The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effect of action video games on the spatial distribution of visuospatial attention.
Open accessAbstract
The authors investigated the effect of action gaming on the spatial distribution of attention. The authors used the flanker compatibility effect to separately assess center and peripheral attentional resources in gamers versus nongamers. Gamers exhibited an enhancement in attentional resources compared with nongamers, not only in the periphery but also in central vision. The authors then used a target localization task to unambiguously establish that gaming enhances the spatial distribution of visual attention over a wide field of view. Gamers were more accurate than nongamers at all eccentricities tested, and the advantage held even when a concurrent center task was added, ruling out a trade-off between central and peripheral attention. By establishing the causal role of gaming through training studies, the authors demonstrate that action gaming enhances visuospatial attention throughout the visual field.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03203267 · Cited by 7,230
Action video game modifies visual selective attention
Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01647 · Cited by 2,540
Self-citationLoad Theory of Selective Attention and Cognitive Control
Lavie, N., Hirst, A., de Fockert, J. W., & Viding, E. (2004) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.133.3.339 · Cited by 1,812 · cited 8×
“Because differences in baseline RTs between groups may produce interactions with within-subject measures that reflect only the magnitude of the baseline RT differences, it is important to note that although the mean VGP RT was approximately 37 ms faster than the mean NVGP RT, the main effect of gaming did not To bette…”
BackgroundInfluential
Cited by
Digital Games, Design, and Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Killingsworth, S. S. (2016) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654315582065 · Cited by 1,274
Do “brain-training” programs work?
Simons, D. J., Boot, W. R., Charness, N., Gathercole, S. E., Chabris, C. F., Hambrick, D. Z., & Stine-Morrow, E. A. L. (2016) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100616661983 · Cited by 1,183
Meta-analysis of action video game impact on perceptual, attentional, and cognitive skills.
Bediou, B., Adams, D. M., Mayer, R. E., Tipton, E., Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2018) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000130 · Cited by 807
Self-citationBoot, W. R., Simons, D. J., Stothart, C., & Stutts, C. (2013) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691613491271 · Cited by 670
Exercising your brain: A review of human brain plasticity and training-induced learning.
Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2008) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037/a0014345 · Cited by 660
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
- Published
- 2006
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1465-1478
- ISSN
- 0096-1523 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1277
- OpenAlex
- W2100511170
- Cited by
- 745
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 8.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
