↓ Skip to main content

The case for causal influences of action videogame play upon vision and attention

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The case for causal influences of action videogame play upon vision and attention
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, February 2013
DOI 10.3758/s13414-013-0427-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Árni Kristjánsson

Abstract

Over the past decade, exciting findings have surfaced suggesting that routine action videogame play improves attentional and perceptual skills. Apparently, performance during multiple-object tracking, useful-field-of-view tests, and task switching improves, contrast sensitivity and spatial-resolution thresholds decrease, and the attentional blink and backward masking are lessened by short-term training on action videogames. These are remarkable findings showing promise for the training of attention and the treatment of disorders of attentional function. While the findings are interesting, evidence of causal influences of videogame play is not as strong as is often claimed. In many studies, observers with game play experience and those without are tested. Such studies do not address causality, since preexisting differences are not controlled for. Other studies investigate the training of videogame play, with some evidence of training benefits. Methodological shortcomings and potential confounds limit their impact, however, and they have not always been replicated. No longitudinal studies on videogame training exist, but these may be required to provide conclusive answers about any benefits of videogame training and any interaction with preexisting differences. Suggestions for methodological improvement are made here, including recommendations for longitudinal studies. Such studies may become crucial for the field of attentional training to reach its full potential.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 2 2%
Italy 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 122 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 22%
Student > Bachelor 25 19%
Student > Master 21 16%
Researcher 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 16 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 74 56%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 6%
Engineering 6 5%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Neuroscience 4 3%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 21 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 December 2013.
All research outputs
#13,512,822
of 24,143,470 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#470
of 1,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,498
of 290,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#5
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,143,470 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,781 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 290,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.