1. N
A totalof22 participantssignedupforthisexperiment,11wererecruitedviawordof
mouthand 11 wererecruitedviatheMTSU SONA system.Of the 22,datawas
analyzedfrom18 of theparticipants.We excludedtwoparticipantsforprevious
enrollmentinan astronomycourse.One participantwas excludedforadmitted
guessing.Anotherparticipantwas excludeddueto inabilityto tracktheireye
movements.There werefivemaleandtwofemaleactionvideogame players,leaving
fourmaleand sevenfemalenon-actionvideogameplayers
Materials.
A devicethatrecords/trackseye movement,EyeLink 2000CR,manufacturedbySR
Research,was theprimarypieceof equipmentutilizedin thisexperiment.Two
computerswererequiredto operatetheeyetrackingsystem.The first,calledthe"Host
PC," operatestheeyetrackingcamera,theinfraredilluminator,andthegame padused
to recordparticipantresponses(buttonpresses).The secondcomputer,calledthe
"DisplayPC," was usedtogeneratethestimulipresentedtothe participant.The
experimentwas runfrom theDisplayPC andmonitoredbytheexperimenterthrough
theHostPC. A pre-surveywas administeredthe participantin orderto determine
demographicsandgaminghabits.
Designand Procedure.
Participantswere firstadministeredan eyeexam toensuretheymet theminimum 20/25
visionstandard.Theythencompletedthepre-survey. Aftercompletingtheeyetracker
setup,we calibratedthe eyetrackerandvalidatedsuccessfulcalibrationto ensurethe
participantseyeswere beingtracked.Next,the experimentprogramwas run. A seriesof
galaxyimageswereshown,eachtrialconsistedof 48imagesfora totalof 96images
viewed.The participantwasinformedto selectwhichtypeofgalaxywasshown by
comparingitto fourpossiblechoiceslocatedontheright-sideofthescreen.For each
image,theymatcheditto eitheran elliptical,spiraledge,spiraltop,or mergergalaxyby
pressingthe correspondingbuttonontheircontroller.The participantwas givena 3-5
minutebreakbetweentrialsto alleviateanypotentialfatigueand/orstrainfortheeyes
and muscles,and theeyetrackerwas recalibratedvalidatedbeforethesecondtrial.
Aftercompletingtheexperiment,the participantwas givena post-surveyassessingtheir
effort,debriefed,and givencredit forparticipation,if applicable.
The main purpose of this experiment was to identify any
performancedifferencesbetween action video game players
and non-action video game playersin visual sorting tasks.
Although our findings were not significant, we discovered
severalanticipated trendswhen assessingthe two classes.
We expected little difference concerningaccuracybetween
the two groups,as our data supports.On average,action
video game playerscomplete the trials faster without
compromising accuracy.They exhibit fewer fixations,
shorter fixations, and fewer saccadesoverall. When
assessingdifferencesbetween trials, we uncovereda
possible training effect. The non-action video game players
take longer to complete the first trial, but convergewith the
action video game players after trial two. The non-action
video game playersactually exhibit less fixations and
saccadesduring trial two than the action video game
players.
ProcessingWithActionVideoGames.CurrentDirectionsin
PsychologicalScience, 18(6),321-326.
Dye,M. W., Green,C. S., & Bavalier,D. (2009).The development
of attentionskillsinactionvideogame players.Neuropsychologia,
47,1780-1789.
Green,C. S., & Bavalier,D. (2003).ActionVideoGame Modifies
VisualSelectiveAttention.Nature, 423,534-537.
Green,C. S., & Bavalier,D. (2006).Effectof ActionVideoGames
ontheSpatialDistributionof VisuospatialAttention.Journalof
ExperimentalPsychology:Human Perceptionand Performance,32
(6),1465-1478.
This articleexplainsthehistoryof theGalaxyZoo projectand
providesbackgroundforthereasonsfor ourstudyand"citizen
science"projectslikeit:
Clery,D. (2011).Galaxyzoovolunteerssharepainandgloryof
research.Science,173-175.
A listofeyetrackingresearchstudiescitingSR-Researchcanbe
foundat:
http://www.sr-research.com/publications.html
Analysis
Dataanalysisinvolveda timeseriesanalysisof gazesequencing
usingtheSPSS statisticalsoftwarepackage.Performance
differencesbetweenthe ActionVideoGame (AVGP) participants
andnon-ActionVideoGame (NAVGP) participantswere
assessedusinga 2x5 between-subjectsANOVA for thecombined
trialdifferencesandseparate2x2within-subjectsANOVAs for
theTrail 1 vs.Trail2 differences.
Limitations
• Small sample size
• Samples of convenience
• Self report by participants about gaming
• Determination of game genre
F=.198, P=.662, ηp2=.012
F=.124, P=.730, ηp2=.008
F=.031, P=.864, ηp2=.002
F=.035, P=.885, ηp2=.002
F=.419, P=.527, ηp2=.026
Trial 1 vs Trial 2
F=1.282, P=.274, ηp2=.074
F=1.209, P=.288, ηp2=.070
Participantswere askedtosortgalaxyimagesaccordingto thetypeofgalaxywhich
appearedon a computerscreen.We werelookingat individualswho wereaction
videogameplayersas wellasnon-actionvideogameplayers.An eyetrackerwas
usedto exploredifferencesbetweenthetwo groupswhenitcame toperformancein
visualsortingtasks.Though not statisticallysignificantbasedonthesamplesize,there
seemsto bedifferencesin performancebetweenthe twogroups.These resultswould
be consistentwiththefindingsintheliteratureregardingthe way inwhichaction
videogamesmodifyselectivevisualattention.