ArticlePDF Available

The effects of playing cooperative and competitive video games on teamwork and team performance

  • MyEdMaster

Abstract and Figures

Playing video games is a pervasive activity among middle school students. Researchers are now investigating whether such play carries any educational benefits. One aspect of many video games is teamwork. The goal of the present research was to investigate whether playing video games cooperatively with or competitively against others affects later teamwork behavior and team performance. 60 middle school students, all without previous video game playing experience, participated in the present study. They were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions: no video game playing, cooperative video game playing, and competitive video game playing. Those in the video game conditions then were taught how to play Modern Warfare 3 and played for two hours. They were randomly paired with another subject from the same condition and either played with or against that person. Two weeks later, all participants were randomly paired with new partners from the same experimental condition and played a Prisoner's Dilemma game where points are awarded to players based on whether they play cooperatively or competitively with each other. Total team scores were tallied after 20 trials. Results showed that those who played Modern Warfare 3 cooperatively scored the highest, while those who played it competitively scored the lowest. Results suggest that video game playing can bolster teamwork and team performance when played cooperatively and impair teamwork and team performance when played competitively.
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research
ISSN: 2455-2070; Impact Factor: RJIF 5.22
Volume 2; Issue 12; December 2016; Page No. 24-28
The effects of playing cooperative and competitive video games on teamwork and team performance
1 Ankit Badatala, 2 John Leddo, 3 Atif Islam, 4 Kush Patel, 5 Pavani Surapaneni
1, 3, 4, 5 Research Associate at MyEdMaster, LLC, Herndon, Virginia 20171, United States of America
2 Director of Research at MyEdMaster, LLC, 13750 Sunrise Valley Drive, Herndon, VA 20171, United States of America
Playing video games is a pervasive activity among middle school students. Researchers are now investigating whether such play
carries any educational benefits. One aspect of many video games is teamwork. The goal of the present research was to
investigate whether playing video games cooperatively with or competitively against others affects later teamwork behavior and
team performance. 60 middle school students, all without previous video game playing experience, participated in the present
study. They were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions: no video game playing, cooperative video game
playing, and competitive video game playing. Those in the video game conditions then were taught how to play Modern Warfare
3 and played for two hours. They were randomly paired with another subject from the same condition and either played with or
against that person. Two weeks later, all participants were randomly paired with new partners from the same experimental
condition and played a Prisoner’s Dilemma game where points are awarded to players based on whether they play cooperatively
or competitively with each other. Total team scores were tallied after 20 trials. Results showed that those who played Modern
Warfare 3 cooperatively scored the highest, while those who played it competitively scored the lowest. Results suggest that video
game playing can bolster teamwork and team performance when played cooperatively and impair teamwork and team
performance when played competitively.
Keywords: video games, cooperative, competitive, team work, team performance
1. Introduction
Statistics show that ninety-seven percent of the American
adolescent population plays video games (Lenhart, Kahne, et
al., 2008) [19], and the playing time averages about thirteen
hours per week (Gentile, 2009) [15]. While video games come
in all sorts of varieties, the genre of violent and first person
shooter (FPS) games have clouded the worldwide view of
video games. Rumored to be the instigator of school shootings
and public massacres, violent video games have held a
negative stereotype for decades. Blamed for physical
aggression and psychological distress, they make parents think
twice before letting their kids engage with them. After the
Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, President Obama
demanded that Congress spend $10 million for the research of
violent media, particularly video games (Obama & Biden,
2013) [21]. This has caused researchers to look at and analyze
the impact of the negative along with the positive aspects of
this media.
1.1 Video Game’s Cognitive Impacts
While the common belief is that video games, in the long run,
cause depression and other mental disorders, they actually
have some cognitive benefits. Previous research also suggests
that these cognitive advantages increases neural processing
and efficiency. Bavelier et al. (2012) [4] conducted an fMRI
study and found that gamers use their control attention
network less than non-gamers. The researchers then concluded
that the FPS gamers designate their attentional energy less
than non-gamers, meaning that they sift out insignificant
information from significant information efficiently. Spatial
skills can be easily strengthened by playing FPS games (Uttal
et al. 2013) [29]. The spatial awareness acquired from these
games can be correlated with the same skills that can be
attained at college level courses aimed sharpening these very
skills. Uttal et al. (2013) [29] also shows that the skills can be
acquired from the games more quickly than they can be
acquired from the classes. In addition, the spatial skills from
the games last longer than the skills from the courses.
Problem solving skills are the basis of all video games, and
they can also be refined via video games (Prensky, 2012) [22].
Problem can range from “find the item” to “figure out how to
kill the monster.” In short, they come in all shapes and sizes. It
is up to the player to evaluate the current situation, pull
strategies from past experiences, and then develop a solution
to the problem and put it into execution. Prensky states that
introduction to these types of unrestricted situations will give
rise to a generation called the “digital natives”, who will have
a mindset capable of solving real life situation with “outside of
the box” thinking. While classrooms teach students “by the
book”, the digital natives learn by trial and error.
Cooper’s study shows how these digital natives can help in
real life situations. University of Washington created a game
called Foldit, which allowed gamers to model the makeup of
proteins genetically. After the playing period had ended, the
players were able to help researchers pinpoint the structure
that they had been trying to get for the past ten years. In this
way, the revolutionary thinking process developed by the
digital natives was implemented into a real life situation and
produced stellar results (Cooper et al. 2010) [7].
Even though video gameplay consists of a remote controller,
video games can improve hand eye coordination. These skills
can not only be helpful in sports, but also careers that require
this skill (McKinley et al. 2011) [20]. McKinley found that
video game players were successfully able to fly and operate
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research
drones, and were able to complete this task with similar
competency as trained pilots. Another example of such career
related benefits via video games is an experiment that
investigated surgical skills (Rosser et al., 2007; Schlickum et
al., 2009) [23, 25]. Inexperienced surgeons who were also ardent
gamers outclassed the most accomplished surgeons. The
gaming surgeons demonstrated stellar hand-eye coordination,
attention, and quick decision-making skills, which they refined
through the participation of video games. In essence, video
games should not be viewed negatively as they provide an
assortment of cognitive benefits.
1.2 Video Game’s Impacts on Aggressive Behavior
Scientists have questioned the connections between video
games and aggressive behavior (Anderson & Dill, 2000;
Sherry 2001) [3, 28]. Research suggests that violent games
trigger the aggression scripts in the mind (Anderson &
Bushman, 2002) [2]. Also, ingrained pathways arouse related
networks when prepped with aggression (Eastin, 2006) [10].
FPS and violent games can be held accountable for invoking
these actions. An analysis conducted in 2001 states that 89%
of video games on the market contain some violence (Children
Now, 2001) [6]. That number is slowly rising as violent games
gain increased popularity. The effects of these games can spill
onto the behaviors of the players in real life. Playing violent
games leads to more “harming” behavior in real life (Bavelier
et al., 2011) [5]. Anderson and Bushman (2001) [1] conducted
54 independent tests to discover the relationship between
violent behavior and video games. They used over 4000
participants and discovered robust results. The violent effects
discovered were aggressive behaviors, aggressive cognitions,
physiological arousal. The effects were found in all sorts of
participants, including children, adults, males, and females.
Zhang et al. (2010) [31] found that competition along with
violent content, increased aggressive cognition and aggressive
behavior. This leads to the conclusion that it is not just the
violence of the video game that is causing aggression but also
the competitive aspect of the game. Fleming and Rickwood
(2001) [13] studied the result of violent gaming by children.
They discovered that arousal was definitely greater after
gameplay, but saw no correlation between gameplay and
aggressive characteristics. Anderson and Dill (2000) [3]
conducted a similar experiment, but instead of children, he
used college students as test participants. They detected that
college students who played violent games tended to act more
violently towards their opponents than those that played non-
violent games. In addition, they found that the women
participants were more hostile afterwards than the men that
participated. One can assume that the context of gameplay can
play a factor in the violence behavior, since the results of
Anderson and Fleming varied while they put their participants
in similar situations.
Since the scope of this study is related to both the pro-social
benefits and the anti-social drawbacks of cooperative and
competitive video games, we must look at the other side of the
spectrum as well. In a cooperative circumstance, one only
achieves one’s objective when others also achieve their
objective (Johnson & Johnson, 1983) [18]. In contrast, one only
achieves one’s objective in a competitive situation when
others do not achieve their objective. The general conclusion
of current research suggests that competitive environments
nurture more aggression since the player tends to have to
block or obstruct his or her opponents from reaching their goal
(Sheese & Graziano, 2005) [27]. While in cooperative situations
the payer has to work together with their team. This will
nurture feelings of teamwork and cohesion, thus eliminating
most aggressive sensations (Deutsch, 1973) [8].
1.3 Video Game’s Prosocial Impacts
Research has shown that video games, when played
cooperatively instead of competitively, can lead to prosocial
behavior (Greitemeyer et al., 2012) [17]. In addition, the
playing of video games in a prosocial environment can
beneficially impact cognition and “helping” behaviors
(Bavelier et al., 2011; Gentile et al., 2009; Greitemeyer &
Osswald, 2011; Saleem et al., 2012) [5, 14, 16, 24].
Gentile et al. (2009) [14] discovered that prosocial games can
have both short and long term influences. Immediately after
video game play, the participants exhibited behaviors that
demonstrated assistance towards others. Also, children
exhibited prosocial traits at the end of the school year, if they
played the game at the beginning of the school year (Gentile et
al., 2009) [14]. We can conclude from this research that simply
playing cooperative video games can lead to prosocial
behaviors. While, the term “prosocial” is quite general, it
encompasses a wide range of social behaviors that are
beneficial for the self and the other.
The real issue is that most cooperative and competitive games
are violent and FPS games, and these are the games that are
known to promote aggression. However, there is research that
suggests that violent games do not in and of themselves
promote aggression. Ferguson et al. (2011) [12] found that
participants who played violent games cooperatively tended to
display “helpful” behaviors inside and outside of the game
world. In addition, they discovered that these gamers exhibited
this quality more than gamers who played nonviolent games
cooperatively. Consistent with this finding, Eastin reported
that violent games, when played in social groups, can reduce
the tendency for hostile feelings (Eastin, 2007) [9] compared to
when played individually. Additional research confirms
Eastin’s findings (Schmierbach, 2010; Velez et al., 2012) [26,
1.4 Video Game’s Impacts on Teamwork
While countless projects have been conducted on the impact
of video games on prosocial behaviors, aggressive sensations,
and cognitive benefits, minimal research had been done on the
effects of participation in competitive and cooperative
videogame play on participants’ teamwork performance
afterwards. As this is the main focus of the present` study, it is
important to delve deeper into this area.
Ewoldsen et al. (2012) [11] conducted an experiment that is
very similar to the present study. They told participants to play
Halo 2, which is a videogame that can be played competitively
or cooperatively. Afterwards they measured the participants’
behavior in a Prisoner’s Dilemma task. Ewoldsen et al. [11]
found that participants who played Halo 2 cooperatively were
more likely to engage in “tit-for-tat” behavior in the Prisoner’s
Dilemma task than those who had played cooperatively.
However, while the researchers pointed out that “tit-for-tat”
behavior can be a precursor to cooperation, “tit-for-tat” can
also be employed in competition as well. The researchers did
not clarify this as they did not report whether the participants
in the cooperative condition did indeed cooperate more and
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research
achieve a higher group score than those in the competitive
condition. Moreover, they did not investigate whether the
effects of game play persisted beyond the day of the study.
The present study builds on the work of Ewoldsen et al. [11].
Our methodology is similar in that participants first play a
video game, either cooperatively or competitively, and then
participate in a Prisoner’s Dilemma game. Unlike the
participants in the Ewoldsen et al. [11] study, all of our
participants have no previous video gaming experience (to
eliminate any prior effectives of playing video games), we
added a control condition where no video games are played
and we look at Prisoner’s Dilemma performance two weeks
after the game playing to determine if there are any lingering
effects from game playing.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1 Participants
Participants were 60 middle school students who were
recruited from middle schools in Fairfax and Loudoun
counties in Virginia. None of them had prior experience
playing videogames. Each participated in the study without
compensation. Each of the participants was a boy. This was
not by design; it just turned out that when recruiting 60
volunteers from local middle schools, those responding were
all boys.
2.2 Videogame
The videogame used in the experiment was Call of Duty:
Modern Warfare III. It is a first-person shooter game in which
players engage in combat against an opposing force, which
can either be the computer itself or another human. The game
was chosen because it can be played in either a cooperative or
competitive mode, making it suitable as a testbed for the
experimental hypothesis. In competitive mode, players oppose
each other in combat and the goal is to kill the opposing
player. In cooperative mode, two players work together to
defeat a computer-controlled force. They make joint decisions
on the strategies they will use to defeat the enemy, including
how to spend the money they are given in the game on
weapons. Of particular interest to the present study is the fact
that if one player is injured, the other can save him if he is
close enough to arrive before the injured player dies. If the
injured player dies, then the game is over. Therefore, a key
teamwork element taught by the game is that the fates of both
players are linked; in order for one to succeed, both must
succeed and if one fails, then both fails. Therefore, the best
path to success is for each player to think of both himself and
his partner.
2.3 Procedure
The 60 participants were randomly assigned to pairs and to
one of the three experimental conditions: control, competitive,
and cooperative. The latter two conditions involved playing
the videogame. Those in the control condition only played the
Prisoner’s Dilemma game. Those in the other two conditions
received training on how to play the videogame and then
played the videogame for two hours. Participants in the
videogame conditions were brought back two weeks later to
play the Prisoner’s Dilemma game. The rationale behind the
delay was twofold. First, by delaying the Prisoner’s Dilemma
game, it could be determined whether experience playing the
game had a more lasting effect on participants’ behavior than
could be measured if the Prisoner’s Dilemma game were
played immediately after the videogame. Second, delaying the
Prisoner’s Dilemma game was designed to negate a potential
immediacy effect whereby participants who just competed in a
videogame might be inclined to compete in the Prisoner’s
Dilemma game while those who had just cooperated might be
inclined to cooperate.
However, before playing the Prisoner’s Dilemma game, each
subject was randomly reassigned to a new partner. The new
partner was from the same videogame condition
(cooperative/competitive) as the subject. This was done in
case the previous competitive or cooperative relationship the
subject had with his partner in the videogame might spill over
the Prisoner’s Dilemma game. Moreover, the participants were
blind to the experimental conditions their new Prisoner’s
Dilemma partners had been in so as to not induce a bias in the
participants as to how their new partners might act in the
Prisoner’s Dilemma game.
Each player was given a sheet (shown in Figure 1) that
described the rules of the Prisoner’s Dilemma game and
allowed the player to keep score. There were 20 trials in the
game for which participants were asked to select either X or
Y. If both participants chose X, they each received five points.
If they both chose Y, each lost five points. If one chose X and
the other chose Y, then the one choosing Y received ten points
and the one choosing X lost ten points. After each player made
his choice, he was told his partner’s choice as well. The player
then recorded both choices on the sheet provided and kept
track of his and his partner’s total points.
3. Results and Discussion
The primary purpose of the Prisoner’s Dilemma game was to
test whether experience playing a videogame can influence
subsequence teamwork behavior. The Prisoner’s Dilemma
game was chosen because it provides an overall score of team
performance that is dependent upon how well players look out
for their partner’s success and not just their own, something
representative of real life team performance. Therefore, the
measure of importance in the present study is the total score
achieved by each pair of players. Accordingly, the team score
for each pair of players was determined by adding the
individual scores for each player in the pair. As a result, there
were ten scores per condition, reflecting the ten pairs per
condition. These were then averaged across players in each
condition. The averages are shown in Table 1.
As can be seen from Table 1, the average team score was
highest in the cooperation condition and lowest in the
competition condition. A one-way analysis of variance
revealed that a statistically significant difference between
conditions, F (2.27) = 87.00, P < .0001. A Tukey test was used
to determine which means were significantly different from
each other. Because multiple comparisons were being made, a
.01 level of significance was used instead of a .05 level. The
critical value required for the means to be significantly
different from each other at the .01 level is 35.53.
Accordingly, each mean was statistically significantly
different from each other mean at the .01 level.
The primary purpose of the research was to investigate
whether playing videogames can affect subsequent teamwork
behavior. While many skills comprise effective teamwork, an
important one is thinking in terms of overall group, not
individual, performance, which entails maximizing the success
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research
of one’s partners as well as one’s own success as the two are
often linked. The present results indicate that playing
videogames can affect team performance, both positively and
negatively. Those with no prior videogame experience showed
differences in their team performance after only two hours of
videogame play.
A Prisoner’s Dilemma game was chosen to test whether the
cooperation/competition skills learned during the videogame
would extend to contexts beyond the videogame. The results
suggest that there was such as transfer of behavior. The
Prisoner’s Dilemma game was purposely conducted with
different partners in order to demonstrate that any effect
produced from the videogame was not linked to the specific
videogame partner/opponent as this could be construed as
implying that the videogame merely induced a competition or
cooperation mindset that was unique to the individual
Prisoner’s Dilemma game partner. The fact that the effects
occurred two weeks after playing the videogame suggests that
the effects were not an immediate by-product of having just
competed or cooperated in a videogame, but rather may reflect
a genuine change in how the participants approach situations
where they have the choice to compete or cooperate with
4. Tables and Figures
Table 1: Mean Prisoner’s Dilemma Game Scores based on Condition
Fig 1: Prisoner’s Dilemma Instructions
5. Conclusion
As noted in the Introduction, video game play is prevalent in
adolescents with the predominant type of video game being
violent first person shooter games. Research suggests that
there are both positive and negative potential effects from
playing video games. Given that video games are likely to
remain prevalent in the marketplace and that adolescents show
a preference for violent games, the issue becomes how to
manage video game playing to maximize benefits from game
playing and minimize harmful effects. Games that require
cognitive abilities and eye-hand coordination can be
beneficial. To the extent that adolescents prefer violent games,
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research
these should be played cooperatively to maximize teamwork
and prosocial skills.
6. References
1. Anderson CA, Bushman BJ. Effects of violent games on
aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive
affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A
meta-analytic review of the scientific literature.
Psychological Science. 2001; 12:353-359.
2. Anderson CA, Bushman BJ. Human aggression. Annual
Review of Psychology. 2002; 53:27-51.
3. Anderson CA, Dill KE. Videogames and aggressive
thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and life.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000;
4. Bavelier D, Achtman RL, Mani M, Föcker J. Neural bases
of selective attention in action videogame players. Vision
Research. 2012; 61:132-143.
5. Bavelier D, Green CS, Han DH, Renshaw PF, Merzenich
MM, Gentile DA. Brains on videogames. Nature Reviews
Neuroscience. 2011; 12:763-768. doi:10.1038/nrn3135
6. Children Now. Fair play? Violence, gender and race in
videogames. Los Angeles, CA: Children Now, 2001.
7. Cooper S, Khatib F, Treuille A, Barbero J, Lee J, Beenen
M, et al. Predicting protein structures with a multiplayer
online game. Nature. 2010; 466:756-760.
8. Deutsch M. The resolution of conflict: Constructive and
destructive processes. New Haven, CT: Yale University
Press, 1973.
9. Eastin MS. The influence of competitive and cooperative
play on state hostility. Human Communication Research.
2007; 33:450-466. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00307.x
10. Eastin MS. Videogame violence and the female game
player: Self and opponent gender effects on game
presence and aggressive thoughts. Human
Communication Research. 2006; 32:351-372.
11. Ewoldsen DR, Eno CA, Okdie BM, Velez JA, Guadagno
RE, DeCoster J. Effect of playing violent videogames
cooperatively or competitively on subsequent cooperative
behavior. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking. 2012, 15(5). doi: 10.1089/cyber.2011.0308.
12. Ferguson CJ, Garza A. Call of (civic) duty: Action games
and civic behavior in a large sample of youth. Computers
in Human Behavior. 2011; 27:770-775.
13. Fleming MJ, Rickwood DJ. Effects of violent versus
nonviolent videogames on children’s arousal, aggressive
mood, and positive mood. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology. 2001; 31(10):2047-2071.
14. Gentile DA, Anderson CA, Yukawa S, Ihori N, Saleem
M, Ming L, et al. The effects of prosocial videogames on
prosocial behaviors: International evidence from
correlational, longitudinal, and experimental studies.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2009;
15. Gentile DA. Pathological video-game use among youth
ages 8 to 18: A national study. Psychological Science.
2009; 20:594-602.
16. Greitemeyer T, Osswald S. Playing prosocial videogames
increases the accessibility of prosocial thoughts. The
Journal of Social Psychology. 2011; 151:121-128.
17. Greitemeyer T, Traut-Mattausch E, Osswald S. How to
ameliorate negative effects of violent videogames on
cooperation: Play it cooperatively in a team. Computers in
Human Behavior. 2012; 28:1465-1470.
18. Johnson D, Johnson R. The socialization and achievement
crisis: Are cooperative learning experiences the solution?
Applied Social Psychology Annual. 1983; 4:119-164.
19. Lenhart A, Kahne J, Middaugh E, Macgill AR, Evans C,
Vitak J. Teens, video games, and civics (Report No. 202-
415-4500). Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American
Life Project, 2008.
20. McKinley R. Andy, Lindsey K. McIntire, Margaret A.
Funke. Operator Selection for Unmanned Aerial Systems:
Comparing Videogame Players and Pilots. Aviation,
Space, and Environmental Medicine. 2011; 82:635-42.
21. Obama B, Biden J. Obama Urges $10 Million to Study
Videogames and Violence, 2013. Retrieved
22. Prensky M. From digital natives to digital wisdom:
Hopeful essays for 21st century learning. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press, 2012.
23. Rosser JC, Jr., Lynch PJ, Cuddihy L, Gentile DA,
Klonsky J, Merrell R. 2007. The Impact of Videogames
on Training Surgeons in the 21st Century. Archives of
Surgery. 2012; 142:181-86.
24. Saleem M, Anderson CA, Gentile DA. Effects of
prosocial, neutral, and violent video games on college
students’ affect. Aggressive Behavior. 2012; 38:263-271.
25. Schlickum MK, Hedman L, Enochsson L, Ann Kjellin A,
Li Fellander-Tsai L. Systematic Video Game Training in
Surgical Novices Improves Performance in Virtual
Reality Endoscopic Surgical Simulators: A Prospective
Randomized Study. World Journal of Surgery. 2009;
26. Schmierbach M. Killing spree: Exploring the connection
between competitive game play and aggressive cognition.
Communication Research. 2010; 37(2):256-274.
27. Sheese B, Graziano W. Deciding to defect: The effects of
video-game violence on cooperative behavior.
Psychological Science. 2005; 16:354-357.
28. Sherry JL. The effects of violent video games on
aggression: a meta-analysis. Human Communication
Research. 2001; 27(3):309-331.
29. Uttal DH, Meadow NG, Tipton E, Hand LL, Alden AR,
Warren C, et al. The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-
analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin. 2013;
139:352:402. doi:10.1037/a0028446
30. Velez JA, Mahood C, Ewoldsen DR, Moyer-Gusé E.
Ingroup versus outgroup conflict in the context of violent
video game play: The effect of cooperation on increased
helping and decreased aggression. Communication
Research, 2012. Advance online publication. doi:
31. Zhang X, Liu C, Wang L, Piao Q. Effects of violent and
non-violent computer video games on explicit and
implicit aggression. Journal of Software. 2010; 5(9):1014-
1021. doi: 10.4304.jsw.5.9.1014-1021.
... Los juegos cooperativos son particularmente útiles si el objetivo es fomentar la cohesión de grupo y mejora de valores sociales (Badatala et al., 2016). Los alumnos están en un entorno motivador del juego donde se les condiciona a participar juntos activamente, tomando el docente un rol de facilitador, favoreciendo el libre intercambio de ideas, información y recursos para que el grupo pueda satisfactoriamente solventar las dinámicas del juego. ...
... En tercer lugar, con el objetivo de a la conocer las relaciones del aprendizaje basado en juegos con el desarrollo de relaciones sociales y mejora del autoconcepto, se ha visto como las dinámicas de los Eurojuegos potencian la interacción social y generan un sentimiento de comunidad en el aula, siendo la escuela un agente socializador determinante durante la adolescencia (Aguirre, 2009). La existencia de juegos cooperativos y competitivos permiten al docente el refuerzo de diferentes dimensiones del alumnado, siendo los cooperativos particularmente útiles para la cohesión grupal y mejora de los valores sociales (Badatala et al., 2016). Los juegos estimulan el afán de superación y fortalecen la autoestima, siendo también un catalizador de experiencias útiles hora de explorar la atención a la diversidad, con beneficios demostrados en el seguimiento de alumnado con necesidades específicas de apoyo educativo (Aguirre, 2009;Forés y Ligioiz, 2009). ...
Full-text available
Los Eurojuegos son una herramienta que puede emplearse estratégicamente dentro de las aulas de educación secundaria y cuyas bondades pasan desapercibidas para muchos docentes. El objetivo general del presente trabajo fue conocer la influencia de los Eurojuegos en las dimensiones: aprendizaje significativo, desarrollo cognitivo, relaciones sociales, mejora del autoconcepto y fomento de la motivación; sobre el desarrollo holístico del alumnado en Educación secundaria Obligatoria. En el presente trabajo se realizó una revisión narrativa de la literatura científica en la que se buscaron originales publicados en las bases de datos de Web of Knowledge, Google Académico y Research Gate. En el trabajo se valoró el impacto de los Eurojuegos como medio para favorecer el desarrollo cognitivo del discente, centrado en los procesos cognitivos de orden superior. Por otro lado, también se mostraron las potencialidades de su uso en el aula a la hora de mejorar tanto las relaciones sociales y cohesión grupal, como el desarrollo intrapersonal de los estudiantes. Además, mostró la relación de los Eurojuegos con diferentes tipos de motivación que favorecen su implantación en el proceso de aprendizaje. Como conclusiones principales, el aprendizaje basado en juegos puede favorecer el aprendizaje significativo, puede promover el uso de procesos de pensamiento de orden superior y los juegos de mesa pueden facilitar el desarrollo de relaciones sociales.
... Co-operative games can communicate this need to the players and support social bonding and collective decision-making that can be transferred from the in-game world to real-life situations. Previous studies have suggested that participation in co-operative-as opposed to competitive-multiplayer games can support team building [110][111][112][113] and increase real-world collaboration and prosocial behaviors among players [114][115][116][117]. In contrast, the motivation to win in competitive games may leave little room for bonding and the exchange of ideas, possibly limiting the encouragement of prosocial behavior. ...
Full-text available
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic introduced an urgent need for effective strategies to disseminate crucial knowledge and improve people's subjective well-being. Complementing more conventional approaches to knowledge dissemination, game-based interventions were developed to create awareness and educate people about the pandemic, hoping to change their attitudes and behavior.
... Assim, muitas das investigações experimentais mais recentes têm procurado também incluir estas variáveis e os resultados têm sugerido que os VE em modo multijogador, na vertente competitiva, independentemente se os seus conteúdos são violentos ou não, podem produzir um aumento das cognições e comportamentos agressivos fora do ambiente de jogo, à semelhança do que acontece com os VE com conteúdos violentos jogados em modo isolado (Zhang et al., 2010). Já na vertente cooperativa, os resultados têm sugerido que, independentemente dos seus conteúdos, jogar VE pode aumentar o comportamento cooperativo no trabalho de equipa (Badatala et al., 2016;Ewoldsen et al., 2012;Greitemeyer et al., 2012;Waddell & Peng, 2014) e diminuir o comportamento agressivo fora do ambiente de jogo (Greitemeyer et al., 2012;Velez et al., 2016). Apesar de nem todos os resultados indicarem que os VE jogados cooperativamente aumentem significativamente os comportamentos cooperativos , ou que os VE jogados competitivamente aumentem a agressão afetiva dos jogadores fora do contexto de jogo (Waddell & Peng, 2014), a maioria sugere que o contexto social em que os VE são jogados (modo isolado, modo multijogador competitivo ou cooperativo) é uma variável importante, que pode influenciar as interações sociais na vida real., à semelhança dos conteúdos presentes nos VE (e.g., Dolgov et al., 2014;Velez et al., 2016). ...
Os videojogos de entretenimento (VE) constituem artefactos de média digital visual., tipicamente com um carácter estético, concebidos para entretenimento e que integram regras e objetivos de jogo e/ou ficção interativa (e.g., Tavinor, 2009). Tendo vindo a conquistar cada vez mais adeptos em todo o mundo, os VE levantam apreensão sobre os possíveis efeitos da sua utilização na vida dos adolescentes, sobretudo na atividade escolar, central no seu quotidiano. Esta revisão de literatura analisa várias teorias e estudos empíricos, da área da Psicologia, focados na relação entre a atividade de jogar VE e a aprendizagem escolar ou os comportamentos, cognições e afetos envolvidos nessa aprendizagem. Tendo sido identificadas relações quer negativas, neutras ou positivas entre a atividade de jogar VE e a aprendizagem escolar, a investigação não fornece ainda uma imagem inequívoca sobre a relação em causa, sendo necessários mais estudos sobre ela. Video games (VG) are artifacts of visual digital media, typically with an aesthetic character, designed for entertainment and that integrate rules and objectives of game and/or interactive fiction (e.g., Tavinor, 2009). Having gained more and more fans around the worl lives, especially on school activities, which are central to their quotidian. This literature review analyzes several theories and empirical studies, in the field of Psychology, focused on the relation between the activity of playing VG and school learning or the behaviors, cognitions and affects involved in that learning. Having identified negative, neutral or positive relationships between the activity of playing VG and school learning, research does not yet provide an unambiguous picture about the relationship in question, and further studies on it are needed.
... Co-operative games can communicate this need to the players and support social bonding and collective decision-making that can be transferred from the in-game world to real-life situations. Previous studies have suggested that participation in co-operative-as opposed to competitive-multiplayer games can support team building [110][111][112][113] and increase real-world collaboration and prosocial behaviors among players [114][115][116][117]. In contrast, the motivation to win in competitive games may leave little room for bonding and the exchange of ideas, possibly limiting the encouragement of prosocial behavior. ...
Full-text available
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic introduced an urgent need for effective strategies to disseminate crucial knowledge and improve people's subjective well-being. Complementing more conventional approaches to knowledge dissemination, game-based interventions were developed to create awareness and educate people about the pandemic, hoping to change people's attitudes and behavior. Objective: This study provides an overview and analysis of digital and analog game-based interventions in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. As major pandemics and other large-scale disruptive events are expected to increase in frequency in the coming decades, this analysis aims to inform the design, uptake, and effect of similar future interventions. Methods: From November 2021 through April 2022, Scopus, Google, and YouTube were searched for articles and videos describing COVID-19-themed game-based interventions. Information regarding authorship, year of development/launch, country of origin, license, deployment, genre/type, target audience, player interaction, in-game goal, and intended transfer effects was extracted. Information regarding intervention effectiveness was retrieved where possible. Results: A diverse assortment of 23 analog and 43 digital serious games was identified, approximately one-third of them through scientific articles. The majority of these games were developed by research institutions in 2020 and originated in Europe and North America. A limited number were tested on relatively small samples, using a diversity of research methods to assess the potential changes in participants' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors, as well as their gameplay experience. While the majority of evaluated games effectively engaged and motivated the players, increased awareness, and improved their understanding of COVID-19-related issues, the games' success in influencing people's behavior was often unclear or limited. Conclusions: To increase the impact of similar future interventions aimed at disseminating knowledge and influencing people's attitudes and behaviors during a large-scale crisis, some considerations are suggested. Based on the study's results and informed by existing game theories, recommendations are made in relation to game development, deployment, and distribution; game users, design, and use; game design terminology; and effectiveness testing for serious games. Clinicaltrial: /.
... Collaborative games can also facilitate greater willingness for teamwork (Badatala et al, 2016;Velez, 2015) and increase trust, which in turn makes further collaboration more likely (Greitemeyer & Cox, 2013). Other studies found that prosocial video games such as Super Mario can promote prosocial attitudes, facilitate the development of empathy, and may even decrease aggression (Gentile et al, 2009;Sestir & Bartholow, 2010). ...
Full-text available
Although a causal link between gaming and radicalization could not be established thus far, thevexploitation of gaming by extremist actors has become a growing concern. P/CVE practitioners invparticular are devoting an increasing amount of attention to the issue. This report reviews existingvliterature on the positive effects of gaming in light of the specific needs of the P/CVE field and deducesvrecommendations for practitioners seeking to develop a bespoke game for the P/CVE context.
... This finding is also similar to the previous studies on the more casual gamers [69,70]. Communication skills development and achieving team works are also considered important as well, akin to the findings on video gaming in earlier literature [71][72][73][74]. In terms of the factors that impact Esports participation, both groups expressed skill level, and fortitude play a significant role. ...
Full-text available
Esports have grown to become a core part of popular culture in many countries, including Hong Kong. Albeit the low participation rates in Esports in Hong Kong, it was starting to gain traction, yet the local Esports advocates were experiencing challenges in promoting and popularizing the Esport. Hence, the current study was aimed to identify and reveal the determinants of participating in Esports, as well as strengthen the work on Esports behaviors using the theory of planned behavior (TPB), a reliable and valid prominent theory in predicting human behavior across a plethora of contexts, ranging from health-related behaviors to sport consumption behaviors. In the current study, the convenience sampling method was used to recruit over 2000 students (secondary school, N = 1567 ( female = 615 ); university students, N = 1525 ( female = 255 ). The students were invited to participate in the survey for collecting their perception on Esports participation using TPB-based questionnaire. Results were analyzed using theoretical analysis and structural equation modeling (SEM). The results show that both secondary school and university students have positive attitudes toward Esports. The outcomes indicated that participating in Esports develops social networks, and people with professional Esports’ skills capability and being fortitude tend to be models of Esports participation. However, inadequate resources are a significant barrier to participation in the Esports business. The SEM model verified that the variables of intention in Esports participation among the students in Hong Kong with an adequate goodness of fit index. As a whole, the current study has identified the factors and determinants of Esports’ intention and behavior among Hong Kong students, which were successfully displayed in terms of the theory of planned behavior. In addition, the findings are expected to provide the Hong Kong government with a documented framework to advocate Esports-related policies on a long-term basis.
... Prior research on cooperative game play has largely allowed teammates to communicate in some capacity (Adachi, Hodson, Willoughby, & Zanette, 2015;Dolgov, Graves, Nearents, Schwark, & Volkman, 2014;Eastin, 2007;Greitemeyer, 2013;Jerabeck & Ferguson, 2013;Schmierbach, 2010;Velez et al., 2016) while subsequent social dilemmas did not examine, or even allow, communication between partners (Badatala, Leddo, Islam, Patel, & Surapaneni 2016;Breuer, Velez, Bowman, Wulf, & Bente, 2017;Greitemeyer & Cox, 2013;Greitemeyer, Traut-Mattausch, & Osswald, 2012;Velez, 2015;Velez et al., 2014;Waddell & Peng, 2014;Zheng et al., 2020). Therefore, positive behaviors after cooperative game play may heavily depend on players' in-game communication-suggesting that reciprocal behaviors that confirm or violate group expectations, as predicted by BGR, may play a lesser role or none at all. ...
Cooperative game play has been associated with a growing list of prosocial benefits. However, less research has examined its constituent parts to determine their contribution to subsequent positive outcomes. The current study examined partners’ communication as a common and even imperative aspect of cooperative play that may largely account for its positive effects on cooperative behaviors and effective teamwork. Partners played a cooperative game (Overcooked 2) alone or with a partner, and in the latter case with or without the ability to communicate, before engaging in two puzzle-solving tasks that required effective and efficient communication for successful performances. Results suggest communication is unnecessary, and may even be detrimental to, subsequent team performances on non-gaming tasks, and that it seems unlikely to account for the cooperative norms proposed to be the theoretical mechanism behind cooperative play’s positive effects. The conclusion discusses theoretical implications and potential future research.
... Furthermore study concluded that gaming related learning was significantly more attractive to students than traditional learning (4). In addition cooperation based computer games have been shown to provide significant increase in cooperation among subjects that engaged in cooperation gaming activities (5). Furthermore there are patterns in online cooperative games that can be compared to classic societies, and that through creation and fostering of common ties build engagement and loyalty to online gaming community (6). ...
This study investigated players' emotional responses to performance feedback in an educational game under cooperative and competitive structures. A 2 × 2 repeated-measures experiment was conducted with the task structure (cooperative and competitive) and the task demand (low and high) as independent variables. Thirty-two students from a university campus participated in the experiment. We designed a memory game involving a humanoid robot as a co-player, manipulating cooperation and competition between the human player and the robot. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) scanner was employed to monitor the participant's prefrontal cortex activity. The subjective experience was measured with questionnaires. fNIRS results showed that, compared to negative feedback, positive feedback led to increased activations in the orbitofrontal cortex and rostromedial cortex regardless of the task demand. Additionally, compared to competitive structures, cooperative structures caused increased activation in the left rostromedial region in low-demand tasks. Furthermore, participants reported a more positive self-evaluation in competitive than cooperative structures but more positive evaluation toward the robot in cooperative than competitive structures.
Research suggests that video games can have both negative and positive effects. Studies investigating the adverse effects of games have found a short-term link between violent video games and minor forms of aggression. However, the effect size for this link is small, some of these studies suffer from methodological shortcomings, and recent research suggests games do not impact severe acts of violence. In addition, research examining whether games can be addictive is inconclusive. Scholars investigating the positive effects of games have found that they can alter negative moods, increase specific visuospatial skills, and provide healthy social interactions.
Full-text available
Previous research has demonstrated a positive influence of cooperative video game play on participants’ cooperative strategies (tit-for-tat behaviors) in a modified Prisoner’s Dilemma task (Ewoldsen et al., 2012). The current study tested whether these positive effects are applicable to ingroup and outgroup conflict. Eighty participants were assigned to play a violent video game cooperatively or competitively with a confederate posing as an outgroup or ingroup member. The main findings corroborate previous research on the beneficial effects of cooperative game play and suggest playing cooperatively can increase helping behavior. Furthermore, cooperation with an outgroup member can actually reduce aggression. Implications of findings for future research are discussed.
Full-text available
The present research tests the idea that playing a team-player video game in which players work together as teammates and assist each other in achieving a common goal ameliorates the negative effects of violent video game play on cooperative behavior. In fact, two studies revealed that, relative to a single-player mode, playing a cooperative team-player violent video game increased cooperation in a decision dilemma task. Importantly, cooperative behavior generalized across targets in that the decision dilemma was played with a partner who was not the video game play partner. Mediation analyses revealed that cooperative team-play promoted feelings of cohesion, which activated trust norms, which in turn increased cooperative behavior.
Full-text available
Reviews theory and research into the impact of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning experiences on socialization and cognitive and social development and on achievement and related attitudes. Also surveyed is the impact of peer relationships on children's and adolescents' values, attitudes, perspectives, prosocial and antisocial behaviors, perspective-taking ability, and psychological health. A series of studies is examined which indicates that, compared to individualistic and competitive learning, cooperative learning promotes greater interaction, greater feelings of acceptance, a more dynamic view of classmates and self, greater liking of classmates, more positive expectations, and higher self-esteem and self-acceptance. Further, these positive effects can generalize to free-time situations. It is suggested that the current crises of alienation and work-force quality facing society can be seen in terms of 2 educational paradoxes: Alienated youngsters are pitted against each other in bureaucratic schools that emphasize individualism and competition, and there is an achievement crisis that causes schoolchildren to focus on superficial learning. It is concluded that greater emphasis on cooperative learning might provide a solution to these crises. (5 p ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Full-text available
Research on human aggression has progressed to a point at which a unifying framework is needed. Major domain-limited theories of aggression include cognitive neoassociation, social learning, social interaction, script, and excitation transfer theories. Using the general aggression model (GAM), this review posits cognition, affect, and arousal to mediate the effects of situational and personological variables on aggression. The review also organizes recent theories of the development and persistence of aggressive personality. Personality is conceptualized as a set of stable knowledge structures that individuals use to interpret events in their social world and to guide their behavior. In addition to organizing what is already known about human aggression, this review, using the GAM framework, also serves the heuristic function of suggesting what research is needed to fill in theoretical gaps and can be used to create and test interventions for reducing aggression.
An expert perspective on 21st century educationWhat can you learn on a cell phone? Almost anything! How does that concept fit with our traditional system of education? It doesn't. Best-selling author and futurist Marc Prensky's book of essays challenges educators to “reboot” and make the changes necessary to prepare students for 21st century careers. His “bottom-up” vision is based on interviews with young people and includes their ideas about what they need from teachers, schools, and education. Also featured are easy-to-do, high-impact classroom strategies that help what he calls “digital natives” acquire “digital wisdom.” This thought-provoking text is organized into two sections that address: Rethinking education; 21st century learning and technology in the classroom (including games, YouTube, and more)In addition to valuable knowledge, this compelling collection offers inspiration, new perspectives, and ideas that work. Our educational context has changed, and a new context demands new thinking. This book will broaden your mind, spark new insights regarding how and what you teach, and reshape your vision of 21st century education.
Although scholars have repeatedly linked video games to aggression, little research has investigated how specific game characteristics might generate such effects. In this study, we consider how game mode—cooperative, competitive, or solo—shapes aggressive cognition. Using experimental data, we find partial support for the idea that cooperative play modes prompt less aggressive cognition. Further analysis of potential mediating variables along with the influence of gender suggests the effect is primarily explained by social learning rather than frustration.
Based on the view that the level of market penetration of video games combined with the high levels of realism portrayed in these games make it important to investigate the messages video games send children, this report details a study of the 10 top-selling video games for each of 6 game systems available in the United States and for personal computers. The report identifies some of the unhealthy social messages such games may be sending to young players about violence, gender, and race and contains ideas for improving games for children. The report also answers frequently asked questions about video violence. Findings of the study of 70 games revealed that video games often glorified violence, ignored women and people of color, and reinforced racial and gender stereotypes. Video games were overwhelmingly violent, with nearly every game containing some violent content and too often without consequence to the perpetrator or the victim. Comparisons across game systems revealed considerable variation. A list of the video games examined completes the report. (Contains 25 endnotes.) (KB)
Most research on violent video game play suggests a positive relationship with aggression-related outcomes. Expanding this research, the current study examines the impact group size, game motivation, in-game behavior, and verbal aggression have on postgame play hostility. Consistent with previous research, group size and verbal aggression both displayed a significant positive relationship with hostility. From these results, avenues for future research on anti- and prosocial outcomes from group gaming are offered.
Adding depth and breadth to the general aggression model, this paper presents three experiments that test the relationships among user and opponent gender representation, opponent type, presence, and aggressive thoughts from violent video game play. Studies 1 and 2 suggest that females experience greater presence and more aggressive thoughts from game play when a gender match between self and game character exists. Studies 2 and 3 indicate that playing against a human opponent (rather than a computer) increases aggressive thoughts. Finally, although Studies 1, 2, and 3 indicate that playing as a female against a male opponent increases aggressive thoughts, Studies 1 and 2 suggest that playing as a male against a female opponent consistently and significantly decreases aggressive thoughts.