Medical Video Game Addiction Tied To Depression, Social Problems And Poorer Grades

[Ivan Seeking]

Video game addiction is a global phenomenon and appears to lead to poorer grades in school and serious psychological problems, including depression, anxiety, and social phobia, said an international team of researchers who followed over 3,000 third through eighth grade students in Singapore and found the percentage of pathological youth gamers there to be similar to other countries...

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/213929.php

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Here is an interesting link on how video games are made addicting
http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5-creepy-ways-video-games-are-trying-to-get-you-addicted.html

 

[DanP]

Here is an interesting link on how video games are made addicting
http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5-creepy-ways-video-games-are-trying-to-get-you-addicted.html

Sure, give that the behaviorism school of Psychology is dead and was totally wrong, all the explanations references to Skinner can be safely ignored. Still, the underlining idea is correct, video games can be made psychologically addictive by some of the techniques enumerated there.

 

[apeiron]

Sure, give that the behaviorism school of Psychology is dead and was totally wrong, all the explanations references to Skinner can be safely ignored. Still, the underlining idea is correct, video games can be made psychologically addictive by some of the techniques enumerated there.

How can Skinner be both totally wrong and also correct in some underlying fashion?

If you want to say that behaviourism is a sadly impoverished model of human behaviour, I would agree. But that does not make it a "wrong" model - as is proven by the very fact it can be so effictively applied in producing impoverished human behaviour such as gaming and gambling.

 

[DanP]

How can Skinner be both totally wrong and also correct in some underlying fashion?

Where did I said that that he is correct in some underlining factor ? The techniques described in the articles do work. That's what I meant with "correct" Explaining why they work through a limited behaviorist perspective is a joke IMO. And you seem to agree.

 

[apeiron]

Where did I said that that he is correct in some underlining factor ? The techniques described in the articles do work. That's what I meant with "correct" Explaining why they work through a limited behaviorist perspective is a joke IMO. And you seem to agree.

Err, wasn't behaviourism just about "the techniques that work"? That was its big selling point - it eschewed complicated theories for unadorned pragmatics. You didn't have to ask any why questions. You just described observables like stimulus and response.

Eg: from wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behaviorism

The behaviorist school of thought maintains that behaviors as such can be described scientifically without recourse either to internal physiological events or to hypothetical constructs such as the mind.[2] Behaviorism comprises the position that all theories should have observational correlates but that there are no philosophical differences between publicly observable processes (such as actions) and privately observable processes (such as thinking and feeling.

So what exactly do you mean is the "Skinnerian explanation" here that is wrong? There just is no explanation, simply a small collection of observed routines that can be classified and employed.

OK, I admit that Skinner and some enthusiasts did think they could push further than simple methodological behaviourism eventually. And that was hardly a success. So wrong in the sense that it was not ever going to be psychology's theory of everything.

(BTW, I really loved behaviourism - for about the first term at uni. It seemed so "scientific" at the time. It was also taught with great clarity (employing its own techniques). But yes, it soon became plain there was very little in behaviourism. You could get it all in a term and then get on with more complicated stuff.)

 

[DanP]

Err, wasn't behaviourism just about "the techniques that work"? That was its big selling point - it eschewed complicated theories for unadorned pragmatics. You didn't have to ask any why questions. You just described observables like stimulus and response.

yeah, Skinner and his cronies treated humans like black boxes.






T

 

[DanP]

So what exactly do you mean is the "Skinnerian explanation" here that is wrong? There just is no explanation, simply a small collection of observed routines that can be classified and employed.

OK, I admit that Skinner and some enthusiasts did think they could push further than simple methodological behaviourism eventually. And that was hardly a success. So wrong in the sense that it was not ever going to be psychology's theory of everything.

(BTW, I really loved behaviourism - for about the first term at uni. It seemed so "scientific" at the time. It was also taught with great clarity (employing its own techniques). But yes, it soon became plain there was very little in behaviourism. You could get it all in a term and then get on with more complicated stuff.)

Yes you are right. I agree with you.

 

[SpeedOfDark]

I fail to see sufficient evidence between these links, I can think of a few possibly overlooked contradictions.

As a 16 year old, I can say that MOST kids play video games even some of my teachers do. People of all endeavors, gender, race, social standing, and beliefs play them.

How do they know that people who're depressed aren't turning to video games, couldn't video games be a good outlet for depressed people to interact with others?

Video games I can say may make my grades worse, because while I'm playing them I'm not spending time learning. Don't sports make kids do worse in school? I know a lot of stereotypically "dumb" football players, I even know people who player sports who're smart and fail.

I'm sorry to tell you, but there is nothing addictive about a video game, you can say what you want you can whine about it all you want. If you think that something that has no physical effect on you and want to pawn that off as an addiction you're looking for a cop out. THERE IS NOTHING ADDICTING ABOUT A VIDEOGAME.

I also don't think that 3000 students between 3rd grade and 8th is a decent pool size especially when I'm unable to identify what the control is. A good study and experiment should be set up so that it can fail, I know what these doctors were looking for and hell it's okay to be biased as all **** as long as you're pretty damn honest to. I think maybe these doctors might have a thing against video games, they might hate them, they might want more doctors, but most of all they probably just want everyone to the same way they are and that's all fine with me don't we all want that sometimes? Just don't pawn it off as scientific and medical ********.

 

[Evo]

I'm sorry to tell you, but there is nothing addictive about a video game, you can say what you want you can whine about it all you want. If you think that something that has no physical effect on you and want to pawn that off as an addiction you're looking for a cop out. THERE IS NOTHING ADDICTING ABOUT A VIDEOGAME.

That might have been more convincing if you hadn't gotten so upset.

Also, stop swearing.

 

[DanP]

I fail to see sufficient evidence between these links, I can think of a few possibly overlooked contradictions.

As a 16 year old, I can say that MOST kids play video games even some of my teachers do. People of all endeavors, gender, race, social standing, and beliefs play them.

How do they know that people who're depressed aren't turning to video games, couldn't video games be a good outlet for depressed people to interact with others?

Video games I can say may make my grades worse, because while I'm playing them I'm not spending time learning. Don't sports make kids do worse in school? I know a lot of stereotypically "dumb" football players, I even know people who player sports who're smart and fail.

I'm sorry to tell you, but there is nothing addictive about a video game, you can say what you want you can whine about it all you want. If you think that something that has no physical effect on you and want to pawn that off as an addiction you're looking for a cop out. THERE IS NOTHING ADDICTING ABOUT A VIDEOGAME.

I also don't think that 3000 students between 3rd grade and 8th is a decent pool size especially when I'm unable to identify what the control is. A good study and experiment should be set up so that it can fail, I know what these doctors were looking for and hell it's okay to be biased as all **** as long as you're pretty damn honest to.


I think maybe these doctors might have a thing against video games, they might hate them, they might want more doctors, but most of all they probably just want everyone to the same way they are and that's all fine with me don't we all want that sometimes? Just don't pawn it off as scientific and medical ********.

How many level 110 chars do you have in your favorite MMO ?

 

[Pythagorean]

hmm, I was already a sociophobe and anxious; that's why I started playing video games. My grades are excellent.

 

[SpeedOfDark]

How many level 110 chars do you have in your favorite MMO ?

Well I play World of Warcraft and this may be seen as the bane of them all, however it's also the ONLY game I play I only have one maximum level character. I will not use that as a shield though because I play that character a lot at least 20 hours a week. I used to think I was wasting my life to, but don't so many people spend 20 hours a week doing so many useless things?

To be honest with you also, being in school you have to imagine I come home, and I'm tired I have homework I'm hungry and I don't have all that much free time so I play from 8-12 every night because when I have free time I can't be hanging out with my friends.

Most people don't consider me a stupid person and when I'm saying things like this I try to be as unbiased as possible by telling you things about myself that are good and bad

I am lazy and yes I have failed classes in the past before I played, and yes I have attendance issues in school, but in the end I feel like a 16 year old even a 14 year old who deals with a lot of stress can successfully allocate there time the way they want it and you know what I CAN. That's all that really matters, it's my life and I can do what I want with it.

Kids don't always know what's best for them, but I've never met someone so smart who knew so much about me and everyone else that they knew what was best for them or me either.

 

[SpeedOfDark]

That might have been more convincing if you hadn't gotten so upset.

Also, stop swearing.

For your sake as a mathematician and a scientist, I hope you're joking because if not you're going to get a speech about how only buffoons and children look at an argument at the level of it's Ethos and pathos instead of the logos of the argument.

 

[Evo]

For your sake as a mathematician and a scientist, I hope you're joking because if not you're going to get a speech about how only buffoons and children look at an argument at the level of it's Ethos and pathos instead of the logos of the argument.

I was quite serious.

Before you post and get into trouble, read the guidelines. Just a bit of friendly advice.

 

[Tach]

What's interesting is that a quick scan of history in say the american culture (where we have had the focus on rap, rock and roll, television, money, sex, and the bazillion other things that don't even come to mind right now) shows us that these studies keep popping up with the same underlying message - that some things are addictive by definition to the attainment of causing depression and other very potentially harmful problems. It almost always has to do with whatever is mainstream at the time, since that is going to be the most aware activity to society at large; and with the popular activities is where those that are frustrated or down about life are going to be found escaping or evading their problems through fun rather than facing their pain and struggle directly. In fact, I might argue that seeking fun (or more specifically pleasure) is what sets the adjusted apart from the maladjusted - because if you can succeed in doing so (and some do), haven't you gained so much? And people will struggle to reach a life that brings more pleasure than strife, even if it requires taking an activity in obvious excess, in the hopes that things will adapt to joy and that it will always be there to balance things out.

What am I saying?

 

[SpeedOfDark]

I usually use statistics or at least try to find them but I think we're all in agreement that A LOT OF KIDS PLAY VIDEOGAMES, there's more factors to depression and then and while I do agree kids who may have depression go and try to have social contact through video games to say that all the kids who play video games a lot are doing this is ABSOLUTELY ABSURD. Music, Video Games, dancing, and jogging are not addicting. I can bet more kids watch t.v. then jog, I bet I could easily pick 3000 adults and say they're depressed.

This only said as many as 9% of the entire survey had either
1. Depression
2. Social Problems
3. Poorer Grades

First off What is the national average for 3rd - 8th graders with depression, social problems, and bad grades? I have a feeling it's probably right around 9% cause you're talking about a huge range of people

Who decides what poor grades are? what national standard for not poorer grades, what is social problems? They should and may want to elaborate.

http://www.teendepression.org/stats/teenage-depression-statistics/5% of teens suffer from depression at anyone time and 8.3% of teens suffer from depression for at least a year.

That's what that site says and wow look at that 5% already of teens just on this, imagine if they picked a really small sampling and got a really obscure number like oh say 2x the "avg" because they used a terrible sampling and no definable control group

It's very simple the numbers in the survey don't lie, numbers don't lie you know what does PEOPLE DO and it's very simple it maybe tied but guess what it's not. It seems to me like a couple people with PHDs who don't like something decided they would figure away to scar it just like people have been doing with rock n' roll, sex, rap and video games since they've been around.

Also, I couldn't find this study anywhere only quotes

What a terrible study, to believe this study for more then a good thought would be to throw all logic and common sense out the window simply because of "research".

 

[Markface]

As a 16 year old, I can say that MOST kids play video games even some of my teachers do. People of all endeavors, gender, race, social standing, and beliefs play them.

I also don't think that 3000 students between 3rd grade and 8th is a decent pool size especially when I'm unable to identify what the control is.

So a 3000 group census isn't a 'decent pool size', yet you're happy to boast your opinion on us, falling under the category of a teen gamer, almost as if it's fact? Contradiction.

People of all age, gender, race, etc may play video games, but the study itself focused on those who were addicted to video games, not the average gamer. They weren't focusing on how gaming reduces all players grades, happiness, etc, it focuses simply on the addicted.

In regards to the article, I will agree that it didn't seem scientifically conclusive. While it was more theory based, I won't denounce the possibility of video game addiction and it's link to depression, poor grades, etc, as it is possible.

 

[nismaratwork]

I think that there is an association between avoidant and withdrawn behaviours of clinical significance, and any isolated form of recreation. I've noted that people who play games aren't monolithic, our habits change and evolve with age, and as we get older we tend to become more social players.

If you're sitting in front of a TV or monitor, not working, for most of the day... that's not a great sign. Is that the cause, or simply your means of escape? I'd argue for the latter... like drugs, or food, or TV, or cruddy novels... one is a result of the social issues.

In short, a sign and symptom, not a cause.

 

[bobze]

I think that there is an association between avoidant and withdrawn behaviours of clinical significance, and any isolated form of recreation. I've noted that people who play games aren't monolithic, our habits change and evolve with age, and as we get older we tend to become more social players.

If you're sitting in front of a TV or monitor, not working, for most of the day... that's not a great sign. Is that the cause, or simply your means of escape? I'd argue for the latter... like drugs, or food, or TV, or cruddy novels... one is a result of the social issues.

In short, a sign and symptom, not a cause.

Agreed. Addiction is most often a "self-medication" coping issue. I think we've really found in the last 30-40 years of addiction research and medicine that it isn't limited to drugs and alcohol. People use addict behavior to cope with all kinds of problems and many of them stem from personality disorders which affect sociality.

 

[nismaratwork]

Agreed. Addiction is most often a "self-medication" coping issue. I think we've really found in the last 30-40 years of addiction research and medicine that it isn't limited to drugs and alcohol. People use addict behavior to cope with all kinds of problems and many of them stem from personality disorders which affect sociality.

I couldn't agree more.