This is the presentation made by Jayne Gackenbach and Craig Guthrie at the Canadian Game Studies Association meeting in 2015 in Calgary, AB.

1. JAYNE GACKENBACH & CRAIG GUTHRIE
MACEWAN UNIVERSITY
Thanks to the students who have worked on this series of studies: Dan
Swanston, Hanna Stark, John Bown, and Cynthia Ma
Contemplative Practice versus
Video Game Play Associations:
Attention, Dreams, Mindfulness and Self-
Presence

2. When you think of video games . . . .

3. Is this the image that comes to mind?

4. Or is it sweaty button mashing teenagers?

5. there maybe a connection between the them

6. Similarities in Waking
Between Contemplative Practice and Gaming
Psychological Cognitive
• Reduced depression
• Reduced tension
• Elevated mood
•Enhanced attention
•Better spatial orientation
•Improved memory
Physiological Transpersonal
•Physical relaxation
•Reduced stress
•Absorption
•Mindfulness
•Flow

7. Similarities in Dream States

8. Similarities in Dream States
 Higher lucidity
 Better control
 Increased bizarreness
 Third person observer

9. Studies from our lab investigating their connection
 Gackenbach, J.I. (2008). Video game play and
consciousness development: A transpersonal perspective.
Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 40(1), 60-87.
 Gackenbach, J.I. & Bown, J. (2011). Mindfulness and
video game play: A preliminary inquiry. Mindfulness,
2(2), 114-122.
 Gackenbach, J.I., Swanston, D. & Stark, H. (2015). Effects
of video game play versus meditation/prayer in waking
and dreaming experiences. Journal of Transpersonal
Psychology, 47(2), 188-218. STUDY 1
 Gackenbach, J.I. & Guthrie, C. (2016). Contemplative
Practice versus Gaming: A Further Inquiry. Paper to be
presented at the International Association for the Study of
Dreams.. STUDY 2
 Gackenbach, J.I. & Ma, C. (2016, June). Contemplative
practice vs gaming in mature adults: Attention,
Transpersonal and Dream Comparisons. Poster to be
presented at the International Association for the Study of
Dreams. STUDY 3

10. Study 1
Gackenbach, J.I.,
Swanston, D. & Stark, H.
(2015). Effects of video
game play versus
meditation/prayer in
waking and dreaming
experiences. Journal of
Transpersonal
Psychology, 47(2), 188-
218.

11. Contemplative Practice: Prayer or Meditation
 Very few students meditate (2%)
 Both regarded as spiritual and/or religious practices
 Similar physiological and psychological benefits
 Some forms of prayer involve negation of ego
 Adoration, thanksgiving, reception

12. Method
 246 Western Canadian
University students
3 Groups:
A. Gaming = 74
B. Meditation/prayer = 75
C. Controls = 97

13. Method
Laboratory Session
• Change blindness flicker tasks
• Two self report scales on Effects of activity
At home dream collection
• After a high activity day
• After a low activity day

14. Laboratory Results
 Performance on Change Blindness:
Game> M/P = Control

15. Self Report Data: Dream Type
 Lucid – M/P >
Gamer > controls
 Control – Gamer
>M/P=controls

16. Judges Ratings: Group x Time Dream
 Lucid
 Group x Condition
 All of a sudden i was
surrounded by zombies.
... Then my dream
turned into a lucid
dream. So i ended up
with a gun somehow
because i thought of it
and killed a bunch of
zombies.
Controls
Gamers
M/P
High
Activity
Day
Low
Activity
Day

17. Game in Dream Coding
 Game is dream: (gamer > M/P=controls)
 In my dream I was playing Nintendo 64 with a bunch of friends at
another person's house...Suddenly I was transported into the game
and became a participant but I didn't look like myself.

18. Meditation/Prayer Content
 Meditation and Prayer Types
 Sum of prayer in dream: group (M/P>gamers =
controls); interaction
Controls
Gamers
M/P
M/P: teaching me
(mosque) about what I
should do or not and I
remember her saying a
line that’s in my
religion when your
praying ..... High
Activity
Day
Low
Activity
Day

19. Study 2
Differences from Study 1:
1. Three attention tasks
2. Five individual difference scales
3. Gender examined
4. No dream collected
5. No high versus low activity day comparison

20. Method
 Contemplative Group: contemplation gaming
 Gaming Group: contemplation gaming
 Control Group: contemplation gaming
Male Female Total
Contemplative Group 20 28 48
Gaming Group 31 32 28
Control Group 13 15 63
Total 64 75 139
Study sessions were completed in computer
laboratories and seated up to 30 people

21. 3

22. Individual Difference Scales
 Validation of membership
in a group was attained
through additional
questions regarding
gaming and contemplative
practice including number
of games played or type of
prayer activity engaged in
 Self-Presence
Questionnaire
 Kentucky Inventory of
Mindfulness Skills
 Mindful Attention
Awareness Scale
 Dream Intensity
Inventory
 Spiritual Dreams Scale

23. Results for attention tasks:
Change Blindness superior for gamers
Multiple object tracking superior for gamers
Stroop effect no group differences
Group by Sex Interaction on Total Trails Aborted in the Change Blindness Task
M/P=Contemplation Group
VGP=Gaming Group
CON=Control Group

24. Results for individual difference scales:
Self-presence
In theory:
Both social
media and
gaming should
have an effect
for self-presence
but no group
difference was
found for social
media use
Self-presence questionnaire was higher for gamers
for all three subscales

25. Results individual difference scales:
Mindfulness
 There no differences for the Kentucky Inventory
of Mindfulness Skills
 MAAS: Mindful attention awareness scale
 more mindful for gamers on the emotion and listening items
 contemplative and control groups were more mindful for the
preoccupied item

26. Results for Individual difference
scales: Dreaming
 Dream intensity inventory:
 both the gaming and control groups were superior in
lucid dreaming
 Spiritual Dreams scale:
 The noesis item was superior for the contemplative
group

27. Study 3 with Cynthia Ma
 Currently collecting data
 These are preliminary
analysis
 Same method as study 2
except:
 All online data collection,
unsupervised
 Seeking people outside the
university to participate
 Dreams collected
 Added a high high
group (high gamers
who are also high
contemplatives)
Group #
Low contemplative &
Low gaming (old
control group)
10
High contemplative
& High gaming
33
Low contemplation &
high gaming (VG)
22
High contemplation
& low gaming (M/P)
50

28. Validating Groups
 Meditation/Prayer
 HH & M/P higher
 Sum of prayer types
 Focused attention
meditation
 Open monitoring
meditation
 Gaming
 HH & VG higher
 Length session
 Number games
played
 Started playing
younger
 Use of gaming social
media

29. Social Media Use
 No differences groups for sum of social
media use or age began social media use

30. Attention Tasks
 Multiple Object Tracking
 Change
Blindness and
Stroop no
group
differences
Group Sum objects across
trials
Low contemplative & Low
gaming
9.900
High contemplative & High
gaming (HH)
11.000
Low contemplation & high
gaming (VG)
10.100
High contemplation & low
gaming
8.800

31. Individual Difference Variables
 Self Presence
 Two high gamer
groups higher than
two low gamer groups
 Kentucky
Mindfulness
 No group difference
 Mindful to activity
Sum
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Low contemplative,
low gaming (LL)
High contemplative,
high gaming (HH)
Low contemplative,
high gaming (VG)
High contemplative,
low gaming (M/P)

32. Dream Intensity Scale
 Lucidity  Control
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Low
contemplative,
low gaming (LL)
High
contemplative,
high gaming
(HH)
Low
contemplative,
high gaming (VG)
High
contemplative,
low gaming
(M/P)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Low
contemplative,
low gaming
(LL)
High
contemplative,
high gaming
(HH)
Low
contemplative,
high gaming
(VG)
High
contemplative,
low gaming
(M/P)
Spiritual Dreams Scale no group differences

33. Conclusions
 Attention Tasks
Change blindness
2 out of 3 gamers highest
Multiple object tracking
1 out of 2 gamers highest
Stroop test
2 out of 2 no group difference

34. Individual Difference Measures
 Activity experience (1)
 Effects of activity: M/P > Gamers (1)
 During activity: various (1)
 Mindfulness (2 & 3)
 General mindfulness: no group differences (2 & 3)
 Specific to activity
 2 of 3 items: Gamers > M/P (2)
 Sum score – HH & VG highest (thus Gamers) (3)
 Self Presence (2 & 3)
 Gamers higher other two groups (2)
 Two high gamer groups higher than two low gamer groups (3)
 No group differences in social media (2 & 3)

35. Dreams
 Self-Report based on a
dream
 Lucid
M/P > Gamer (1)
no difference (3)
 Control
Gamer >M/P (1)
HH > Gamer & M/P
(3)
 Game is dream -
Gamer > M/P (1)
 Dream Intensity Scale
 both the gamers were
superior in lucid dreaming
(2 & 3)
 Spiritual Dreams Scale
 The noesis item was
superior for the
contemplative group for 2
 No difference for 3

36. Limitations
 Gender differences
 Game genre
 Cell sizes
 All students – thus
need longer term
contemplatives

37. Gaming and Consciousness