Talion.  There is a main quest, but the player has the freedom to pursue side quests and roam around the world.   The player levels up the abilities of Talion both as a Ranger and Wraith.  The “Shadow of Morder” has been called the strategic person’s action game.

• Mass Effect

This is a science fiction role playing action game that is also a third person shooter.  The player assumes the role of Commander Shephard and use extreme character customization.  The game reacts to every decision a player makes.  The game has a rich, branching storyline with multiple endings based on the player’s choices and actions throughout the game.

Simulation Games

Simulation games usually mimic the real world, such as flying a plane, managing a city or a zoo.  As such, it teaches or introduces real-world skills.  Many simulation games also teach players to make management decisions, such as the effective use of finite resources.  Many of them also requires math or number skills to make analysis needed for decisions and actions.

• Microsoft Flight Simulator

TMicrosoft Flight Simulator is a highly realistic flight simulation game that allows players to take the helm of various aircraft and explore the world from a pilot’s perspective. The game offers an expansive and detailed virtual representation of the Earth, providing players with the opportunity to navigate through accurate landscapes, weather conditions, and airport procedures. Flying in this immersive environment engages cognitive skills such as spatial awareness, attention to detail, and problem-solving as players manage complex flight systems, navigate routes, and make informed decisions. Microsoft Flight Simulator also encourages a deep understanding of geography, weather patterns, and aviation principles, promoting a sense of curiosity and learning. With its emphasis on realism and attention to detail, the game offers a mentally enriching experience that stimulates the brain, hones critical thinking, and fosters a passion for aviation and exploration.

• Animal Crossing: New Horizons

Animal Crossing: New Horizons is a charming and relaxing life simulation game that invites players to create their own virtual paradise on a deserted island. The game encourages creativity, problem-solving, and resource management as players build and customize their island, design their dream home, and interact with anthropomorphic animal villagers. It fosters a sense of responsibility and time management as players engage in various activities like fishing, bug catching, and gardening, while also engaging in social interactions and community development. Animal Crossing: New Horizons promotes mental well-being by providing a peaceful and low-stress environment, allowing players to escape and unwind. With its open-ended gameplay and gentle challenges, the game cultivates cognitive skills such as planning, organization, and artistic expression. It operates in real-time, encouraging players to manage their in-game activities and balance them with real-life responsibilities, thus also helping improve players’ time management skills.

• Two Point Hospital

Two Point Hospital is a delightful simulation game that puts players in charge of designing and managing their own hospital. With its humorous and quirky approach, the game challenges players to strategize and think critically as they tackle a variety of medical cases, hire and train staff, and optimize hospital operations. Players must balance budgets, prioritize patient needs, and expand their healthcare empire. Two Point Hospital promotes problem-solving skills as players diagnose and treat various ailments, manage resources efficiently, and handle unexpected crises. The game’s complexity and depth encourage players to analyze data, make informed decisions, and adapt to ever-changing situations, fostering cognitive skills such as critical thinking, multitasking, and organization. With its engaging gameplay and lighthearted presentation.

Sim City enables players to build a city and do the challenging job of urban planning.  Players zone land for residential, commercial or industrial development, as well as building and maintaining public services, transport and utilities. It effectively teaches players how to manage finite resources and the complex consequences of decisions.

• Farming Simulator

Puzzle Games

• The Pedestrian

The Pedestrian is a unique puzzle-platformer that takes players on a captivating journey through the world of public signs and symbols. As the player controls a 2D stick figure, they must navigate through interconnected signs and solve puzzles by rearranging and connecting them to progress. The game challenges players to think critically, solve spatial puzzles, and consider the interconnectedness of their surroundings. By manipulating signs and symbols, players exercise their problem-solving skills, spatial awareness, and logical thinking. The Pedestrian’s innovative gameplay mechanics and visual design engage players in a mentally stimulating experience that encourages creativity, strategic planning, and the ability to think outside the box.

Maquette is a mind-bending puzzle game that immerses players in a world where nested environments and recursive mechanics are the key to progression. Players navigate through a series of interconnected dioramas, manipulating objects in both the larger and smaller versions of the world to solve intricate puzzles. The game challenges the player’s spatial reasoning, critical thinking, and problem-solving abilities as they navigate the complex relationships between the different scales of the environment. Maquette prompts players to reflect on the relationships between the different elements in the game world and consider how changes in perspective can impact the puzzles. Maquette’s innovative gameplay mechanics encourage players to think outside the box, experiment with creative solutions, and perceive puzzles from multiple perspectives. With its captivating puzzles and thought-provoking mechanics, Maquette provides a mentally stimulating experience that exercises the brain and fosters cognitive skills such as abstraction, lateral thinking, and mental flexibility.

Unpacking is a zen-like puzzle game that revolves around the simple act of unpacking boxes and arranging items in a new living space. Players embark on a journey through various stages of a person’s life, carefully unpacking belongings and placing them in the appropriate spots. The game requires attention to detail, organization, and spatial reasoning as players decide where each item belongs based on context clues and personal preferences. Unpacking challenges players to think critically about the significance of objects and how they fit into a person’s life story. It promotes mindfulness and mental engagement as players meticulously arrange items, fostering a sense of order and creativity. With its calming atmosphere and emphasis on careful consideration, Unpacking provides a therapeutic and mentally stimulating experience that exercises the brain, hones organizational skills, and encourages introspection.

• Cut the Rope Series

This game, popular in mobile devices, uses game physics as the main element to solve puzzles.  The player help collect candies by cutting rope and manipulating objects and obstacles such as floating bubbles and bellows, using the touchscreen.  Each level introduces new challenges.

This mobile game uses logic and math skills to win.  Players swipe numbered tiles around the board.  When two tiles with the same number touch, they merge into one.  The object is to swipe numbered tiles around the board until a player create a tile with the number 2048

In “Portal”, the goal is to escape from an evil lab using only one tool, a portal gun which creates one blue and one orange portal, only one entry and exit portal at a time.  If you enter through the blue portal, you’ll come out of the orange portal, and vice-versa.  The game requires players to plan out his steps to escape traps.  The game environment are varied and in later levels of the game, the usefulness of the portal gun grows as well as the difficulty of the puzzle.   The puzzles can be completed with many possible solutions, and players are required to think and act not only logically, but also creatively as he uses the portal gun.

• Little Big Planet

Little Big Planet is a puzzle platform game where players control Sackboy, and navigates him through various levels, collecting items and battling the forces of Negativitron (which sucks the fun, color and life out of Craft World) along the way.  The best aspect of the game is the players’ using their creativity to design levels for them or others to play.  Players can make their own scenery, character, obstacle and even compose their own music.

Sports Games

FIFA 23 is a popular sports simulation game that recreates the excitement and intensity of professional soccer. As players take control of their favorite teams, the game challenges them to think strategically, make split-second decisions, and demonstrate precise control over the ball. FIFA 23 requires cognitive skills such as situational awareness, spatial reasoning, and quick reflexes as players navigate the field, analyze the movements of opponents, and execute skillful plays. Additionally, the game encourages strategic thinking as players develop tactics, make substitutions, team formations, player positioning, and adjust their gameplay to counter the strategies of their opponents. Players must devise effective strategies to outsmart opponents and create scoring opportunities. With its realistic gameplay and emphasis on strategy and skill, FIFA 23 provides an engaging and mentally stimulating experience that enhances critical thinking, decision-making abilities, and hand-eye coordination.

NBA 2K23 is a highly realistic basketball simulation game that immerses players in the world of professional basketball. It offers an authentic and immersive experience, challenging players to think strategically, make split-second decisions, and exhibit precise control over their in-game players. The game requires cognitive skills such as situational awareness, spatial reasoning, and quick reflexes as players navigate the court, analyze the movements of opponents, and execute skillful plays. The game presents players with dynamic situations on the court, such as defensive assignments, shot selection, and offensive strategies. Players must quickly analyze the game state and make decisions to solve challenges and find scoring opportunities. NBA 2K23 also promotes strategic thinking as players develop game plans, make substitutions, and adjust their tactics to counter the strategies of their opponents. With its lifelike gameplay and emphasis on strategy and skill, NBA 2K23 provides a mentally stimulating experience that enhances critical thinking, decision-making abilities, and hand-eye coordination, making it a good video game for the brain for both basketball enthusiasts and those looking for an engaging sports simulation experience.

• Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 1+2

Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 1+2 is an exhilarating skateboarding game that captures the thrill and excitement of the sport. Players perform jaw-dropping tricks, navigate challenging skate parks, and complete objectives. The game requires precise timing, spatial awareness, and quick reflexes as players execute complex trick combinations and maintain balance on their boards. It promotes cognitive skills such as problem-solving, pattern recognition, and creative thinking as players explore the environment, seek out opportunities for high-scoring tricks, and plan their routes. Players need to be aware of their surroundings, find unique lines, and execute imaginative combinations of tricks. Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 1+2 offers various challenges and objectives for players to complete. It promotes persistence, goal setting, and the drive to improve skills and achieve high scores.

This sports video game based on the NFL gives you all the moves of the American Football game and more.   There is even a skills trainer that teach not only gameplay skills, but strategy and football concepts as well.

Action Adventure

• Ghost of Tsushima

Ghost of Tsushima is a captivating action-adventure game that transports players to feudal Japan during the Mongol invasion of Tsushima Island. As players take on the role of a samurai, the game challenges them to think strategically, make tactical decisions, learn to focus, be observant, and exhibit stealth and combat skills. It offers stealth mechanics that require players to plan and execute silent takedowns, navigate enemy patrols, and use the environment to their advantage. It promotes strategic thinking and patience. Ghost of Tsushima promotes cognitive skills such as situational awareness, problem-solving, and decision-making as players navigate through vast open-world environments, analyze enemy patrols, and plan their approach to liberate the island. The game also encourages artistic expression through its stunning visuals and photo mode, fostering creativity and attention to detail.

• Marvel’s Spider-Man: Miles Morales

Marvel’s Spider-Man: Miles Morales is an exhilarating action-adventure game that allows players to step into the shoes of the iconic superhero Miles Morales. As players swing through the bustling streets of New York City, the game challenges them to think quickly, exhibit reflexes, and make split-second decisions. It promotes cognitive skills such as situational awareness, problem-solving, and strategic thinking as players navigate through complex environments, analyze enemy behavior, and utilize Miles’ unique powers. The game features various puzzles and challenges that require players to use Miles’ unique abilities to solve them, requiring the players’ problem-solving skills and thinking outside the box. The game also encourages empathy and moral decision-making as players balance their responsibilities as a hero with their personal relationships.

Minecraft is a very popular open-world sandbox game set in a landscape with blocks representing trees, dirt, rocks, water, and a lot more that are randomly generated.  Players perform various activities in the game, from building things, exploration, to combat.  There are no specific goals but there are different modes: survival, adventure, and creative.

Around the world, Minecraft is being used to educate children on everything from science to city planning to speaking a new language, said Joel Levin, co-founder and education director at the company TeacherGaming.  “Minecraft extends kids’ spatial reasoning skills, construction skills and understanding of planning,” said Eric Klopfer, a professor and the director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Scheller Teacher Education Program. “In many ways, it’s like a digital version of Lego .”

• Super Mario 64

In this platform game, the player controls Mario who explores Princess Peach’s castle to rescue her.  It places an emphasis on exploration within vast worlds that require players to complete many diverse missions in addition to the linear obstacle found in traditional platform games.

In a research conducted jointly by the Max Planck Institute for Human Development and Charite University Medicine St. Hedwig-Krankenhaus ,it was found that  players of Super Mario 64 on a Nintendo XXL had “significant” increased gray matter responsible for spatial orientation, memory formation, and strategic planning, as well as fine motor skills.

Keep in mind that although video games may actually have good effects on the brain when played in moderation, video game addiction or compulsive video gaming can have negative effects.

Also, it is important for kids to spend more amount of time in other activities that improve the mind such as reading and physical activity .

See also: The good and bad effects of video games How to choose a video game for you and your child

Educational Toys and Games to Help Make Your Kids Smart

Types of Play and Their Importance in Early Childhood Development

Life Skills Teens Should Learn – A Comprehensive Checklist

Related articles.

Tips on Raising a Smart Grade School Child

• 14 Benefits of Coding for Kids and Students

Allowance For Kids: The Pros, Cons and Some Useful Tips

Latest posts.

• Are Video Games Good For You? Here’s What Science Says
• Are Video Games Bad For You? Here’s What Science Says
• Life Skills for Kids By Age – A Comprehensive Checklist
• Teach Your Child to Read Early: A Step-by-Step Guide, Tools & Resources
• 101 Best Children’s Books of all Time – by Age
• Benefits of Reading and Being a Reader
• You Can’t Teach Baby to Read, Studies Say. Do These Instead
• How to Treat your Child’s Video Game Addiction

Popular Articles

• Best Educational Toys and Gift Ideas for Children, By Age 2024
• Benefits of Video Games: The Positive & Negative Effects
• Smartphone and Tablet Screen Time: Good or Bad for Kids?
• The Good and Bad Effects of TV on Children
• 50+ Parenting Tips On How To Raise A Smart Child
• The Effects of TV on Baby
• Good and Bad Effects of Social Media on Teens and Kids
• Benefits of Reading To Your Child
• All Articles
• Privacy & Contact Info

Copyright 2022 Ronaldo Tumbokon, LLC RaiseSmartKid.com