AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY BANGLADESH (AIUB)

Effects of Video Games

Research Methodology (Section D)
ALI, S.M. FURKAN
14-97610-1
23-Jul-14




Acknowledgements:
I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my teacher Dr. Md. Faruque Hossain who gave
me the opportunity to do this wonderful research on the topic Effects of Video Games, which also
helped me in doing a lot of Research and I came to know about so many new things I am really thankful
to my course instructor. Secondly I would also like to thank my cousins Md. Fakrul Islam, Tahrima
Mustary and my nephew Sadikur Rahman who helped me in survey for this research within the limited
time frame.
Abstract:
Video games are one of fastest growing medium of entertainment, people of age between 10 to 30 not
only plays video games for fun but also to spend their leisure time. Now the question when that many
people are getting involved in gaming what kind of impact it will bring to our society. For this reason this
research was conducted with 63 observations to find out the impact. With different variable research
indicates academic brightness, aggressiveness, dependency on gaming, spatial ability, game addiction
and demographic information. Which indicates to result Bangladesh still havent suffered from gaming.
Most of the gamer in sample likes non-violent games this indicates that result. On the other side
academic performance and analytical ability is quite same among gamers and non-gamers. In the end I
can say we still havent received any negative or positive outcome from gaming but research with
significant number of observation might change the result.













Contents
Acknowledgements:...................................................................................................................................... 2
Abstract: ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
1. Introduction: ......................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Background: ........................................................................................................................................ 4
1.2 Justification of background: .......................................................................................................... 4
1.3 Literature review: ................................................................................................................................ 4
1.4 Hypothesis: ......................................................................................................................................... 5
1.5 Objective: ............................................................................................................................................ 5
2. Materials and Methods: ............................................................................................................................ 5
2.1 Site description: .................................................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Research design: ................................................................................................................................. 5
2.3 Pros & Cons: ........................................................................................................................................ 5
2.4 Statistical design: ................................................................................................................................ 5
3. Results: .................................................................................................................................................. 5
3.1 CGPA: ............................................................................................................................................ 5
3.2 Analytical Ability: .......................................................................................................................... 6
3.3 Demographic: ................................................................................................................................ 6
3.4 Game Addiction: ........................................................................................................................... 7
3.5 Aggressiveness: ............................................................................................................................. 8
4. Discussion: ............................................................................................................................................ 9
4.1 CGPA: ............................................................................................................................................ 9
4.2 Analytical Ability: .......................................................................................................................... 9
4.3 Demographic: ................................................................................................................................ 9
4.4 Game Addiction: ......................................................................................................................... 10
4.5 Aggressiveness: ........................................................................................................................... 10
5. Conclusion: .......................................................................................................................................... 10
5.1 Findings: ...................................................................................................................................... 10
5.2 Action Plan: ................................................................................................................................. 10
Reference: ................................................................................................................................................... 10

Effects of Video Games in Society
1. Introduction:
1.1 Background:
Video game is one of the fast growing medium of entertainment that is not only accepted by kids but
also by the adults. Now internet is quite available and affordable in our country, if look few years back
internet was not available and people used to go to the cybercafs to work or have fun in internet but a
new type of caf is introduced in Bangladesh which is game caf. People age between 10 to 30 used to
come and play pc games in game caf. Game is not only played in pc but also played in consoles (Xbox
one, Play station 3), web based games (Candy Crush saga, Zynga poker) also the portable platforms
(PSP). Multibillion dollar gaming industry (Ubisoft, Electronics Art) is growing and giving entertaining
possibility which is eventually will collapse TV industry. So now the question is how this industry will
effect of society.
1.2 Justification of background:
Electronics Art which is one of the giant game developer which has asset US$5.070 billion (2013;
according to Wikipedia) not only that in our country where most of people uses pirated disc to play
games they still spends huge amount of money because needs so much customization. A person who
wish to play games needs to spend load of money, gamer needs some other accessories apart from pc
like, controller, gaming keyboard, gaming mouse, gaming mouse pad, cooler, power supply. Many
businesses are established to fulfill the demands of gamers. So, this gaming has created demand to fulfill
this demand certain businesses have established. Gaming has effect on us not only socially but also in
economically.
1.3 Literature review:
First we will discuss about games affecting us socially. Video games can positively or negatively influence
the gamers, in our literature review we will discuss about how gamers react as they play video games for
a long period of time. Because of significant development in handheld devices, using handheld device
for gaming have increased where PC and Console playing remains same (Rideout et al., 2010). With the
development of technology gaming will also increase that and that will significantly change
interpersonal behavior both positively and negatively (Psychological Science, 2014). First we will discuss
about negative outcomes. A large amount of developmental and physiological research in video games
literature has indicated the relation between violent games and negative outcomes among gamers such
as depression, decreased empathy, aggression, violence and video games addiction (Adachi and
Willoughby, 2012). Apart from that there is some horrifying events happened because of gaming
shooting sprees by violent video games players at Columbine high school at 1999 as well as beltway
sniper shooting in 2002 (Adachi and Willoughby, 2012). If people continuously play violent game for a
longer period will lead to aggressive personality (Prot et al., 2012). One of the issues that have received
little attention which happens for prolonged gaming is narcissism which is characterized by exceptional
interest and admiration for self, low empathy towards others and increased sense of beliefs (Barlett et
al., 2009). Playing violent video games (Grand Theft Auto 4) for long period can affect gamers can lead to
no respect towards law and order.
If we only watch one side of the coin that would be a foolish decision, we also need to consider the
positive effects and outcomes of gaming. Where all our conventional studies suggests that playing video
games is intellectually lazy and sedating it turns out that playing these games promote wide range of
cognitive skills. This is particularly true for shooting games. The most convincing evidence comes from
numerous training studies those professional gamer shows faster and accurate attention allocation than
other (American Physiologist, 2014). Gaming industry has begun to develop games which will make the
player smarter. Now-a-days games are designed to enhance learning skills, vocabulary, math, history
(Barlett et al., 2009). Several researches have shown that gaming can improve visual and spatial skills.
Experimental studies have shown that 10 hours of can improve spatial attention and mental rotation
(Prot et al., 2012). This beneficial effect also has practical example, an early experimental studies show
that Israeli Air Force cadets are trained using the game Space Fortress 2 and have better flight
performance as a result this game became a part of Israeli Air Force training program. Game developers
has mastered the art of pulling people of all age, sex, races and having them work towards a single goal,
to avoid the failure and celebrate the win. Game developer now-a-day doesnt motivate children to play
instead they aim to motivate different types people (American Physiologist, 2014). There are a huge
difference games today and its 10 or 20 years predecessors, mostly gamers now dont play alone they
play with their friends or family or with complete stranger who eventually become friends. Perhaps the
most celebrated success story of game that had significant impact on health related behaviors.
Researcher and doctors in medical field have begun to harness the power of game to motivate patients
and ultimately improve their health outcome (American Physiologist, 2014).
1.4 Hypothesis:
According to literature review Is it a fact or fiction? that gaming is improving our social life.
1.5 Objective:
Find out whether gaming is helping the people of Bangladesh or leading to destruction.
2. Materials and Methods:
2.1 Site description:
The research survey was conducted in Dhanmondi and Mohammadpur, where students of AIUB, ULAB,
UAP, Residential model College, St. Joseph School & College were observations. Total 63 observations
were collected.
2.2 Research design:
With consideration research problem, ethics, budget and time, data was collected by survey.
2.3 Pros & Cons:
The main disadvantage of this research was time was very short, the data we collected was qualitative
data that is also an obstacle to find accurate result.
2.4 Statistical design:
Correlation between hour of games played and GPA, analytical ability, introvert or extrovert personality
certainly drawn a conclusion.
3. Results:
3.1 CGPA:
Sample whom does not play games CGPA is ranges from 3.00 to 4.00 with their mean is 3.47 0.35,
apart from that sample whom plays games less than an hour CGPA ranges from 2.55 to 4.00 with their
mean is 3.55 .40, but samples whom plays games between 1 to 3 hours their CGPA ranges from 3.00 to
4.00 with their mean 3.47 0.32, at last sample who plays games more than 4 hour their CGPA is ranges
from 2.98 to 3.75 with their mean 3.40 0.30 (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Sample academic brightness based on hours of games played (left to right more time spending
in playing games)
3.2 Analytical Ability:
Sample who doesnt play games analytical question success rate ranges from 0 to 4 with their mean 1.75
1.16, apart from that people who plays games less than an hour success rate ranges from 0 to 3 with
their mean 1.29 0.94, but samples who play games between 1 to 3 hours success rate ranges from 0 to
3 with mean 1.55 1.06, at last sample who play games more than 4 hours success rate ranges from 1 to
3 with mean 1.80 0.84 (Table 1). In sample for people who doesnt play games, plays more than 4
hours maximum number of sample correct answer is 2 with middle number is 2 whereas people who
plays less than an hour maximum number of sample correct answer is 2 with middle number is 1 and
people who plays between 1 - 3 hours maximum number of sample correct answer is 1 with median is
1.50 (Table 1).
Table 1: Sample analytical ability based on hours of games played
Dont play games Less than hour Between 1-3 hours More than 4 hours
Mean 1.75 1.29 1.55 1.80
SD 1.16 0.94 1.06 0.84
Min 0 0 0 1
Max 4 3 3 3
Mode 2 2 1 2
Median 2.00 1.00 1.50 2.00
CV% 66.57 72.89 68.38 46.48
3.3 Demographic:
Sample who plays games in PC age ranges from 10 to 30 with their mean age 23.53 3.85, apart from
that people who plays games in Smartphone age ranges from 16 to 29 with their mean age 23.59 3.22
3.47
0.35
3.00
4.00
3.39
10.02
3.55
0.40
2.55
4.00
3.58
11.18
3.47
0.32
3.00
4.00
3.50
9.17
3.40
0.30
2.98
3.75
3.40
8.70
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
mean sd min max median CV
and people who plays games in other medium age ranges from 17 to 28 with their mean age 24 3.85
(Figure 2). In sample maximum number of PC gamer age are 25 with their middle number 25 whereas
maximum number of Smartphone gamer age is 26 with their median 26 and gamers who use other
mediums maximum number of age is 24 and median as well as 24. Samples medium for playing games
are PC, console, Smartphone and web based games where most people plays games in PC, Smartphone
2
nd
popular device to play games, very few people are involved in playing games in console and web
(Figure 3).

Figure 2: Sample age based on their preferred gaming medium (left to right PC, Smartphone, other)

Figure 3: Sample preferred gaming medium
3.4 Game Addiction:
To calculate gamers addiction based in different game types some qualitative data was converted into
quantitative for the calculation purpose. Question 2, 3 and 7-10 was depended variable to calculate
option of each depended variable was coded on the scale of 1, which was judged on total score of 6. In
23.53
3.85
10
30
25 25
16.37
23.59 3.22 16 29 26 24 13.64
24.00
3.85
17
28
24 24
16.03
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
mean sd min max mode median CV
pc
console
Smartphone
web
sample people who plays single player games addiction level ranges from 0.25 to 6 with their mean 2.65
1.89 apart from that multiplayer gamers addiction level ranges from 1 to 5.5 with their mean 2.63
1.87 and people who play with their friends addiction level ranges from 1 to 4.5 with their mean 2.93
1.26 (Table 2). In sample maximum number of single player gamer addiction rate is 1 with median 2.5
whereas maximum number of multiplayer gamers addiction rate is 1 with median 2.13 and maximum
number people who plays with their friends addiction rate is 3 with median as well as 3 (Table 2).
Table 2: Sample gamers addiction level based on different types of game play
Single player Multiplayer With Friends
Mean 2.65 2.63 2.93
SD 1.89 1.87 1.26
Min 0.25 1 1
Max 6 5.5 4.5
Mode 1 1 3
Median 2.5 2.13 3
CV% 71.25 71.21 42.99
3.5 Aggressiveness:
To calculate gamers addiction based in different game types some qualitative data was converted into
quantitative for the calculation purpose. Question 1 - 3 and 7-10 was depended variable to calculate
option of each depended variable was coded on the scale of 1, which was judged on total score of 7. In
sample gamers who play action games eagerness for playing ranges from 1 to 6 with their mean 2.85
1.60, apart from that who plays strategy games dependency on games ranges from 1.5 t 6.5 with their
mean 3.55 1.69 but racing gamers dependency on games ranges from 0.5 to 6.25 with their mean 3.04
2.33, apart from that sports game players dependency on games ranges from 0.75 to 7 with their
mean 3.37 2.00, rest of the gamer who plays puzzle and simulation games their dependency on games
ranges from 0.75 to 4.5 with their mean 3.21 1.51 (Table 3). In sample maximum number of action
game player game dependency rate is 3.25 with median 2.25; maximum number of strategy game
player dependency rate is 6.5 and median 3, maximum number of racing game player dependency rate
is 0.5 and median 2.63, maximum number of sports game player dependency rate is 5 and median 3.25,
maximum number of simulation & puzzle game player dependency rate is 3.75 and median as well as
3.75 (Table 3). The most popular genre of gamers is racing; sports and action games strategy games are
little less popular than previous mentioned kinds but puzzle and simulation games are least favorite
(Figure 4).
Table 3: Sample games dependency on game based on genres
Action Strategy Racing Sports Others
Mean 2.85 3.55 3.04 3.37 3.21
SD 1.60 1.69 2.33 2.00 1.51
Min 1 1.5 0.5 0.75 0.75
Max 6 6.5 6.25 7 4.5
Mode 3.25 6.5 0.5 5 3.75
Median 2.25 3 2.63 3.25 3.75
CV% 56.05 47.74 76.70 59.53 47.12

Figure 4: Sample popularity of game genres
4. Discussion:
4.1 CGPA:
In sample people who do not play games and between 1-3 hours both mean CGPA is 3.47, people play
games between less than an hour mean CGPA is 3.55 and people who play games more than 4 hours
mean CGPA is 3.40 but standard deviation indicates that people who plays games more than 4 hour
hours are more uniformed than others, not only that people who play more than 4 hours CGPA variance
0.77 and the CGPA difference of other 3, doesnt play games, less than hour, between 1-3 hours are
accordingly 1, 1.46 and 1 which also supported above mention statement. In sample people who plays
games more than 4 hours is more homogeneously mixed than others supported by coefficient of
variation (Figure 1).
4.2 Analytical Ability:
In sample people who dont play games mean success rate is 1.75, people play less than an hour mean
success rate is 1.29, people play between 1 to 3 hours mean success rate is 1.55 and people who play
games more than 4 hours mean success rate is 1.8 but standard deviation indicates that people who
plays games more than 4 hours success rate is more uniformed than others, not only that people who
play games more than 4 hours success rate difference is 2 and the difference of others, dont play
games, less than an hour, between 1-3 hours are accordingly 4, 3 and 3, which also supported above
mentioned statement. In sample people who plays games more than 4 hours success rate is more
homogeneously mixed than others supported by coefficient of variation (Table 1).
4.3 Demographic:
In sample people who plays in PC mean age 23.53, people who play in Smartphone mean age 23.59 and
people who plays in other mediums mean age 24 but Standard deviation indicates that people who
plays in Smartphone their age is more uniformed than others. In sample people who plays games in
Smartphone is more homogeneously mixed than others supported by coefficient of variation (Figure 2).
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
action
strategy
puzzle
sports
racing
simulation
4.4 Game Addiction:
In sample single player gamers mean addiction level 2.65, multiplayer gamers mean addiction level 2.63
and people who play with their friends mean addiction level 2.93 but standard deviation indicates that
people who play games with their friends addiction level is more uniformed than others. Not only that,
people who play games with their friends addiction rate difference 3.5 and the difference of single
player and multiplayer gamers difference are accordingly 5.75 and 4.5 which is also supported above
mentioned statement. In sample people who play with their friends is more homogeneously mixed than
others supported by coefficient of variation (Table 2).
4.5 Aggressiveness:
In sample action game player mean dependency level 2.85, strategy game player 3.55, racing gamer
3.04, sports gamer 3.75, others 3.21, people more likely to play sports game than others. Not only that
difference of dependency level of sports gamers is 6.25 highest, action, strategy, racing and other
difference of dependency level accordingly 5, 5, 5.75, 3.75 which also supported above mentioned
statement. In sample people who play sports games are less homogeneously mixed than others
supported by coefficient of variation (Table 3).
5. Conclusion:
5.1 Findings:
It is evident the data of all sample is quite similar but people who play games more than 4 hours CGPA is
more homogeneous (Figure 1). It is clear that the data of all samples is quite similar but people who
play games more than 4 hours their success rate is more (Table 1). People of different ages are more
involved in PC gaming (Figure 2). People became more addicted to gaming when they are playing in
single player mode (Table 2). People are more interested in playing action, racing and sports games but
calculation suggests that they are more depended to sports games which is not aggressive, so playing
games makes people aggressive doesnt apply here (Table 3).
5.2 Action Plan:
This type of research should be done in near future with maximum number of observation as possible.
Reference:
Adachi, P. C., Willoughby, T., 2012. Do Video Games Promote Positive Youth Development, Brock University,
St. Catharines, ON, Canada, 28(2):155-165
American Psychologist, 2014. The Benefits Of Playing Video Games, American Psychological Association,
Washington, USA, 69(1):66-78
Barlett, C. P., Anderson, C. A., Swing, E. L., 2009. Video Game Effects- Confirmed, Suspected and Speculative,
Iowa State University, USA, 40(3):377-403
Prot, S., McDonald, K. A., Anderson, C. A., Gentile, D. A., 2012. Video Games: Good, Bad or Other, Pediatric
Clinics of North America, 53(3):647-658
Psychological Science, 2014. Long-Term Relations Among Prosocial-Media Use, Empathy and Prosocial
Behavior, Association for Psychological Science, Washington, USA, 25(2):358-368
Rideout, V. J., Foehr, U. G., Roberts, D. F., 2010. Generation M
2
-Media in Lives of 8- to 18-Years-Olds, Kaiser
Family Foundation, Menlo Park, California, USA, pp. 18-27