Researchers can predict your performance on a video game simply by measuring the volume of specific structures in your brain, a multi-institutional team reports this week.
The new study, in the journal Cerebral Cortex, found that nearly a quarter of the variability in achievement seen among men and women trained on a new video game could be predicted by measuring the volume of three structures in their brains.
The study adds to the evidence that specific parts of the striatum, a collection of distinctive tissues tucked deep inside the cerebral cortex, profoundly influence a person's ability to refine his or her motor skills, learn new procedures, develop useful strategies and adapt to a quickly changing environment.
"This is the first time that we've been able to take a real world task like a video game and show that the size of specific brain regions is predictive of performance and learning rates on this video game," said Kirk Erickson, a professor of psychology at the University of Pittsburgh and first author on the study. Ann Graybiel, an Institute Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Investigator in the McGovern Institute for Brain Research; and Arthur Kramer, a professor of psychology at the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology at the University of Illinois, were co-principal investigators on the study. Walter Boot, of Florida State University, also contributed to the research...
That's not really surprising. Saying better gamers are smarter is like saying better athletes are in better physical shape. Games is to the mind what sports is to the body.
No... not all games are good for your mind. Actually, most games aren't good for your mind past reflexes and such.
There are a lot of retarded pot heads who own me in FPS games. I'd like to think I have the mental capacity greater than a dead animal at least. Or is everyone on XBox Live some kind of savant?
everyone has about the same potential to be good at a game, barring any real mental disability. my experiences have always been that whoever plays the game more is going to be better at it- has nothing to do with 'smarter.'
this is like saying a 'smart' person can pick up a musical instrument faster, and that's just not true.
Agreed.
Intelligence is merely a measurement of potential, how quick someone can learn or pick up on some concept. It doesn't mean they are a good person, a nice person, a respectable person, nor does it mean they ever took advantage of their gift.
I tend to do well in multiplayer but not so well in single-player. I rarely attempt games on anything higher than the default difficulty level, because it just frustrates me. Not sure what that says about me.
everyone has about the same potential to be good at a game, barring any real mental disability. my experiences have always been that whoever plays the game more is going to be better at it- has nothing to do with 'smarter.'
this is like saying a 'smart' person can pick up a musical instrument faster, and that's just not true.
Only PS3 gamers are smarter.
That last part is sooo wrong. There are certain people that think musically and pick it up much quicker.
but does that make them 'smarter' (again with the quotes since this is so hard to define) or simply more musically inclined?
i don't think someone is neccessarily a math whiz or a literary genius just because they can pick up the piano quick or kick ass at lode runner.
As far as I can tell, all this article says is that some people are more inclined to do well at video games. They aren't necessarily smarter, I think Dari assumed that's what it meant (based on reading some of the article and skimming the rest).
Agreed. The article (from what I skimmed) does not establish any correlation between the size of these areas and intelligence, let alone a correlation between video game performance and intelligence. It merely establishes a correlation between the size of these areas and video game performance.
Well, that settles it. Size does matter. Also, since intelligence is ill-defined, what's wrong with me making my own definition?
Well, that settles it. Size does matter. Also, since intelligence is ill-defined, what's wrong with me making my own definition?