Oral Defence Flashcards
Why did you decide on this particular research question?
There has been a lot of negative press surrounding video games in recent years. However recent studies have looked into more positive effects of video games. I saw a lot of these studies do before and after effects on video game training but very little examining the short term effects. I thought that games would affect gamers and non-gamers differently, even prime VGs to do better
What have you found the most interesting aspect of your research?
That NVGs were able to improve to a point that matched VGs after training. Suggesting that VGs might be primed for these attention tests due to familiarity but that NVGs can do just as well on a second attempt
How did your thinking about this topic develop as you went through this research process?
I started off wondering about the positive effects of video games and then realised there was a lack of research for short term effects, so I incorporated that into my study and did both. I then started to consider other factors that may account for the data and included arousal as well
Now that you have finished the research, which part of the process would you say you enjoyed the most, and why?
I enjoyed the background research a lot, I like being able to link theories and increase my understanding of the topic. I find mastering a subject enjoyable especially those moments when information starts to price together. The results would have been more enjoyable if most of them were significant. I think most researchers want to find a significant result so its only natural to be disappointed when your hypothesis is unsupported
Were there any surprises along the way?
Yeah, the sheer time it can take to carry out a study. I wasn’t prepare for the 30+ hours I would have to spend in the emotion lab. I was also surprised at how little people were interested in my study. I expected more but I guess 50 minutes is asking a bit much.
How did doing research change you as a researcher?
I think it has better prepare me of the future to think ahead more and look at all the small details. I want to do a phd so ill definitely learn from my mistakes and carry out a better study with a more realistic time frame.
You refer to … as a key influence on your research. Can you summarise the particular relevance of their work?
Green and Bavelier essentially carried out a lot of studies examing the long term effects. Bavelier is a neuroscientist so she is interested in how video games modify the brain. They found action gamers have better FFOV , multiple object tracking etc. They also found that VGS brains actually supress distracting stimuli which could account for some of the improvements in ability they have gained.
You make only passing reference to the field of . . . why do you think that field is less relevant than the others you give more space to?
I think arousal is really something that effects many cognitive functions. I tried to control for it but in the end everyone’s levels of arousal are different so there should still be clear enough differences given a large sample size.
How well did the study design work in practice?
Honestly, it was quite hectic at first. The study took 50 minutes so everything have to work to a strict schedule so that students would not be late to their next class. I also hadn’t accounted for the time it would take for me to collect results on the first set of attention tests. So I made the decision to set up four computers instead of two. Running the attention tests on 1 and the game/video on the other.
Did you have any problems with the data collection process?
Yeah one of the computers froze and I lost all the data for 1 participant. Also the website I was using for the Stroop test went down so I had to quickly find an alternative. Unfortunately I had to discard those results as they didn’t match up when it came to the data analysis.
How did you establish the limits around the scope of your data collection?
I tried to think of everything that was essential. In retrospect I would have collected less data and taken out one of the tests. Three tests before and after plus a game for 20 minutes was a bit much.
Can you describe your main findings in a few sentences?
There are no significant short term effects of video games. VGs do better than NVGs in visual search but not significantly. Also practise seems to allow NVGs to match VGs in ability.
If you were starting your research again now, are there any changes in the way you would plan it?
Yes I would reduce the time it took to run the experiment.
In what way do you consider your research to be original?
To my knowledge there is no study examining differences between gamers and non-gamers on the short term effects of video games. The only other study also incorporates those with ADHD.
What are the research, practice, theoretical implications of your findings?
That for some attention tests VGs might merely be primed or more familiar with them so they initially perform better. This does not mean there are better than NVGs who have had practise. Also since there appears to be no short term benefits it may not mean a positive outcome but people can at least be relieved there is’nt a negative one.
