Brad Flickinger
Brad Flickinger

Part 4 of MindShift’s Guide to Games and Learning.

For years, most people thought that video games were like candy: mostly bad, tempting to children, but okay in moderation. Now we understand that they can have more “nutritional” value than our parents ever imagined.

My brothers and I played Space Invaders and Pac Man, Asteroids and Breakout. We pulled the plastic casing off the Atari joystick and stuck the accordioned bottom end to our foreheads like a suction cup. These were still the early days of interactive home computing and because game consoles were so unfamiliar, the adults were afraid. Surely, they assumed, staring at a box of glowing light while pressing buttons in response to electronic triggers would cause some invisible neural damage.

Kids played video games for hours. They wiggled joysticks and maneuvered “paddles” until they discovered the game’s patterns. They talked about the games with their friends. They shared tips and tricks. Even if they were learning together, and if the arcade was always a kind of educational community, what exactly were they learning? Clearly, not the things that mattered. All learning is not good learning. Something had to be done.

Along came Oregon Trail, Reader Rabbit, Math Blaster, and others.  Gamification was not yet a household word. Back then, folks “school-ified” video games. The shoot-em up alien attack narratives were replaced with educational curriculum: facts about letters, numbers, history, science. Each correct solution launched a missile at your enemy. If kids were going to memorize all the details of a video game, why not construct those details so that they align with classroom content? It made sense. And it worked. Many of us learned touch typing from Mario and geography from Carmen Sandiego.


Clearly, the world has changed considerably since then. Interacting with machines is commonplace. It’s normal to respond to screen-based electronic stimuli. Work almost always involves some interaction with digital platforms. Maybe this is why video games no longer inspire the same kind of anxiety and terror from parents and caregivers as they once did. In fact, we now know that games can teach much more than just content. There are social, emotional, and meta-cognitive benefits.

In 2013, the American Psychological Association published a study that identified some of the benefits of gaming, and the results were surprising. For example, in controlled tests, kids who played first-person shooters showed “faster and more accurate attention allocation, higher spatial resolution in visual processing, and enhanced mental rotation abilities.” This likely has very little to do with the violent narrative and a lot to do with repetitive execution of reflex-based actions. Essentially, first person shooters are intricate 3D virtual simulations of the carnival classic “whack-a-mole.” Players need to react fast. This is why kids who play a lot of games seem to show “measurable changes in neural processing and efficiency” and a positive increase in creativity. Players practice quick thinking and hurried response.

Of course, neural advantages like these are vague and invisible. Research that assumes a biologically deterministic view of humanity should be questioned. When we imagine ourselves as cellular organisms first and only second as uniquely human, we equate ourselves with amoebas, insects, and animals. This theoretical approach implicitly assumes that our development and actions are determined by electrochemical and biological impulses alone. Instinct reigns. The classic conception that distinguishes humans as “moral” animals is rendered obsolete. These neuroscientific discoveries may be accurate, but when it comes to learning, is this approach useful? After all, our intention is not husbandry in a petri dish. Instead, we aim to nurture human citizens that contribute to an ethical civilization.

We want our children to develop strong meta-cognitive skills. We want students to become critical thinkers that are motivated to make a difference in the world. When it comes to motivation, look to the work of Carol Dweck, Stanford professor who writes about motivation and social development. She makes a distinction between an entity theory of intelligence and an incremental theory of intelligence. When kids develop an entity theory of intelligence, they believe they have innate, fixed traits. They’re praised for being smart, or being good at math. It has a negative impact on long term attitudes. When kids develop an incremental theory of intelligence, on the other hand, they understand that they have certain skills. They are praised for their effort: “you worked so hard on that problem, you solved that puzzle.” They have a growth mindset.

Video games nurture an incremental understanding of intelligence. Because players are rewarded for one task at a time — for overcoming one obstacle after another — they learn to understand learning and accomplishment iteratively. For example, each track in Nintendo’s classic game Mario Kart has its own particular challenges. Each time a player drives it he or she addresses the weaknesses of the previous attempt. The player iterates performance incrementally, addressing shortcomings and adjusting accordingly. He or she understands that mastering one course doesn’t necessarily equate to mastery of the next. A new learning process begins at the conclusion of the previous one.

Games designed for the classroom can leverage the same sort of motivational intelligence. Consider a game like Reach For The Sun (Filament Games). This resource management game is designed to teach plant life cycle sciences and photosynthesis. Players are challenged to “become a plant” and balance resources like starch and water. “Extend your roots, sprout leaves, and make your flowers bloom before winter hits.”


Succeeding in Reach For The Sun is about more than just trial and error. It involves an incremental approach that’s way more authentic than a workbook, lecture, or a quiz. It is not about right and wrong; it is about simulation. Students don’t just retain textbook bullet points of photosynthesis. They understand in an experiential way that the plant is a vibrant, dynamic life system that is constantly adjusting to its surroundings. They succeed when they comprehend the way a plant relates to the world around it. Learning is about incrementally applying content in context. And context is all about iterating relationships.

In the process of learning to incrementally iterate in context, students are developing metacognitive skills. Put simply, metacognition describes an individual’s ability to think about his or her own thinking. Among other things, it refers to the ability to self-evaluate a thought process and to iterate based on an analysis of strengths and weaknesses. For learners, strong metacognitive functions translate into study skills. Strong metacognitive functions mean students have the ability to identify problem areas and seek out the necessary and deliberate practice needed to compensate for weaknesses.

Metacognition is also another word for what educators are talking about when we say we want to create life-long learners. When we talk about critical thinking, problem solving skills, creating innovators, or nurturing perseverance, we’re talking about metacognition.

Those skills are not really unique to the new millenium. They are the same reflexive skills that have always been the prerequisite to critical thinking. Character education is code for metacognition. It’s all about producing individuals who have the desire, the drive, and the skill, to look at themselves and evaluate the way they think about their place in the world.

Most importantly, strong metacognitive skills translate into strong interpersonal skills. After all, the ability to look at yourself is one of life’s most important social skills. How can you relate to others if you can’t even relate to yourself? Not well. Relationships, conflict resolution, and emotional intelligence all require strong metacognitive skills.

What does this have to do with video games? A lot: 70 percent of gamers play their games with other people. Contrary to the popular image of the gamer as an awkward, socially inept loner, players are actually engaged with one another. Think back to that educational community that emerged in every 1980s pizza parlor around the Ms. Pacman machine. Gamers play cooperatively. They play competitively. They share tips and tricks. They work together. The teach each other how to get better at the game-

Imagine a classroom where collaboration is the norm. Where assessment is collective and individual assessment and competition do not create a culture of “entity intelligence.” Game-based learning is one tool that can help make it a reality.

The MindShift Guide to Games and Learning is made possible through the generous support of the Joan Ganz Cooney Center and is a project of the Games and Learning Publishing Council.

Social And Emotional Benefits Of Video Games: Metacognition and Relationships 16 May,2014Jordan Shapiro

  • nery

    Hello, what about the violent games? Because I agreed with this conclusions but if we are talking about games like mindcraft, simcity, or any game that doesn’t involve violence, am I right?

    • Gamer_Researcher

      Hello Nery,
      No research yet has provided any solid proof that violent video games have any effects in real life; that is, outbursts of violence due to game usage . It is a myth usually supported by the media. I can further analyze this but in simple words, this is a fact. No connection.

      • TIm

        I would like to see the research on this. I completely agree with the article, but I struggle with games like Grand Theft Auto, which are morally incomprehensible to me. I also wonder if students who are talented problem solvers naturally gravitate to gaming. I have two sons, one who would play video games all day who is a natural problem solver, and another who would rather do other things because some of the games are hard for him.

      • Kelly in Culver City

        Here is a link to a well-regarded meta-analysis of multiple studies on the well documented association between violent video games and increased aggressive behavior and decreased pro-social behavior. Craig Anderson

        • Ο Πίκρης

          Dear Kelly, Sorry for the (very) late answer.
          Anderson’s reports show aggressive behavior that fades over time. Aggressive behavior is reported to last 1-2 hours after game exposure and it is limited to verbal “violence”. Anderson conducted way to many studies that all produced the same results. No aggressiveness in the long term. It was also found that people that play games and have aggressive behavior, also have certain psychological background. If you want some deeper insights check also Anderson’s “nemesis”, Ferguson. But the latest research seems to have stopped studying if violent games are bad for kids. Instead academics now focus on video games and learning more than ever before. Check James Paul Gee, an excellent game theorist and Squire K.

  • Pingback: Social And Emotional Benefits Of Video Games: Metacognition and Relationships | MindShift | The Sharing Tree()

  • Pingback: Social And Emotional Benefits Of Video Games: Metacognition and Relationships – Capital Notes (blog) | Games For Adults And Beyond()

  • Pingback: Social And Emotional Benefits Of Video Games: Metacognition and Relationships – Capital Notes (blog) | Gaming Social | Daily Gaming News Magazine()

  • Pingback: Video Games | Enjoy Shopping With Us!()

  • Pingback: Social And Emotional Benefits Of Video Games: Metacognition and Relationships | KQED | FRONTBURNR()

  • John

    I’m 16 and I’ve been playing “violent” games involving death and killing for about 6 years and I can say it didn’t turn me violent. Infact I’d say it calmed me down, it helps to put down stress attained from school work. And it comes with a great feeling of knowing “I’m relieving this in a good way, I’m not hurting myself or anyone physically or mentally”.

  • Pingback: Social And Emotional Benefits Of Video Games: Metacognition and Relationships | Gabriele Ferri's research blog()

  • starr84

    Is there any research to back up what age they should start playing video games? It seems like some of the Information I have read is after age 10. Once their little brains have developed.

  • Melissa Schaefers

    As an educator (and gamer), I love that it is becoming more acceptable to use games as a tool for learning. I have always felt that fast-paced gaming increased problem-solving abilities and taught children to think quickly. There are so many educational video games that can be used in the classroom to reinforce concepts and practice skills. As for the first-person shooter games, they do help thinking quickly and there are a variety of options that are not necessarily violent and serve the same general purpose. I definitely support the use of games in the classroom.

  • Pingback: Blog 2: Great Blog: Mind/Shift | palancatina()

  • Pingback: Latest Play Video Games News | Game News()

  • Very Interesting article! Playing video games is not only fun but is also helpful to the growth of a child.

    iPhone App Developer UK

  • Pingback: Benefits of Gaming: What Research Shows | MindShift()

  • Pingback: Video Game Friends GR#4 | ENG 380: New Media, an introduction to video game studies()

  • Pingback: Motivational Intelligence | Sally on Edu()

  • Miss Stern

    Gaming is a mind-numbing process that will eventually lead to the dissolution of skills. Period.

    • Tristan

      Imagine all the activities not discovered because the computer is right there –
      maybe the person just closes the word doc containing the essay being worked on for school to a video game without
      even leaving the chair. John, the 16-year-old who said he had been playing violent games involving death and killing for about 6 years [apparently since he was 10], stated that, “I’d say it calmed me down, it helps to put down stress attained from school work.”

      I have to wonder if John and the millions of other 16-year-olds in similar situations have found relief from stress from the unlimited number of activities that calm and reduce stress, such as going for a run – even on a treadmill or at a
      gym or around the block if that is all that is available. Running on
      trails in open space is not always an option, but this can be planned if
      a person learns that running is a calming activity.

      My point is that, if a 10-year-old finds several activities that reduce that “keyed-up” feeling and pursues a few of these activities over the next six years, most of these activities lead to much more interesting places than sitting at a computer. Consider the result of 6 formative years pursuing a hobby of almost anything you can imagine – there are too many possibilities to list, but it is easy to see that the resulting growth and development could be phenomenal and lead to evolving interests beyond the goal of coping with the stress of school.

      I would also like to add that gaming is addictive. A young gamer may start out completing their homework before starting the game, but when their game is “calling them”, they discover that they can switch between screens easily and the priority for the homework gets lower and lower. Then there are the protests that they are busy when the rest of the family calls them to participate in a common activity.

      I will close by recalling a defining incident in our family when the homemade birthday cake was placed in the middle of the table, candles waiting to be lit, parents and sister waiting, but the gamer said his “friends” were counting on him. By the time he showed up, the baker of the cake had long left the table and collapsed in defeat.

      • Jonathan

        Ok that is a wonderful point I have to agree but everyone has different things that calm them down, im 17 and working out calms me down, but also playing a game of Starcraft 2, Team Fortress 2, or even the occasional Call of Duty, it calms me down. Everyone has different triggers and things that relieve them.

  • Pingback: Flipping the Switch: SEL Lights the Path for Academic and Personal Success in Schools | Success For ALL Students()

  • Pingback: Can video games be considered healthy? | eschwriting150()

  • Pingback: Get the free slots app from Slotomania | AudioMelody()

  • Pingback: Social And Emotional Benefits Of Video Games: Metacognition and Relationships | MindShift « the circle()

  • Sheryl Senkiw

    Whether the impact of a game is positive, negative, or some of both depends upon the game, and the age of the child playing it. I have seen my son play some wonderful games, and I sometimes play along with him. I have also seen games that teach that violence and bullying is fun… For example, in one game, Clumsy Ninja, the player is encouraged to abuse a childlike character (the ninja) to get “experience points”. Not a good lesson.

  • Brenda Gutstadt

    What REALLY frustrates me in this type of research and conversation for parents and teachers is that there is very little insightful and frank information about the addictive nature of computer use in children. Children do not know how (or can’t) voluntarily stop using a computer (you tube, games or even messaging) and often use computers as an entertainment device at the exclusion of all other activity (even eating)! I have seen children become violent when asked to stop using a computer/ipad/cellphone some to the point that parents have to call the police to intervene. These behavioral changes are not imagined or unique to a specific group of families or children (I’m a parent of four kids and a social worker at a shelter). In order to have a realistic dialogue about the benefits of computer use for children we have to talk about these very real and very dramatic behavior consequences. The true tragedy of all this is that parents are ill equipped to effectively deal with this problem because noone in the real world is talking about it.

  • Pingback: Why LAN? | Ignite Gaming Lounge()

  • Pingback: Virtual Friendships – A Gamer's World()

  • Pingback: Social Emotional Learning in the SMALLab - SMALLab Learning()


Jordan Shapiro

Jordan Shapiro’s academic work and publishing blend psychology, philosophy, and business in surprising ways. His internationally celebrated writing on education, parenting, and game-based learning can be found on  He teaches in Temple University’s Intellectual Heritage Department where he’s also the Digital Learning Coordinator. He is the parent of two boys (six and eight years old) and the lead administrator at Project Learn School (an independent cooperative K-8 school in Philadephia). His most recent book FREEPLAY: A Video Game Guide To Maximum Euphoric Bliss, considers how the games we play in our youth shape our adult lives.

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor