Selling points: What cognitive abilities are tapped by casual video games?

Abstract

The idea that video games or computer-based applications can improve cognitive function has led to a proliferation of programs claiming to "train the brain." However, there is often little scientific basis in the development of commercial training programs, and many research-based programs yield inconsistent or weak results. In this study, we sought to better understand the nature of cognitive abilities tapped by casual video games and thus reflect on their potential as a training tool. A moderately large sample of participants (n=209) played 20 web-based casual games and performed a battery of cognitive tasks. We used cognitive task analysis and multivariate statistical techniques to characterize the relationships between performance metrics. We validated the cognitive abilities measured in the task battery, examined a task analysis-based categorization of the casual games, and then characterized the relationship between game and task performance. We found that games categorized to tap working memory and reasoning were robustly related to performance on working memory and fluid intelligence tasks, with fluid intelligence best predicting scores on working memory and reasoning games. We discuss these results in the context of overlap in cognitive processes engaged by the cognitive tasks and casual games, and within the context of assessing near and far transfer. While this is not a training study, these findings provide a methodology to assess the validity of using certain games as training and assessment devices for specific cognitive abilities, and shed light on the mixed transfer results in the computer-based training literature. Moreover, the results can inform design of a more theoretically-driven and methodologically-sound cognitive training program.

Fig. 1

Phase 1 study protocol. Participants completed a battery of tasks from different cognitive domains, followed by 5 sessions of game play using games from a subset of similar cognitive domains.

Fig. 2

Confirmatory factor analysis results for the cognitive task battery. Only significant paths are drawn and only the standardized estimates of the factor relationships are shown. ***, ** and * denote significance at the p<.001, p<.01 and p<.05 levels, respectively. All indicator variables loaded highly onto their respective factors and were significant at the p<.001 level.

Fig. 3

Heatmap showing the absolute value of the correlation between the task analysis-based categorization of games (x axis) and tasks (y axis), uncorrected for multiple comparisons. Warmer colors indicate higher correlations. Correlation coefficients and significant values are shown in Appendix C. TASKS legend: speed (SP), working memory (WM), reasoning (GF), switching (SHIFT), attention-inhibition (ATT), and episodic memory (MEM). GAMES legend: speed (SPEED), working memory and short-term memory (WM/SHORT-TERM), reasoning and executive control-switching (REASONING), and attention.

Fig. 4

Contextual analysis to examine the unique relations of different cognitive abilities to the game component scores. Only significant paths are drawn. Standardized estimates are displayed above. Model fit: χ² (78)=129.342, p=0.0002; RMSEA=0.056 [.038, .073]; CFI=0.961; TLI=0.948.