Older Adults’ Perceptions of Video Game Training in the Intervention Comparative Effectiveness for Adult Cognitive Training (ICE-ACT) Clinical Trial: An Exploratory Analysis

  • Ronald Andringa
  • Erin R. Harell
  • Michael Dieciuc
  • Walter R. BootEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11593)


Video game-based interventions have been increasingly explored as a means to prevent or reverse age-related declines in attention, executive control, memory, and processing speed. Further, the gamification of interventions aimed at improving mental and physical health, and encouraging healthy behaviors, holds promise with respect to promoting intervention engagement and adherence. Successful implementation of game-based and gamified interventions depends on the ability to design games that older adults are willing and able to play, which ultimately depends on understanding the game preferences of older adults, and the challenges and barriers to video gameplay. To explore these issues, this paper presents data collected from U.S. participants as part of the Intervention Comparative Effectiveness for Adult Cognitive Training (ICE-ACT) clinical trial. This trial aimed to understand the impact of various interventions on cognition and everyday task performance. Three intervention arms involved video game play: BrainHQ training (gamified cognitive training), Rise of Nations training (commercial complex real-time strategy game), and a control group that played Sudoku, crossword, and word search computer programs. After each game session, participants rated their game experience and provided comments in a game diary. This paper presents analyses of these diary data. The largest differences observed were between attitudes toward the control games and Rise of Nations. Control games were strongly preferred and were perceived as more motivating compared to Rise of Nations, and there was a trend for Rise of Nations to be perceived as more frustrating than BrainHQ. The observed preference for puzzle games, and an aversion for the violent and complex content of Rise Nations, is consistent with previous survey and focus group data of older adults’ game preferences. Results have implications for designing game-based and gamified interventions for older adults that will encourage enjoyment, engagement, and adherence.


Older adults Video games Cognitive intervention Gamification Adherence Engagement 



We gratefully acknowledge support from the National Institute on Aging, Projects CREATE III and IV – Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (, NIA P01 AG017211). We are grateful to Nelson A. Roque for his assistance developing the online diary system used for this study.


  1. 1.
    Green, C.S., Bavelier, D.: Exercising your brain: a review of human brain plasticity and training-induced learning. Psychol. Aging 23(4), 692–701 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Toril, P., Reales, J.M., Ballesteros, S.: Video game training enhances cognition of older adults: a meta-analytic study. Psychol. Aging 29(3), 706–716 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Simons, D.J., et al.: Do “brain-training” programs work? Psychol. Sci. Publ. Interest 17(3), 103–186 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., Sarsa, H.: Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In: 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 3025–3034. IEEE, January 2014Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Loos, E.: Exergaming: meaningful play for older adults? In: Zhou, J., Salvendy, G. (eds.) ITAP 2017. LNCS, vol. 10298, pp. 254–265. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Charness, N., Boot, W.R.: Aging and information technology use: potential and barriers. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 18(5), 253–258 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pew Fact Sheets. Fact sheets (2017).
  8. 8.
    Brown, A.: Younger men play video games, but so do a diverse group of other Americans (2017).
  9. 9.
    Anderson, M.: Technology device ownership: 2015 (2015).
  10. 10.
    Brown, J.A.: Digital gaming perceptions among older adult non-gamers. In: Zhou, J., Salvendy, G. (eds.) ITAP 2017. LNCS, vol. 10298, pp. 217–227. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Schutter, B., Abeele, V.: Designing meaningful play within the psycho-social context of older adults. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Fun and Games, pp. 84–93, September 2010Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Quandt, T., Grueninger, H., Wimmer, J.: The gray haired gaming generation: findings from an explorative interview study on older computer gamers. Games Cult. 4, 27–46 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blocker, K.A., Wright, T.J., Boot, W.R.: Gaming preferences of aging generations. Gerontechnol. Int. J. Fundam. Aspects Technol. Serve Ageing Soc. 12, 174–184 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Schutter, B.: Never too old to play: the appeal of digital games to an older audience. Games Cult. 6, 155–170 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nap, H.H., de Kort, Y., IJsselsteijn, W.A.: Senior gamers: preferences, motivations and needs. Gerontechnology 8, 247–262 (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    McKay, S.M., Maki, B.E.: Attitudes of older adults toward shooter video games: an initial study to select an acceptable game for training visual processing. Gerontechnol. Int. J. Fundam. Aspects Technol. Serve Ageing Soc. 9, 5–17 (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pew Research Center. America’s complex relationship with guns (2017).
  18. 18.
    Czaja, S.J., Boot, W.R., Charness, N., Rogers, W.A.: Designing for Older Adults: Principles and Creative Human Factors Approaches, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McLaughlin, A., Gandy, M., Allaire, J., Whitlock, L.: Putting fun into video games for older adults. Ergon. Des. 20, 13–22 (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yoon, J.-S., et al.: Intervention comparative effectiveness for adult cognitive training (ICE-ACT) trial: rationale, design, and baseline characteristics. Contemp. Clin. Trials. 78, 76 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Basak, C., Boot, W.R., Voss, M.W., Kramer, A.F.: Can training in a real-time strategy video game attenuate cognitive decline in older adults? Psychol. Aging 23, 765–777 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gamberini, L., Raya, M.A., Barresi, G., Fabregat, M., Ibanez, F., Prontu, L.: Cognition, technology and games for the elderly: an introduction to ELDERGAMES Project. Psychnology J. 4(3), 285–308 (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Belchior, P., Marsiske, M., Leite, W.L., Yam, A., Thomas, K., Mann, W.: Older adults’ engagement during an intervention involving off-the-shelf videogame. Games Health J. 5(3), 151–156 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    de la Hera, T., Loos, E., Simons, M., Blom, J.: Benefits and factors influencing the design of intergenerational digital games: a systematic literature review. Societies 7(3), 18 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ronald Andringa
    • 1
  • Erin R. Harell
    • 1
  • Michael Dieciuc
    • 1
  • Walter R. Boot
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations