↓ Skip to main content

Association of Video Gaming With Cognitive Performance Among Children

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Network Open, October 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#42 of 9,994)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
217 news outlets
blogs
15 blogs
twitter
779 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
168 Mendeley
Title
Association of Video Gaming With Cognitive Performance Among Children
Published in
JAMA Network Open, October 2022
DOI 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.35721
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bader Chaarani, Joseph Ortigara, DeKang Yuan, Hannah Loso, Alexandra Potter, Hugh P. Garavan

Abstract

Although most research has linked video gaming to subsequent increases in aggressive behavior in children after accounting for prior aggression, findings have been divided with respect to video gaming's association with cognitive skills. To examine the association between video gaming and cognition in children using data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study. In this case-control study, cognitive performance and blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) signal were compared in video gamers (VGs) and non-video gamers (NVGs) during response inhibition and working memory using task-based functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in a large data set of 9- and 10-year-old children from the ABCD study, with good control of demographic, behavioral, and psychiatric confounding effects. A sample from the baseline assessment of the ABCD 2.0.1 release in 2019 was largely recruited across 21 sites in the US through public, private, and charter elementary schools using a population neuroscience approach to recruitment, aiming to mirror demographic variation in the US population. Children with valid neuroimaging and behavioral data were included. Some exclusions included common MRI contraindications, history of major neurologic disorders, and history of traumatic brain injury. Participants completed a self-reported screen time survey including an item asking children to report the time specifically spent on video gaming. All fMRI tasks were performed by all participants. Video gaming time, cognitive performance, and BOLD signal assessed with n-back and stop signal tasks on fMRI. Collected data were analyzed between October 2019 and October 2020. A total of 2217 children (mean [SD] age, 9.91 [0.62] years; 1399 [63.1%] female) participated in this study. The final sample used in the stop signal task analyses consisted of 1128 NVGs (0 gaming hours per week) and 679 VGs who played at least 21 hours per week. The final sample used in the n-back analyses consisted of 1278 NVGs who had never played video games (0 hours per week of gaming) and 800 VGs who played at least 21 hours per week. The VGs performed better on both fMRI tasks compared with the NVGs. Nonparametric analyses of fMRI data demonstrated a greater BOLD signal in VGs in the precuneus during inhibitory control. During working memory, a smaller BOLD signal was observed in VGs in parts of the occipital cortex and calcarine sulcus and a larger BOLD signal in the cingulate, middle, and frontal gyri and the precuneus. In this study, compared with NVGs, VGs were found to exhibit better cognitive performance involving response inhibition and working memory as well as altered BOLD signal in key regions of the cortex responsible for visual, attention, and memory processing. The findings are consistent with videogaming improving cognitive abilities that involve response inhibition and working memory and altering their underlying cortical pathways.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 779 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 168 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 168 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 9%
Researcher 14 8%
Student > Bachelor 10 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 4%
Other 6 4%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 96 57%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Computer Science 3 2%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 102 61%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2258. 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 03 January 2024.
All research outputs
#3,765
of 25,844,183 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Network Open
#42
of 9,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126
of 443,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Network Open
#3
of 558 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,844,183 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 128.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 443,286 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 558 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.