Question

Playing Video Games A new study provides some evidence that playing action video games strengthens a person's ability to translate sensory information quickly into accurate decisions. Researchers had 23 male volunteers with an average age of 20 look at moving arrays on a computer screen and indicate the direction in which the dots were moving \(^{33}\) Half of the volunteers ( 11 men) reported playing action video games at least five times a week for the previous year, while the other 12 reported no video game playing in the previous year. The response time and the accuracy score were both measured. A \(95 \%\) confidence interval for the mean response time for game players minus the mean response time for non-players is -1.8 to -1.2 seconds, while a \(95 \%\) confidence interval for mean accuracy score for game players minus mean accuracy score for non-players is -4.2 to +5.8 . (a) Interpret the meaning of the \(95 \%\) confidence interval for difference in mean response time. (b) Is it plausible that game players and non-game players are basically the same in response time? Why or why not? If not, which group is faster (with a smaller response time)? (c) Interpret the meaning of the \(95 \%\) confidence interval for difference in mean accuracy score. (d) Is it plausible that game players and non-game players are basically the same in accuracy? Why or whynot? If not, which group is more accurate?

Short answer

(a) We are 95% confident that, on average, game players respond 1.2 to 1.8 seconds faster than non-players. (b) It's not plausible that they have the same response time, and game players are faster. (c) We are 95% confident that, on average, game players' accuracy score is between 4.2 points lower and 5.8 points higher than non-players. (d) It's plausible that both groups have the same accuracy. We cannot determine which group has higher accuracy based solely on this interval.

Step-by-step solution

Interpret the Confidence Interval for Mean Response Time

The 95% confidence interval for the difference in mean response time between video game players and non-players is from -1.8 to -1.2 seconds. This means we are 95% confident that, on average, video game players' response time is between 1.2 and 1.8 seconds faster than non-players.

Determine the Plausibility for Equality in Response Time

The question here is whether the response time for game players and non-game players could be the same. Given our confidence interval does not include 0 (which would indicate no difference), it is not plausible that the response times are same. Since the entire confidence interval is negative, this indicates that the game players have a faster (smaller) response time.

Interpret the Confidence Interval for Mean Accuracy Score

The 95% confidence interval for the difference in mean accuracy score between video game players and non-players is -4.2 to +5.8. This means we are 95% confident that, on average, video game players' accuracy score is between 4.2 points lower and 5.8 points higher than non-players.

Determine the Plausibility for Equality in Accuracy

The question here is whether the accuracy for game players and non-game players could be the same. Since our confidence interval includes 0 (which would indicate no difference), it is plausible that both groups have the same accuracy. Because the confidence interval range includes both negative and positive values, we cannot determine which group has higher accuracy based solely on this interval.

Key concepts

Statistical Decision Making

Statistical decision making involves using statistical techniques to inform practical decisions. In the context of the video game study, it plays a crucial role in how researchers draw conclusions about response times and accuracy scores of gamers versus non-gamers.

With a 95% confidence interval for mean response time showing a range entirely below zero, we can make a statistical decision that there's significant evidence suggesting that video game players respond faster. Statistical decision making turns the abstract confidence interval into actionable insight — in this case, it supports the theory that action video games can increase response speed. Care is taken not to hastily conclude causation; the decision merely points to an association that might warrant further investigation.

However, when it comes to accuracy, the confidence interval straddles zero, spanning from negative to positive values. The statistical decision-making process here indicates that no definitive decision can be made about the relative accuracy of gamers versus non-gamers. This uncertainty highlights the importance of statistical literacy; a conclusion drawn without respect to the confidence interval's span could be misleading.

Response Time Analysis

Response time analysis involves examining how quickly subjects perform a task following a stimulus. It's a measure of the speed of cognitive processing and decision-making.

For our gaming study, researchers measured the mean response time difference via two sample groups. The confidence interval ranging from -1.8 to -1.2 seconds conveys that in analyzing response time, players of action video games on average respond quicker than non-players.

In applying this analysis practically, say for developing a training program that uses video games, one would be justified in considering the inclusion of action-based video games to improve response times. Educators and trainers can harness such response time analysis to support programs aimed at enhancing cognitive-motor skills, further solidifying the link between video games and potential real-world skills enhancement.

Accuracy Score Assessment

Accuracy score assessment is the process of evaluating how well someone performs a task in terms of precision and correctness. In the study, the accuracy score measures how accurately participants identified the direction of moving dots.

The confidence interval for the accuracy score ranged from -4.2 to +5.8, suggesting that video game players' accuracy could either be lower or higher than non-players — the data isn't conclusive. What matters here isn't just the width of the interval but that it crosses the zero point. This indicates uncertainty and implies that any observed difference in accuracy scores might be due to chance.

In the context of educational content, assessing accuracy is crucial because it reflects on the quality of learning or training. While speed (response time) might be enhanced by playing video games, the accuracy assessment tells us that the relationship isn't as clear-cut for precision — action video games may or may not improve accuracy, and this intersection of improved speed without definite improvement in accuracy could become a point of focus in advanced cognitive training research.