CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 145Cognitive Abilities and TestingEducational Games and GamificationCognitive Functions and Memory

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 103 of the 103 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Action Video Game Training for Healthy Adults: A Meta-Analytic Study

Open access
Wang, Ping, Liu, Han-Hui, Zhu, Xing-Ting, Meng, Tian, Li, Hui-Jie, Zuo, Xi-Nian·2016·Frontiers in Psychology
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00907PMC PMC4911405
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Action video game (AVG) has attracted increasing attention from both the public and from researchers. More and more studies found video game training improved a variety of cognitive functions. However, it remains controversial whether healthy adults can benefit from AVG training, and whether young and older adults benefit similarly from AVG training. In the present study, we aimed to quantitatively assess the AVG training effect on the cognitive ability of adults and to compare the training effects on young and older adults by conducting a meta-analysis on previous findings. We systematically searched video game training studies published between January 1986 and July 2015. Twenty studies were included in the present meta-analysis, for a total of 313 participants included in the training group and 323 participants in the control group. The results demonstrate that healthy adults achieve moderate benefit from AVG training in overall cognitive ability and moderate to small benefit in specific cognitive domains. In contrast, young adults gain more benefits from AVG training than older adults in both overall cognition and specific cognitive domains. Age, education, and some methodological factors, such as the session duration, session number, total training duration, and control group type, modulated the training effects. These meta-analytic findings provide evidence that AVG training may serve as an efficient way to improve the cognitive performance of healthy adults. We also discussed several directions for future AVG training studies.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00907

Cites

103 of 103 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 103 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Borenstein, 2005, Comprehensive Meta-Analysisversion 2.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–145 of 145

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Wang, P., Liu, H.-H., Zhu, X.-T., Meng, T., Li, H.-J., & Zuo, X.-N.
Affiliations
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
  • China Youth University for Political Sciences (CN)
Corresponding author
Li, Hui-Jie
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2016-06-17
Volume
7
Pages
907-907
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00907
PMC
PMC4911405
OpenAlex
W2419275396
Cited by
145
References
103
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 2
FWCI
21.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Repository of Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences) (submittedVersion)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (973 Program, 81171409)
  • Youth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (2016084)
  • National Key Research and Development Program of China (2015CB351702)
  • Youth Innovation Promotion Association (2016084)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
action video games, video game training, cognitive training, cognitive ability, healthy adults, young and older adults, age differences, training effects, modulation factor, session duration, training duration

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