UK study suggests games contribute to dearth in vocabulary
by Ross Miller 
{ Dec 14th 2006 at 9:25PM }
Teenagers have only half the vocabulary of adults (12,600 vs. 21,400), an issue that can be partially attributed to too much gaming, according to research conducted by Lancaster University's Professor Tony McEnery.As it is presented in the BBC report (we don't have a copy of the research to verify our critiques), there are some obvious issues with how McEnery reached his conclusions. Since his comparison was between teenagers and adults between the ages of 25 to 34. Within that time, many students attend college courses and / or interact outside of a small group of school students, and such time to interact is what McEnery himself suggests increases vocabulary. The lack of a control group in his studies means that most of the correlations he makes have little merit to support them. Perhaps a cross-generational study of similarly-aged groups would be more fitting?
What irks us about the study is his conclusion that the problems can be contributed to "technology isolation syndrome," an issue purported to be caused by an "overuse of technologies such as computer games and MP3 players" (quotation attributed to BBC, although presented as a rephrasing of McEnery's words). Online games are interaction. McEnery believes that "kids need to get talking and develop their vocabulary." Sure, Mario doesn't have any five-dollar terminology, but neither do Go or Spider Solitaire. And reading isn't exactly social, either. Might there be other, non-vocabulary skills learned in gaming (reaction time, multitasking, etc.) also beneficial to work? It just feels too much like a scapegoat excuse.
McEnery's study came from observations of blogs, questionnaires, and speech. He does opine that the educational system needs improvement to counteract the problem, and we agree that teenagers optimally would equal or come close to their predecessors at a younger age, so that they might one day surpass them. As for us, we learned most of our lexicon from text-based adventure games. So if you excuse us, we have to walk north, look kitchen, look counter, take sandwich, inventory, eat sandwich.
[Via Game Politics]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
john @ Dec 14th 2006 9:35PM
I disagree.
"Teenagers" is too broad of a terminolgy.
As is "Adults"
Why? To put it frank, there are those who are smart, and those who aren't.
In all honesty, those who are smart are a minority, which is unfortunate.
Heres a rule of thumb I once read on a blog: If you have to ask if your smart. You aren't.
That aside, there are teenagers that are high achievers, some that would have better vocabulary then a large sum of adults, and those who may have less than a child.
I'm offended about the feracity of the media lately ridiculing games for something they aren't - A distraction.
I grew up around games, sure, but I'm turning sixteen in a month and have a 90 average in my grade, with nearly a 95 in both math and science.
I don't even tend to study as much as I should be. I learn from listening, what most teenagers should be doing.
Perhaps the UK, a stark symbol of the fight against videogames, it seems, along with Hillary, should not be persuading parents to re-evalute their decision to allow their children to play games; but perhaps, looking at other factors of a child's life, like education, abuse, family, neglect, etc.
Videogames are here to stay, no government will ever stop that, regardless of how many "studies" are made.
klinko @ Dec 14th 2006 9:41PM
Do what?
Reapz @ Dec 14th 2006 9:41PM
U r so silly!! lawl tht is not write @ all. english is nown by every1.
- The Internet: Death of the English language.
Ben @ Dec 14th 2006 9:42PM
Was the study written in crayon?
john @ Dec 14th 2006 9:44PM
- The Internet: The globilization of every community in the world in the pursuit of knowledge and the quest for information.
- The Internet: Death of the English language.
Well, there is always French.
I think the pros out weigh the cons.
Narhan @ Dec 14th 2006 9:47PM
No, it means that British minds (Like their teeth) are slowly deteriorating.
(Somwhat sarcastic, meant to be a counter to the many Europeans who constantly critscize America)
FREEDOM FTW!!!
Wickedneoq @ Dec 15th 2006 12:35AM
Since this was about "gaming" as a whole, I can say that my vocabulary has actually increased due to the girth of gaming that I partake in, or have partaken in the past. Being a former M:TG player, I can tell you quite vividly that learning new words is necessary to the task of playing a fickle card game that keeps evolving.
I say words at work that literally, people ask me what they mean while I'm in mid sentence. When I try to explain it to them, they cut me off and talk about something different. Tony McEnery should research ME.
Optimus Prime @ Dec 14th 2006 9:52PM
Just to clarify, the author did find the differences in vocabulary, but, the association with video games is HIS opinion. Maybe he just wanted to jump on the blame video games bandwagon.
The only way to test this is with a carefully controlled, comparison of 'non-gamers' vs. 'gamers'.
Tom @ Dec 14th 2006 9:54PM
But these adults between the ages of 25 to 34 used to be teenagers themselves, so what exactly does this study prove, if anything? The study should have been:
Teenagers 15 years ago vs. teenagers today.
See, THAT might have been relevant, but it would have required some foresight on the part of those conducting the study, so of course that's just not feasible.
Touch My Box @ Dec 14th 2006 10:07PM
I'd post a comment about how inaccurate this "study" is, however I can't seem to put it into words.
john @ Dec 14th 2006 10:12PM
I love the irony of your comment #9.
I have a feeling it was purposely done.
Touch My Box @ Dec 14th 2006 10:18PM
You have a good eye there, number 10.
Footlong! @ Dec 15th 2006 1:57PM
Dearth? Irk? does he mean videogames? are Dearth and Irk new videogames?
WedgeTalon @ Dec 14th 2006 10:57PM
I'm just chiming in with another WTF.
For me, video gaming actually was the catalyst for my love of reading. Between video games (especially those RPGs which I love oh-so-much) and books, I've always had a larger vocabulary than most of my peers. Of course, I'm not so deluded as to believe that video games played a larger part than my reading. Which brings me to my theory - kids these days don't read enough! Hardly anyone in my classes loved to read, let alone read the approximately 1000 page books as I did. And no, obviously video games did not keep me from reading, so they don't need to be mutually exclusive.
Tyrael @ Dec 14th 2006 10:52PM
Important fact to remember about the term correlation the study uses.
Correlation does not prove any causation.
It may imply a causaton, but a correlation in no way is any form of proof that one factor is causation of another.
Not to mention the lack of a control group...
Garcian_Smith @ Dec 14th 2006 10:53PM
I go to Lancaster University, here in good old England. I'm currently writing an essay on the works of political philosopher, John Locke. And I'm a gamer.
Take that!
Savok @ Dec 15th 2006 12:07AM
They obviously never played the original Quest games from Sierra. Many an hour was spent attempting to work out just what the developers called that mug.
"try glass"
"no no, it'll think you're talking about the window then"
"ok container then"
"no there's something called that in our inventory already"
Bryan @ Dec 15th 2006 12:08AM
I agree with 14. RPGs I played as a child played a small part in expanding my vocabulary.
tack @ Dec 15th 2006 12:23AM
Circa 1950: UK study suggests Comic Books contribute to dearth in vocabulary
They've been saying the same thing about whatever those punk kids are into for years.
Kevin Kelly @ Dec 15th 2006 12:40AM
INFOCOM FTW!
Crazed Geek @ Dec 15th 2006 12:39AM
*agrees with #14*
The only RPG I played was Pokemon. >_
GhaleonQ @ Dec 15th 2006 12:39AM
"The Internet: death of the English language."
Indeed.
Tommy @ Dec 15th 2006 2:05AM
What the hell is a dearth?
silkylove @ Dec 15th 2006 2:02AM
That study was made by a bunch of poopie heads>:(
ALH @ Dec 15th 2006 3:49AM
lets face it, its not cool to speek wiv a lot of words innit. That might make u look like a geek. Who wants 2 listen 2 teachers? they shud teech us lyfe skillz not maths and english!!11
..*cough* god that was actually pretty hard to write. These verbally retarded teenagers must actually be outright geniuses, because i sure as heck find it hard to speak in short,misspelt words. We're not appreciating their subtle..sentence..condensation..prowess!
Seriously though, my sisters (17 and 18, im 21)type and talk like that,and they dont play games. An awful lot of their friends talk and type like that and dont play games either. They simply dont care whether they sound stupid or not, and if approached with ' typing like that makes you sound stupid, stop it' they just shrug and say ' im fick, I cant spell nyways' or 'who cares man lol'.
If you want to throw media blame around, throw it on the TV. If people can become 'celebrities' and make money just by getting their tits out or by saying something stupid on big brother then why bother to learn 'big words'? Society is increasingly rewarding stupidity.
Onomah @ Dec 15th 2006 12:31PM
Baulderdash! I have been a keen advocate of the electronic gaming industry ever since I was a neophyte! And it has not done me or my vocabulary any harm in the slightest! I suspect that for this study they intentionall selected dullards, thus, skewing the results.
Flunk @ Dec 15th 2006 6:43AM
Wow, so much video game hate recently!
The people conducting these pointless studies need to realise the ones playing games (usually) aren't the same delinquent teenagers that wonder around the streets vandalising and failing their tests at school.
It's about time the kids parents got put under the same media spot light!
fraxyl @ Dec 15th 2006 10:44PM
If you wish to know what a dearth is, why not look it up?
As for internet or gaming ruining the vocabulary of the youngsters, I blame parents for giving youngsters mobile phones and text messaging. See, they start out with 'txt' speak shorthands, and then when they move into internet chat, they use the same 'txt' speak so they can type faster. Because in chat you have to write everything as fast as possible so you can get in enough lols and emoticons. :| (Heavy dose of sarcasm there.)
Ryan D. @ Dec 15th 2006 9:44AM
They're not wrong. I frequently cringe when I say something in game (or via IM) and the response is "lol" or "orly". Worse yet is there are a quite a few people indeed who get so defensive when you corner them on this subject, claiming that it doesn't make them any less intelligent and that they intentionally dumb up their speech to save time.. because we all know, typing "you" is so much harder than merely "u". I wouldn't place the blame on games so much as I would place it on the internet and text messaging, etc., though.
majortom @ Dec 15th 2006 10:30AM
"And reading isn't exactly social, either"
er, what? Guys, you really need to start proofreading this stuff before you put it up. I'm sure reading isn't 'social', but I'm also pretty sure that it's likely to have a 100% positive effect on your vocabulary.
James @ Dec 15th 2006 10:38AM
You know it's really bad, because the actual "teenage" average would be much, much lower if we took out all the kids that read the Penny Arcade newspost.
Rallion @ Dec 15th 2006 11:15AM
I think it's borderline ridiculous to say that gaming has a negative effect on vocabulary based on this. For one thing, it's not all that easy to peg an accurate number on an individual's vocabulary. I knew a kid back in high school who would probably be able to give you a fine definition for most of the words in Webster's, but you wouldn't know it from your average conversation with the guy. Sometimes he'd break out the polysyllabic power, but only in certain contexts.
Secondly, 'gaming' is not a tightly defined activity, not really. It's only slightly less vague than 'socializing.' It can mean playing cards, shooting people in the face, solving puzzles, or, hey, playing Scrabble. I'm positive that certain types of gaming, and certainly a great deal of other online interaction, have a positive effect on vocabulary. In this modern age, technology doesn't serve to keep people apart. It brings them together. I read the words of hundreds of people on most days. It may keep many people a bit detached, emotionally, but it drastically increases the level of exposure to others, which is really the issue at hand.
Thad @ Dec 15th 2006 11:42AM
Sounds like they're playing the wrong games. Good games build the vocabulary.
You licentious howler!
Jess Q. @ Dec 15th 2006 2:19PM
Actually, for me, I'd say chatting online has dramatically improved my vocabulary. If I'm having a face to face conversation with someone, I won't use a word if I'm not 100% certain of what it means. (Even if it's the first word that comes to mind.) However, if I'm chatting through AIM, I'll just look the word up on the Webster's dictionary site, see if it means what I think, and voila - a new word will suddenly be added to my vocabulary.
As for actual gaming - Someone should tell this guy that it wasn't until recently that games had voice acting, and until they did, we had to READ what the characters were saying. I would think reading comprehension is probably much improved due to games, and that's gotta count for something, right?
I'd say MTV, text messaging, and AOL chat rooms are the real culprits here. Games still seem to have the stigma of being "for nerds" or "brainy types," so, if anything, I'd say gamers are probably the smartest of teenagers. Which might suggest they're also the most well-read.
In short - This guy's whole study is pretty laughable.
@ #28 - No joke. I read all the time, and even I have trouble getting through the Penny Arcade newsposts. That should be required reading for teenagers.
Krister @ Dec 16th 2006 2:31PM
Adding on to what #29 said:
Vocabulary is immensely difficult to measure. His friend is not an exception but rather the rule. We all know way more words than we comfortably use in speech. If you just look, for instance, at the words that he wrote Shakespeare only had a vocabulary of something like 15000. Clearly that number is false and he knew many thousands of words beyond that.
Can't forget to take into effect technical words that you don't use in everyday situations. Your average high school student is learning a new word every 90 minutes. At the end of High School you can expect a student to be able to process 60,000 different words. Maybe not use all of them but certainly understand them.
Videogames aren't ruining anyone's lexical canon. That guy's just got a stick up his butt. Excuse me, a horizontally grown arboreal appendage forcibly inserted in his dietary waste evacuation chute. Sideways.
Paul @ Dec 16th 2006 2:34PM
Evr sence I touk thi evilin wood sped ridden korse my ridden has improvved wunderfully. nd Comprenssion hs impproooved
DAve @ Dec 16th 2006 2:42PM
I also disagree with the study-- I have a teenage son(15YOA) who is in 2nd college semester of intermiate RUSSIAN(grade A) and learning japanese on is own--- if you want to talk about a vocabulary I cant understand him in 3 of 4 languages....oh BTW the 3rd language is Final Fantasy which he is playing when he's not in college-- yes my 15year old is in college
TAKE THAT YOU BRIT STUDY
Mike @ Dec 16th 2006 2:38PM
I doubt that video games have much effect on vocabulary. Agreed, the English language has hit a rough spot, but I think there are other forces much worse than video games. Video games are more likely to contribute to obesity and myopia than to a degradation of vocabulary.
Some blame goes to the media where a famous couple get called Brangelina, and a fop becomes a metrosexual.AARGH! Rock "music?" doesn't help either when the lyrics ssem to have been text messaged on a cheap cell phone and it sounds like a mortar attack on a trailer park.
Ryan @ Dec 16th 2006 3:08PM
I challenge ANYONE to spend time playing an RPG or MMORPG. There is no way you can not learn new words playing them.
Seth @ Dec 16th 2006 3:13PM
I don't mean to sound like a paranoid conspiracy type, but hardcore gamers, much like their not-so-benign counterparts hackers and gangbangers, are developing a lexicon that is all their own and will one day, like their two aforementioned counterparts, have a vocabulary that will virtually necessitate a non-English dictionary.
Understandably, even though the hardcore gamers (unlike the hackers and gangstas) don't pose a threat to the status quo per se, an alien lexicon does, because language is and has been one of the most formidable methods of control for millenia. A language that is "off the books," as it were, is a threat to the status quo, as it has the POTENTIAL for the verbal exchange (and thus propogation) of shady and illicit ideas, which cannot be monitored by the powers that be. That's why "Ebonics" was proposed a few years ago--to catalogue an anthropologically "alien" lexicon while allowing the status quo to infect the source. Brilliant, really.
Gaye @ Dec 16th 2006 3:20PM
Wake up people, American's are falling behind in more than just the English language. They frankly aren't to swift when it come's to a lot of thing's going on in this world today. Work ethics, etc, etc, etc, Sit down and ask them anything that require's an intelligent answer and you may be very surprised.
JJ @ Dec 16th 2006 4:06PM
I'm sorry if I overlooked it, but it seems to me that no one has noticed that the first poster, in his rant about those who are and are not smart, said: "Heres a rule of thumb I once read on a blog: If you have to ask if your smart. You aren't." I beleive it should read "if you're/you are smart." :P
Kim @ Dec 16th 2006 3:37PM
Well, Gaye, as it turns out is not so bright. Maybe he shouldn't be one to comment, considering his grammar is less than 5th Grade level.
One more important question that needs to be addressed is the type of games this ever so brilliant British professer "studied" and I'll just reiterate what others have said: he needs to run a comparison on more than just "educated" adults and the "average" teenager. I use both of those phrases loosely, due to the fact that clearly our author used them loosely.
Next thing you know he'll be blaming video games for the recent "jack the ripper" copycat murders in Britain.
.....oh, by the way, just a note to Gaye~ American's= American is (which is bad English no matter WHAT country you're from) and Americans=2 or more people from America, which is, I'm assuming, what he meant.
But what would I know? Clearly I'm incapable of an intelligent answer.
Jack @ Dec 16th 2006 3:37PM
Gaye,before you start using this as a forum to insult Americans, please learn how to punctuate.
And Krister,your comment about the horizontally grown arboreal appendage stuck up the man's butt totally made my day.
Jack @ Dec 16th 2006 3:39PM
To Kim, who got to the comment before I did, AMEN.
Marlene @ Dec 16th 2006 3:50PM
My parents never let me play video games. I started reading for entertainment at 10 (thanks to an aunt giving me entertaining books). In middle school I had a brilliant vocabulary, and used it oftan. I was also violently bullied daily, so maybe torture increases vocabulary. (*Frowns fiercly*). When I entered highschool, my working vocabulary plumitted, and the more friendships I developed, the lower my vocabulary became, even though everybody around me would actually understand what I was saying with my prior vocabulary. I read as oftan, but now it was for assignments instead of fun. I am now in college, and slowly (painfully slowly) dragging my knowledge of words from out of the dark. My fiance, on the other hand, is a gamer, playing everything from Zelda and Final Fantasy to Residant Evil and all the way over to card games like Magic:TG, as well as role playing games like Dungens and Dragons, and finally board games like Risk and Chess (he is the one who introduced me to these games). He doesn't read novels very well (which I devour), but does read game sites and magazines. He has an immense vocabulary, and has maintained it through highschool and college and into the working world. The difference, I feel, is not in our intelligance or activities, but convidence. If I felt comfortable with people before hand, I probably wouldn't have dumbed myself down. My fiance is a natural leader, and treates himself as such. I don't doubt the general teenage populace is lacking in self-esteem and have a fear of using words they aren't sure about. Perhaps better results would be yeiled if peers would be kinder about mistakes.
Please forgive any spelling errors. I am trying to improve.
JJ @ Dec 16th 2006 4:05PM
The English teacher's here. Gaye, number 41, "American's" does not require the apostrophe. "American's" is a possessive, and you simply needed the plural "Americans." In addition, "aren't to swift" should read "aren't too swift." Also, your "thing's" should read "things"; you don't need the possessive form. Again, "require's" should read "requires." And finally, the syntax of your final sentence is completely awkward, not to mention the fact that it's a run-on sentence. Try inserting a comma before your "and" conjunction. You're welcome.
clinton wayne wilburn, jr. @ Dec 16th 2006 3:57PM
PLEASE, READ THE FOLLOWING CHART TO FIND OUT IF YOU ARE SMART:
I
UM
WE TODD IT
I
UM SO
WE TODD IT
nate @ Jan 9th 2007 9:02PM
throughout history people have refused to make intelligence a requisite when deciding the partners with whom to mate (to mate with... for any non gamers who may be reading). I'm 26 and have been playing video games since I was 5 and have a more extensive vocabulary than most of the teachers who have trying to grasp some of my more simple theories in physics. You are who you choose to be. If you choose to suffer from a cranial-rectal disorder, then at 35 your vocabulary will probably be smaller than an attentive 7 year old. I bet nobody ever invited that researcher to play video games when he was a child and now seeks revenge on all of us for his own lack of personality.
William @ Dec 16th 2006 5:12PM
Has anyone noticed the title, DEARTH and not DEATH. Is this irony?