Advertisement

The Gamification of Cognitive Training: Older Adults’ Perceptions of and Attitudes Toward Digital Game-Based Interventions

  • Walter R. BootEmail author
  • Dustin Souders
  • Neil Charness
  • Kenneth Blocker
  • Nelson Roque
  • Thomas Vitale
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9754)

Abstract

There has been recent excitement over the potential for commercial and custom digital games to reverse age-related perceptual and cognitive decline. The effectiveness of digital game-based brain training is controversial. However, a separate issue is, should digital game-based interventions prove effective, how best to design these interventions to encourage intervention engagement and adherence by older adults (ages 65 +). This study explored older adults’ perceptions and attitudes toward game-based interventions after they were asked to play digital games (experimental or control games) for a month-long period. Clear differences in attitudes toward game-based interventions were observed, as assessed by post-intervention surveys, with older adults finding games in the control condition (word and number puzzle games) more enjoyable and less frustrating compared to a digital game that consisted of gamified brain training interventions that have demonstrated some degree of success in the literature. Interestingly, older adults perceived the control condition as more likely to boost perceptual and cognitive abilities (e.g., vision, reaction time), as assessed by a post-intervention survey of expectations. Although predicting intervention adherence was challenging, overall motivation to do well in the intervention was significantly related to perceptions of cognitive benefit. Not surprisingly, game enjoyment also predicted motivation. Finally, older adults who perceived the game they were assigned to play as more challenging were more likely to believe the game would boost cognition. These findings identify attitudes and beliefs that could be targeted to motivate older adults to adhere to digital game-based interventions found to boost cognition. To better explore factors related to intervention adherence in the future we propose studies of longer duration (e.g., 6–12 months) and studies that allow more flexibility and choice with respect to amount of gameplay (instead of gameplay being dictated by a fixed schedule determined by the experimenter, leaving less variability to be explained by individual difference factors).

Keywords

Older adults Video games Digital games Perceived benefits Adherence 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge support from the National Institute on Aging, NIA 3 PO1 AG017211, Project CREATE III – Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (www.create-center.org).

References

  1. 1.
    Hertzog, C., Kramer, A.F., Wilson, R.S., Lindenberger, U.: Enrichment effects on adult cognitive development can the functional capacity of older adults be preserved and enhanced? Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 9(1), 1–65 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Green, C.S., Bavelier, D.: Action video game modifies visual selective attention. Nature 423(6939), 534–537 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Strobach, T., Frensch, P.A., Schubert, T.: Video game practice optimizes executive control skills in dual-task and task switching situations. Acta Psychol. 140(1), 13–24 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anguera, J.A., Boccanfuso, J., Rintoul, J.L., Al-Hashimi, O., Faraji, F., Janowich, J., Gazzaley, A.: Video game training enhances cognitive control in older adults. Nature 501(7465), 97–101 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Hall, A.K., Chavarria, E., Maneeratana, V., Chaney, B.H., Bernhardt, J.M.: Health benefits of digital videogames for older adults: a systematic review of the literature. Games Health. Res. Devel. Clin. Appl. 1(6), 402–410 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wiemeyer, J., Kliem, A.: Serious games in prevention and rehabilitation—a new panacea for elderly people? Eur. Rev. Aging Phys. Act. 9(1), 41–50 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, F.D., Davis, G.B.: User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27, 425–478 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R.: User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manage. Sci. 35, 982–1003 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Czaja, S.J., Charness, N., Fisk, A.D., Hertzog, C., Nair, S.N., Rogers, W.A., Sharit, J.: Factors predicting the use of technology: findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychol. Aging 21(2), 333–352 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Green, C.S., Bavelier, D.: Action video game training for cognitive enhancement. Current Opin. in Behav. Sci. 4, 103–108 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blocker, K.A., Wright, T.J., Boot, W.R.: Gaming preferences of aging generations. Gerontechnology 12, 174–184 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Boot, W.R., Champion, M., Blakely, D.P., Wright, T., Souders, D.J., Charness, N.: Video games as a means to reduce age-related cognitive decline: Attitudes, compliance, and effectiveness. Front. Psychol. 4, 1–9 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Souders, D.J., Boot, W.R., Charness, N., Moxley, J.H.: Older adult video game preferences in practice: investigating the effects of competing or cooperating. Games Cult. 11(1–2), 170–200 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nap, H.H., De Kort, Y.A.W., IJsselsteijn, W.A.: Senior gamers: preferences, motivations and needs. Gerontechnology 8(4), 247–262 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Loos, E.F., Zonneveld, A.: Silver gaming: serious fun for seniors. In: Proceedings of the Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Design for Aging, Second International Conference, ITAP 2016, Held as Part of HCI International 2015, Toronto, 17–22 July, 2016. Springer, Berlin (2016) (accepted)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Schutter, B.: Never too old to play: the appeal of digital games to an older audience. Games Cul. 6(2), 155–170 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Baniqued, P.L., Allen, C.M., Kranz, M.B., Johnson, K., Sipolins, A., Dickens, C., Kramer, A.F.: Working memory, reasoning, and task switching training: transfer effects, limitations, and great expectations? PLoS ONE 10(11), e0142169 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Boot, W.R., Charness, N., Czaja, S.J., Sharit, J., Rogers, W.A., Fisk, A.D., Nair, S.: Computer proficiency questionnaire: assessing low and high computer proficient seniors. Gerontologist 55(3), 404–411 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Boot, W.R., Simons, D.J., Stothart, C., Stutts, C.: The pervasive problem with placebos in psychology why active control groups are not sufficient to rule out placebo effects. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 8(4), 445–454 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nagle, A., Riener, R., Wolf, P.: High user control in game design elements increases compliance and in-game performance in a memory training game. Frontiers Psychol., 6 (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Walter R. Boot
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dustin Souders
    • 1
  • Neil Charness
    • 1
  • Kenneth Blocker
    • 2
  • Nelson Roque
    • 1
  • Thomas Vitale
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations