Game violence stimulates 'textspeak,' concludes study of 12
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Jan 9th 2007 at 6:43PM }
Dr. Chow Yuan-hua, a psychiatrist at the Veterans General Hospital in Taipei, has amazingly, using just twelve subjects, discovered why young adults (and even more mature adults) have such low language proficiency -- why we often shorten our words and confuse numbers for letters. The culprit: vide0 gamZ. V1ol3nt vide0 gamZ.According to Dr. Chow, 'textspeak' is a symptom of gaming. As we spend more and more hours playing violent games, the blood circulation in our brains' frontal lobes significantly reduces, diminishing our ability to carry out higher mental activities, like proper speech. "[Parents] have to try to keep [their kids] away from [violent] games, if they don't want to receive any more 'textspeak' messages," warns Dr. Chow.
[Via VH1 Game Break]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Degra @ Jan 9th 2007 6:52PM
How about if he studies a few more people, like 1000 more and makes another conclusion?
spartan084 @ Jan 9th 2007 6:54PM
What an idiot! I know that I should have a more clever and thought out response than that, but that pretty much sums up my point.
Author X @ Jan 9th 2007 6:56PM
Ah, yes. This may look grim for video games, but recalling a friend's sage advice, I know exactly what to say in response to such serious accusations.
BAAAAHAHAHAAAAAA! HahahahaHAAAAAAA! BAAAAHAAAHAAAAAAAA-haha*continues for some time*
Neil @ Jan 9th 2007 7:07PM
wtf? lolz
brb
Ignatius @ Jan 9th 2007 7:07PM
Wow. This is about as accurate as astrology. Twelve personalities to define all of humanity.
Callandor @ Jan 9th 2007 7:07PM
What a moron. I just got done playing my Xbox, yet I'm not having any problems with typing this sentence. I speak with proper grammar and I don't abbreviate words when typing or speaking. This is just bullshit.
Jack Thompson @ Jan 9th 2007 7:08PM
More evidence that Xbox games rot your mind
Ignatius @ Jan 9th 2007 7:14PM
Oh and by the way, I play CS:S daily, I play Oblivion daily and I haven't had a day where I haven't picked up the Wiimotes and played to happy oblivion. Yet, somehow I manage to avoid the wonderful 'lol' and 'rofl', why? I'm not lazy.
People who shorten words are either lazy or they're just used to it, OR they need to quickly type something without needing to explain it. It's a very efficient and while somewhat idiotic-looking form of communication in games that require almost full and complete attention to the game itself, not to the people who need to chicken-peck the keys or those who just can't type fast.
Ace of Sevens @ Jan 9th 2007 7:19PM
This is bad research. This might work a premilimary test, but you don't go to press with a dozen test subjects, only indirect evidence (ie he didn't monitor their language abilities) and a single game without any control group. The idea that this is caused by violent video games is an unwarranted assumption withotu comparisons to various games and other activities.
Anonononomous @ Jan 9th 2007 7:17PM
That's fracking retarded. The people who use inane abbreviations are mostly the dumbass teens who text message each other, not game players.
Imadogg @ Jan 9th 2007 7:18PM
lOlZZzZz dis guy iz teh dumb. lez go play sum gow neil
Pluisje @ Jan 9th 2007 7:19PM
I don't come to this site, at all, but this headline kinda got me interested.
Too bad it's a fony study, 12 subject isn't enough to be called an experiment. He should increase subject size and get a control group, plus the fact that I think his hypothesis is a load of nonsense.
It is true that your prefrontal cortex is used for planning and deliberate actions, putting a break on the area responsible for emotions, but the thing I wonder is how this guy measured the bloodflow when the only techniques available to accurately measure so requires the subject to sit really still.. Maybe he did an EEG to check brain activity but that still doesn't prove his point, more emotional activity is normal during a game since that's the whole purpose.
If I can take a wild guess at why kids shorten words and use numbers for letters, I would say this has more causes then just one; I think abbreviations are used to.. cut some time, so you can get back into the game real quick; second I believe words like th3s3 or something have become somewhat of slang in the online community.
And the reason that language proficiency is going down is because parents probably don't force their kids to read more books ;)
Now I hope my English was alright and that it made sense.. ^_^
dustandechoes91 @ Jan 9th 2007 7:20PM
Yea, ive been playing PS3(COD3)all day, right after taking my english final, and i could probably take it again right now, and i can still study for my spanish final
and wth does violence have anything to do with it? What does videogames even have to do with it? The reason people typ lik dis caus its an attmpt 2 b abl 2 hv an onln convo jst as fst as we do wen we talk 2 e chother in persn
Limey @ Jan 10th 2007 4:42PM
lol roflz that guy iz dum!!
fffunfarm06---xbl @ Jan 9th 2007 7:22PM
stupidest shit i have ever heard.
lynch her
Mr. Khan @ Jan 9th 2007 7:22PM
No....
The use of stunted grammar and mechanics in the language i have lovingly dubbed "n00b," stems rather from the fact that its users lack the necessary time to type complete sentences.
Back on my first MMO, i lacked a keyboard, and had to use the engine's software keyboard, i had no time to type complete sentences, so i soon deviated to "Hey, ne1 want 2 help me? plz help, im ded"
Perhaps the lower frontal lobe blood flow is merely coincidence, or perhaps the good doctor netted himself a dozen genetic mutants (no offense intended). But the real reason to discount his claims is that he says "Violent" video games. I bet the same phenomenon would occur if you let them play an hour of Kirby Canvas Curse as an hour of Dead Rising
somaxd @ Jan 9th 2007 7:25PM
lol, gtfo, Dr. Ch0w
Actually id be more interested in a study showing "textspeak" or "1337sp33k" used as a second language, and the effects of long term gaming, or internet use as a way to communicate across the world.
That n00b in Asia is going to understand the term "PWND!" when he gets his ass handed to him by that guy in Lebanon.
CelicaCrazed @ Jan 9th 2007 7:27PM
I'd blame online instant messaging services. This has nothing to do with violence.
mitch @ Jan 9th 2007 7:27PM
Okay. I'm making my OWN bogus study now. Apparently, since anybody with a piece of paper can fabricate facts, I think I'm pretty qualified.
Say goodbye to parsnips, everybody.
Volcan @ Jan 9th 2007 7:33PM
Wow, just wow.
I play video games all the time, and I have better grammar, punctuation, and pronounciation than anybody I know.
Are people really this oblivious? It's obvious that "textspeak" is used to:
A) Type faster. (See: Shorthand)
-and-
B) Try and sound cool. (See: Slang)
Guess what, people didn't have video games, let alone violent video games, when shorthand took off. If secretaries and journalists could do this without for decades without "professionals" researching the "problem", why can't gamers?
Kesh @ Jan 9th 2007 7:51PM
Before you castrate the good doctor I must point out that playing games does starve your higher functions...depending on the game of course.
For example, games likely to cause stilted language development and/or brain death:
Dead of Alive extreme volleyball
Football manager/Champ manager XX
Unreal 2
Doom 3
All level grinding games
The list could go on.
Maybe we can do our own study and censor games that are offensive to GAMERS.
chenry @ Jan 9th 2007 7:51PM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Hilarious.
Josh V @ Jan 9th 2007 7:52PM
The only ignorant one out of the whole "experiment" is "Dr."Chow Yuan-hua himself. He obviously for some reason or another purposally left out the millions of people who do the same thing on the net that dont play video games. And as for the other reasons, they have already been addressed here and no its not from people who cant put together a sentence, its simple a quick way of typing but also many think it is cool to do so.
The ZeroCorpse @ Jan 9th 2007 8:11PM
Indeed, I concur. This hypothesis is hardly feasible when you consider the plethora of variables between individual gamers. Point-in-fact: The research assumes that all gamers suffer from a limited vocabulary and speak in the real world as they do when typing abbreviated and shortened word variants for brevity's sake in a gaming environment. If he had expanded his search to the whole gamut of gamers, he would have discovered a surfeit of intellectuals among gaming enthusiasts.
I find it disappointing and slightly dismaying that an esteemed researcher would take an accelerated, inaccurate sampling of data as indicative of the language skills of the entire gaming populace, when in fact, in the aggregate, we're a heterogeneous assemblage of individuals representing a myriad of educational, social, and intellectual backgrounds.
MY supposition posits that Dr. Chow is an ignoramus and an imbecile, and that he should promptly exchange his license to practice psychological research and report to the nearest agricultural collective to hone his skills as a pig farmer, as this seems suited to his sloppy methods to a far greater extent.
Good day, sir!
I said, "Good day!"
DWells55 @ Jan 9th 2007 8:07PM
Oh, whatever. My typing and conversational skills are absolutely fine and I play more Halo 2 than could possibly ever be healthy. Used to be three hours a day, unfortunately that decreased due to a lot of school work. For God's sake, I type with full capitalization and punctuation on instant messaging software even.
In summary:
mai typin sk1llz r SiK kthxbai
sploy @ Jan 9th 2007 8:14PM
Nobody calls a LASER, 'Light Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of Radiation'.
And do you know why... because everybody who uses the word laser: PLAYS VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES!!
ROFLCOPTERZOMFGWTFBBQeleven11!!11!!1twelve!!11!
Dylan @ Jan 9th 2007 10:59PM
I really hope very soon the entire scientific community will disprove the validity of all of these "a study"s. they all ignore simple social logic, such as the possibility that many "textspeakers" happen to be players of certain types of games.
Rubang @ Jan 9th 2007 8:19PM
I declare #24 and #25 the best comments here. This thread is officially closed.
Chris Putnam @ Jan 9th 2007 8:20PM
Usually when the media writes about these studies, they exaggerate the conclusions of the paper beyond anything that the author actually claimed. Here though, unless there's been some serious translation issues, Dr. Chow actually seems to be making these ludicrous assertions.
Example from the original China Post article: "My findings just prove there is a statistically significant association between violence in video games and low language proficiency." Of course, pretty much every word of that sentence is nonsense - he hasn't established any link "between violence in video games and low language proficiency" (he found a link between video games and temporary reduced blood flow in part of the brain - he didn't even test for language proficiency), his findings weren't "statistically significant" (they couldn't be with 12 people), and he certainly didn't "prove" anything. "Proof" is a word that doesn't belong in much better studies than this one.
A link between reduced blood flow in the frontal lobe and reduced language proficiency is dubious on its own, but the fact that the effect on blood flow was only temporary (when obviously finding a lasting effect on speech would require evidence of long-term impairment) makes this conclusion utterly laughable. The articles also don't mention any control group, but only the 12 subjects. That could be an oversight on their part, but if it isn't then Dr. Chow needs to go back and read his Psych 101 text. At the very least he should have had a control group playing non-violent video games, and preferably several other groups doing other activities.
I'm just wondering now what university this man graduated from. This experiment would fail a high school psychology course.
c0r0n4nv0dk4 @ Jan 9th 2007 8:22PM
This report is 100% grade A bullshit. "Textspeak" is used for efficiency. Im not going to waste my time creating a perfect sentence when all I want to do is quickly convey an idea to another person. Generally when I am communicating online its casual conversation, not a formal letter.
Geoff @ Jan 9th 2007 9:07PM
Did the good doctor bother to look at the number of people who use txtspk who own mobile phones? You know - those devices upon which the language txtspk was born? The entire reason why txtspk is called, well... txtspk.
Lighthouse in a desert: bright, but bloody useless.
Jeramy @ Jan 9th 2007 9:21PM
FUCKING LOLZERZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Insomnious @ Jan 9th 2007 9:25PM
12 is nowhere near a large enough sample for a significant result, there is no mention of a controlled condition nor any other condition, and he made a 1st year-esque error of using the word 'proof'. As any psychology student knows, our experiments never 'prove' anything, merely 'suggest', or 'provide evidence for...' a given theory.
A sentence such as "My findings just prove there is a statistically significant association between violence in video games and low language proficiency" will not find itself in a psychology journal anytime soon. Although I am a little skeptical that this may be an error in translation.
Why did he decide to use only violent games? He really should have used a variety of stimuli. Did he even test his patients' linguistic abilities after playing violent games?
And, without conducting any study of my own, I'm pretty sure the rise of 'textspeak' can be attributed to the growth in mobile phone use. 160 characters is not a lot of space to type out a grammatically-correct sentence.
At the very least, all Dr. Chow's study suggests is that violent video games results in a reduced blood-flow in the frontal lobe. Dr. Chow is assuming that a reduced blood flow results in decreased language proficiency, and therefore 'textspeak' is used, without any kind of result to suggest this. Nice one.
Damn it, now I'm just annoyed.
Tig @ Jan 9th 2007 9:37PM
Bravo #31, well put.
One very easy confounding variable NOT varied in the study was the age of the participants. So what he's found is, in scientist speak, a cohort effect. Much like how those who lived through the depression in the U.S. generally view money, as a cohort, in a different way than generations after them.
Nicely done, Doc.
FSK405K @ Jan 9th 2007 9:51PM
The conclusion is that gaming causes low bloodflow, an indicator of less cognitive thinking? Apparently he was not testing people at any kind of game where they have to think plan very hard and make tactical decisions in order to win. Think Rainbow Six, Starcraft, or Company of Heroes. These games not only require extensive logistical and tactical knowledge, but also an ongoing analysis of your opponents' actions and how best to beat them. It's just like real-life tactical situations.
Not only that, but guess how I learned to type quickly? By playing team-based FPS's before anyone had microphones built into the games. I can type "where are they" in about half a second. Screw Mario teaches Typing, make people play the old versions of Counter-Strike!
Markham Carroll @ Jan 9th 2007 10:28PM
I wonder where that guy got his PhD...
My sister hardly plays any video games at all, and she textspeaks all the time. I play video games the most here, and I can't stand reading textspeak.
dwcl @ Jan 9th 2007 10:50PM
“A play of only 30 minutes causes a statistically significant reduction in blood circulation in the frontal lobe,” Dr. Chow said.
This quotation seems reasonable (other factors not withstanding) as blood circulation through the brain can be objectively measured. Depending on what magnitude of change they were looking for, a 12 person sample size could well be enough to detect a statistical one. None of us know the exact variables, so it’s unfair to comment as to whether this man’s study is unscientific simply based on that one number. After all, medical trials and studies have been published with less. In any case, this figure seems entirely reasonable for a small pilot study which is probably what this is given his call for further study.
"My findings just prove there is a statistically significant association between violence in video games and low language proficiency," Dr. Chow said.
Unfortunately, this statement unfortunately is a jump too far. While there is evidence the frontal lobe of the brain is associated with higher cognitive function, the above statement implies it is the “violence” aspect only that is significant.
Geekette @ Jan 9th 2007 11:48PM
Wow. Being a graduate student who happens to incorporate games into her research and thus plays MMOs and shooters daily....I guess I'm lucky if I can manage to string together a sentence for a thesis. Brilliant. Better not tell my undergrads that their instructor is handicapped by video games. :P
Explore! Create! Live! @ Jan 10th 2007 1:30AM
Video games played before age 6 actually strengthen one part of the brain at the expense of the others. The 'reptilian' brain - the part that reacts to a survival stimulus without putting human thought into it, like reptiles reacting to stimuli - survival, killing, etc. reptiles also have this part of the brain. The human brain has so much more than that; even the most advanced computer cannot replicate the amazing and dynamic human brain. And if a child's brain forms in a controlled video game world - rather than dynamic, unpredictable, and REAL human experience, and they are constantly pulling a trigger/shooting whatever is in front of them, the their brain continue to desire this and need a controlled, predictable environment. It will become their comfort zone, and will continue to seek it like a drug. Need a hit? Buy a new video game. Stay inside all day and night and play them. (Sellers LOVE this... more money for them) But human life is not predictable, and it is scary and risky and requires us to face fears, and to be dynamic and flexible with other human beings that may be very difficult and different from us. We need to equip our children with flexible brains. Others may not do what we want them to do, and they may even hurt us. We can't just 'shoot' those who don't comply, for then the amazing human potential is reduced to the stimulus-response survival part of the brain which we share in common with the the reptile. Instead we should find ways to strengthen the parts of our brain that are unique to us as human beings. Out of all the creatures on Earth only we have an amazing supercomputer in our head - HOW COOL IS THAT?! We can use it to create something rather than just react to what's on a screen. Our potential (aka REALITY) is being sucked away by one small controlled CREATION of a few human brains. Imagine how many hours games have taken away from potential human creativity.
Dr. Chow's study may not be statistically significant, but check into the effects of video games on the human brain. Let's give the future of humanity some hope - step away from that screen and LIVE, GROW, and LOVE fellow man- before all of of us ends up with the same last name: Sims. (Remember the old Twilight Zone movie - the boy who puts his family into the TV so he could control them? Yikes.)
PEACE AND LOVE.
FSK405K @ Jan 10th 2007 2:27AM
Probably the most accurate conclusion anyone can reach from reading the comments here is that everyone has their own hypotheses on how playing games affects the brain, and they're all different. It's worth investigating, but until someone can comfortably play while being strapped into a PET or MEG, don't be surprised if you don't see any results in the journals anytime soon.
Korova @ Jan 10th 2007 6:40AM
I believe the proper scientific term for this study is "bullshit".
This isnt science, its politics. The guy is probably upset that little Chinese-speaking Timmies are not learning characters like Confucius taught, but prefer to play VVG. Moreover, I think its pretty hard to textspeak in characters, so little Timmies are not using Chinese properly.
And Confucius says: he who does not learn characters is a dumb ass. Seriously, language ability is a central value in Chinese culture historically. So, this is just another conservative attack on a modern form of entertainment. Chow is a Chinese version of that florida lawyer, the He Who Shall Not Be Named Cause He Is an A$$Ho1.
Mike @ Feb 4th 2007 5:24PM
Doctor, you're stupid. Video games stimulate the mind. They make people think. I can't believe you haven't looked in on this! What are you thinking man?! I mean you're just like Hillary Clinton. Please check your research's credibility next time. Oh, I almost forgot, you're an f-ing retard! Where did you get your degree from? The Idiotic University for the Mentally Challenged? Screw you!
Raymond @ Feb 20th 2007 7:55PM
The one thing that leaped right out at me, as it obviously has others, was the sole use of "violent" video games.
That right there indicates this is nothing more than a futile attempt to attack violent video games as the SOLE source of all childhood malcontent and misbehaviour.
Of course, studies like these are political in nature, just as the think tanks that predicted America would be hailed as liberators in Iraq, without having a single expert on Middle East affairs on the staff.
The real reason for childhood misbehaviour and malcontent is parents relying on external stimuli as surrogate parents. Does no rational researcher ever wonder why there is a large correlation between bad children and a family with two working parents, who rely on daycare and television to raise the kids?
Its funny, but the whole "crusade" on some dubious moral imperative against violent videogames is comprised of the exact same type of people who thought Dungeons and Dragons caused teenagers to become satanists. These same moral crusaders never bother to investigate violence in the news, on TV, and other more readily available sources.
Its easy to turn to CNN and see coverage of the war in Iraq. Its generally more time consuming to boot up the computer, login to a violent videogame, then play for a protracted amount of time.
I've been all over the world, and with few exceptions, the main method most parents employ when dealing with pressing social issues as it relates to their children (i.e. teen pregnancy, drug use, military service, etc.) is to stick their heads in the sand. I taught at a high school for several years in Minnesota, with a large contingent of bible thumping parents. They excised sex education from the curriculum in the hopes that not informing their children about safe sexual practices would somehow remove the urge that the children's bio-chemical processes were providing on an instinctual level.
That year, I had no less than three female students in my class get pregnant. One gave up for adoption, two got abortions. Ignorance is no substitute for careful and considered knowledge.
On a lighter note, this doctor's conclusions are mind numbingly simplistic. His methods are ludicrous, and anyone who is rational will see right through this as a political ploy. Unfortunately, around the world, the people that are in power and who make policy see these kinds of things, and if it agrees with their beliefs, endorse it or support it, and use their resources to "explain away" the thin veneer of science behind studies such as these.