When pundits—and some researchers—proclaim electronic games either altogether good or altogether bad for society, they often miss theoretical subtleties that if considered would allow us to see both the boon and the burden of the emerging technology and point to important future possibilities. Most important, these critics often fail to recognize that variability exists at different levels of analysis and in the interactions: between players, between games, between contexts, and so forth. The simultaneous existence of both positive and negative consequences of electronic games can be elaborated and reconciled in part through a multilevel perspective on electronic game effects whereby important variables exist at the levels of the individual, game content, and societal time or space. This article illustrates this idea by reviewing some recent findings in this arena and pointing to common threads that relate to the likely multilevel structure of human interaction with electronic games.
Aarseth, E. (Ed.). (2001). Computer game studies, year one. Game Studies, 1(1). Retrieved from http://www.gamestudies.org/0101
2.
Adult women like to play games. (2003, August 27). Wired. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,60204,00.html
3.
Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A metaanalytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12(5), 353-359.
4.
Anderson, C. A., & Dill, K. E. (2000). Video game violence and trait aggressiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 772-790.
5.
Anderson, D. R., Choi, H., & Lorch, E. P. (1987). Attentional inertia reduces distractibility during young children’s television viewing. Child Development, 58, 798-806.
6.
Badinand-Hubert, N., Bureau, M., Hirsch, E., Masnou, P., Nahum, L., Parain, D., et al. (1998). Epilepsies and video games: Results of a multicentric study. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 107, 422-427.
7.
Bensley, L., & Van Eenwyk, J. (2001). Video games and real-life aggression: Review of the literature. Journal of Adolescent Health, 29, 244-257.
8.
Bruce, I. S. (2002, July 14). It’s official: Video games are bad for your brain. Sunday Herald. Retrieved from http://www.sundayherald.com/26272
9.
Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1988). Toward a more appropriate conceptualization of research on school effects: A three-level hierarchical linear model. American Journal of Education, 97(1), 65-108.
10.
Buckingham, D. (1987). Public secrets: East Enders and its audience. London: British Film Institute.
11.
Burstein, L. (1980). The analysis of multi-level data in educational research and evaluation. Review of Research in Education, 8, 158-233.
12.
Cappella, J. N. (1996). Why biological explanation?Journal of Communication, 46(3), 4-7.
13.
Doyle, K. O. (1999). The social meanings of money and property: In search of a talisman. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
Federal Trade Commission. (2000). Marketing violent entertainment to children. Washington, DC: Author.
15.
Fiske, J. (1987). Television culture. London: Methuen.
16.
Friedman, T. (1995). Making sense of software: Computer games and interactive textuality. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), CyberSociety: Computer-mediated communication and community (pp. 73-89). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17.
Fylan, F., Harding, G. F., Edson, A. S., & Webb, R. M. (1999). Mechanisms of video-game epilepsy. Epilepsia, 40(Suppl. 4), 28-30.
18.
Gagné, R. M. (1977). The conditions of learning (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
19.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
20.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of a theory of structuration. Cambridge, MA: Polity.
21.
Giddens, A. (1988). Central problems in social theory. London: Macmillan.
22.
Goldstein, J. H. (1994). Sex differences in toy preference and video game play. In J. Goldstein (Ed.), Toys, play and child development (pp. 110-129). New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Goldstein, J. (2003). People @ play: Electronic games. In H. van Oostendorp (Ed.), Cognition in a digital world (pp. 25-45). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2003). Action video game modifies visual selective attention. Nature, 423, 534-537.
25.
Haney, W. (1980). Units and levels of analysis in large-scale evaluation. New Directions for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 6, 1-15.
26.
Harrison, C. (2004, April 20). Women commit to “casual games,” change face of online entertainment. The Seattle Times, p. E2.
27.
Hox, J. (2002). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28.
Marvin, C. (1988). When old technologies were new: Thinking about electric communication in the late nineteenth century. New York: Oxford University Press.
29.
McMillan, S. J., & Hwang, J. (2002). Measures of perceived interactivity: An exploration of the role of direction of communication, user control, and time in shaping perceptions of interactivity. Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 29-43.
30.
Pan, Z., & McLeod, J. M. (1991). Multilevel analysis in mass communication research. Communication Research, 18(2), 140-173.
31.
Pinckard, J. (2003, December 23). Video gaming and its discontents. Salon. Retrieved from http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/12/23/gaming_and_its_discontents
32.
Price, V., Ritchie, L. D., & Eulau, H. (1991). Cross-level challenges for communication research. Communication Research, 18(2), 262-271.
33.
Roe, K., & Muijs, D. (1998). Children and computer games: A profile of the heavy user. European Journal of Communication, 13, 181-200.
34.
Smith, S. L., & Donnerstein, E. (1998). Harmful effects of exposure to media violence: Learning of aggression, emotional desensitization, and fear. In R. G. Geen & E. Donnerstein (Eds.), Human aggression: Theories, research, and implications for social policy (pp. 167-202). New York: Academic Press.
35.
Southwell, B. G. (2003, July). Modeling micro and macro: A multilevel model to predict memory for television content. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Kansas City, MO.
36.
Wright, C. R. (1986). Mass communication: A sociological perspective. New York: McGraw-Hill.
