Get the latest posts from Dr Jonathan Reed on your
Yahoo! Home Page. Yahoo!

Child Neuropsychology

A blog by Dr Jonathan Reed

  • Infographics are a great way of understanding issues quickly. I have recently come across two very interesting infographics that I wanted to share.

    Firstly the psychology of poverty and it’s impact on mental health.

    The Psychology of Poverty and Its Impact on Mental Health
    Source: BestMSWPrograms.com

    This Infographic links with my previous post on poverty and children’s brains.

    The second Infographic is from Open Colleges in Australia and shows a map of the brain looking at different brain areas and strategies to help leaning associated with these areas. This is a great tool for anyone interested in brain functions and learning.

    No Comments
  • Neuropsychologists have studied memory for a long time.   We have a clear system of memory classification involving declarative memory which includes episodic memory (memory for events) and semantic memory (memory for facts) and non declarative memory which includes more implicit systems such as procedural memory, classical conditioning and priming.  The neurological substrates of this system are understood.  Numerous case studies of individuals with brain injury and memory disturbance have been reported.   The whole enterprise is best summarised by one of the leading researchers Larry Squire in this excellent paper Memory and brain systems 1969-2009 .

    Yet despite all this knowledge I struggle to see the relevance for the many children I see with memory and learning difficulties.  I was therefore fascinated to read a new book Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything by Joshua Foer.  Foer’s book is based around a strange group of people who compete in memory championships around the world.  He explains how these competitors memorise the orders of multiple packs of cards, very long strings of digits and long unpublished poems.  The amount of information they can remember is quite remarkable.  Yet Foer shows that these feats are based on some simple memory techniques.  The premise is that human memory evolved to aid survival (finding food and avoiding danger) and therefore is primarily visual and spatial (location based).  He also highlights the way the brain learns and remembers through associations.  The techniques he describes are based on creating an imaginary spatial location (a memory palace) and imagining different visual images which can be associated with what you want to remember in this location.  So for example if you wanted to remember a shopping list you may imagine your home and visualise the first item, which could be milk by imaging someone bathing in milk.  The next item may be fish and you could imagine a singing fish in the kitchen.  The more bizarre the image the better you will recall, hence the title of the book.  By recalling the location and image you can then easily recall the information.   Individuals can create huge memory palaces and remember large amounts of information this way.  Foer believed that these techniques were so powerful that anyone could become a memory champion and he sets out in the book to prove this by entering the US memory championship.  I won’t give away the ending but it is a fascinating read.

    I think that these ideas could have important implications for neuropsychological rehabilitation and teaching.  How many teachers and psychologists know about these techniques and use them?   The techniques would need some adaptation (learning packs of cards, shopping lists and strings of numbers is not that useful) but used properly it could be very helpful for children learning facts about the world or number facts or just developing more effective ways to pass exams.  Is anyone out there using these techniques to help children with learning problems? If so I would love to hear about it.

    2 Comments
  • The founding father of psychology Sigmund Freud was fascinated by the unconscious mind and made this the centre of his study and practice.  The role of the unconscious in psychology quickly fell out of fashion.  This was because it could not be measured or easily understood.  Initially behaviourism became dominant, based on the objective analysis of observable behaviour.  Later the focus in psychology shifted to studying cognition – the study of thought processes.  Both areas resulted to different psychological therapies for example,  Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), and different ways of understanding learning.  Over the last decade or so neuropsychology has started to emerge.  Neuropsychology focuses on the relationship between the brain and behaviour (including cognition).  And guess what – as we begin to understand the role of the brain in psychology there is an increasing interest in the role of  unconscious processes (brain actions that we are not aware of consciously) .  Back to the start again- maybe Freud was right all along!

    I wrote about the importance if understanding the relationship between sub cortical structures and the cortex in a previous post. I have also just read a fascinating and very readable book by David Eagleman Incognito: The Secret Lives of The Brain.  This book looks at the dominant role that the unconscious brain plays in everyday human life.  Eagleman argues that most of what we do happens automatically and without our conscious brains being aware.  He gives numerous examples of how unconscious processes control our psychology including our attraction to others, our prejudices, our perception of the world, as well as the more obvious examples of motor control- I would really recommending reading the book to understand the richness of his argument.  He argues that conscious thought processes play a very small role in our lives,  perhaps just to allowing us to think flexibly and set goals (clearly this has big consequences as the achievements and dominance of the human species shows).  Intriguingly he also suggests that maybe our conscious self is not in control at all, but we (it) just think we are.  This was a central point in Chris’s Frith’s excellent although more academic book Making Up the Mind: How the Brain Creates Our Mental World.  Both authors report studies  showing that when you ask someone to tell when they have the urge to lift their finger and scan their brain, the part of the brain responsible for planning the action lights up before they report the urge to lift their finger.  Therefore the unconscious brain is making the decision before they are are consciously aware of it.

    Understanding the role of unconscious processes has important implications for psychology.  David Eagleman discusses in detail the implications for the criminal justice system.  Are criminals to blame for acts committed by unconscious processes (and especially when you add in abusive childhoods, brain injury, learning problems, genetics, which are all out of conscious control)?  I think there are also significant implications for child neuropsychology.  Understanding how our brains work and basing treatment and intervention on this understanding will lead to more effective intervention.  In my practice I work a lot with children with significant learning disabilities and brain injury.  Often they are unable to learn or control emotions and behaviour consciously.  I  look at ways to influence implicit processes  i.e changing the environment rather than expecting individual to change.  Also with my games company Neurogames I integrate implicit learning processes into the games, which I think is what makes them effective.  However we are only just starting to understand these processes and as our understanding increases I expect there to much more focus on sub cortical and unconscious processes in psychology.  This is not entirely easy as we create and develop psychological theories using the conscious parts of our mind, thus we are already biased.  We need to suspend our own perceptions and experience, based on our conscious view of the world and look at the data instead (a bit like theoretical physics).  Understanding how the brain actually works holds promise for major changes in psychological treatment, teaching and social policy.  Maybe we are also on the verge of a revolution in how we see ourselves?   I’ll keep you posted on ideas that emerge.

    5 Comments
  • I want to discuss an important new book for understanding how the brain works, which I have just read and is called Subcortical Structures and Cognition: Implications for Neuropsychological Assessment by Leonard Koziol and Deborah Budding.  Our current understanding of how the brain works using Neuropsychology has traditionally focused on the cortex part of the brain – frontal, temporal, parietal and occipital lobes and has looked at what happens psychologically when there is damage to these particular areas.  From this we understand perception, memory, language etc pretty well.  However we have tended to ignore subcortical brain areas such as the basal ganglia and cerebellum and have considered these areas as being responsible mainly for motor co-ordination.   This new book by Koziol and Budding challenges this view and presents a view of sub cortical structures being central to the way the brain works.  It is a detailed book with many arguments (a summary can be seen on the website here) and needs to be read carefully, but some of the important points for me were:

    1.  The brain responds to the environment in two key ways.  Firstly most of the time it responds in an automatic way (subconscious way using procedural memory) which requires little thought, is fast and is adaptive.  You don’t need to work out how to respond to most everyday occurrences you just do it.  However, when a new situation arises, maybe a threat, maybe something you need to learn, the front part of the brain takes control and thinks about how to respond (i.e. executive function).  Both systems operate in tandem and are connected by the basal ganglia.  The default setting for the brain, however, is to make unfamiliar familiar.  This is more efficient.  Hence there is a drive to turn new information into automatic memory.

    2. Koziol and Budding argue that the basal ganglia is key in determining this process i.e. linking controlled and automatic responses.   It does this by being part of a feedback loop connecting the cortex to the limbic system (thalamus) and acting as a gate between the two. Basically the cortex is stimulated by sensory input and the sub cortex inhibits responses by deciding what information is returned to the cortex.

    3. The other main sub cortical area the cerebellum works to further fine tune responses using a mix of excitation and inhibition.

    4. The book details how and why such a system would have evolved.  This is often missing in neuropsychology accounts.  The book offers a plausible explanation of what any organism needs to function and how brains have evolved to meet these needs.  The key purpose of an organism is to survive.  In order to survive an organism needs to recognise objects, locate objects and detect movement (all cortex functions) and then to know what to do, how to do it and when to act (all mediated by the subcortex).  Koziol and Budding compare the subcortical structures in vertebrates, primates and humans to illustrate this point.

    5. The  basal ganglia acts as a gate to switch responses on and off, which is the key to regulation.  Knowing when to start a behaviour (initiation) and when to decease from a behaviour (inhibition) is key to how we function (and yet is rarely explored). The cerebellum further fine tunes this process.

    6.  Traditionally the sub cortical structures have been though of as mainly involved in motor responses.  However one of the many interesting ideas in the book is that  the same structures may have a similar  function for emotion, behaviour and cognition.  This would make sense from an evolution and developmental point of view.  Undertaking complicated motor sequences such as kicking a ball i.e. judging when to move and adjust can be similar to knowing how to control anger, social response or thoughts.

    7. Why this is important in my opinion is that it starts to offer explanations for disorders of regulation, which are so common in children, e.g. ADHD, TBI, OCD, emotional disorder, motor co-ordination and speech disorders.  Neuropsychology does not provide very good explanations for these disorders at present and yet they are the most common difficulties encountered especially with children.  The key issues in these disorders is regulating and adjusting responses to the environment.

    8.  Another reason the book is important is that it gets away from the view that we need to focus on a single brain area and it’s function and looks instead about how different brain areas act in circuits in relation to one another.  The circuits work by involving different brain areas in feedback loops using excitation and inhibition to regulate the system.   This makes sense biologically, developmentally and from an evolutionary point of view.

    Therefore I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in neuropsychology and how the brain works.  It challenges existing thinking.  It is a specialist book but is well written and informative.   There are detailed sections on neuropsychological assessment for those interested, although these sections are in my opinion of more limited interest because most tests don’t assess subcortical functions that well.  The important thing the book does for me as well as explaining sub cortical anatomy and function is to start to provide a more coherent framework for understand brain regulation, which I think is fundamental for understanding child neuropsychology.   I think that ultimately this understanding will help us better assess and help children with brain dysfunction and particularly regulation difficulties.

    2 Comments
  • There is increasing evidence that playing video games improves neuropsychological function.  I have just been reading another excellent paper from the people at the University of Rochester called Increasing Speed of Processing with Action Video Games.  The paper written by Mathew Dye, Shawn Green and Daphne Bavelier looks at a range of previous studies on reaction time and video game playing.  The introduction to the paper states:

    Playing action video games-contemporary examples include God of War, Unreal Tournament, GTA, and call of Duty – requires rapid processing of sensory information and prompt action, forcing players to make decisions and execute responses at a far greater pace than is typical in everyday life.

    Looking at lots of different studies they conclude that:

    • Video Game Players (VGP) have faster reaction times (RT).
    • RT can be trained by action game play (thus showing causation)
    • Improved RT is not at the cost of more impulsivity.  Increased RT do not result in more errors (as measured by the TOVA)

    This paper adds to a body of research showing improved neuropsychological function; for example in working memory, increased literacy and numeracy and improved attention.

    I don’t find this surprising.  Games provide reinforced repetitive mental activity.  Anyone who plays them knows that they are challenging yet very motivating (even in those with generally poor motivation).    Games designers are experts in terms of human motivation. I have written before about the benefits of computer game based learning here.

    Yet despite these increasing positive findings I don’t see research being translated into great educational application.   Many educational/brain training games are actually quite dull- a point well made on the educational games research blog.  Partly to me there still seems to be a mindset that educational games and brain training games need to look educational. It would be good to produce educational and brain training games that look and play like real games.   Also games based on research are often devised by academics, teachers and clinicians (like me) who don’t have the budget and expertise to produce games in the way that commercial games developers do. Whilst there is research showing that existing commercial games can improve neuropsychological benefits, imagine what specifically designed games could do.

    To move the situation forward there is a need to put serious attention and resources into educational/neuropsychological games that combine the latest research with the latest exciting, engrossing game play.  I think that this does require a new mindset and a good degree of creativity.  Also it is uncertain where the market is for this is-; Schools? Concerned parents?  Governments?  It may not be profitable at first.  Existing brain training tends to target adults looking for self improvement and adults are always willing to pay for this.  Trying to improve child education/development is different.  However if someone/ some company was prepared to invest they could produce something fantastic, with great benefit.   I think video games can change education and development but I think it will take something special to realize this potential.

    2 Comments
  • I am a avid user of Twitter and find all sorts of interesting information on there. As with the web, however it is difficult to sort out what is important. It also moves so fast that it is hard to keep track. This post highlights some important tweets I have seen regarding advances in neuroscience in the last two weeks.

    1. Repairing brain cells- Researchers at the Montreal NeurologicaI Institute and Hospital (The Neuro) and McGill University group at Montral University have developed a new technique to help repair damaged nerve cells. The study was in the October 7 issue of Journal of Neuroscience. They show that it is possible to use plastic beads coated with a substance that encourages adhesion to help cells grow and form new synapses. You can read about this study here

    2 Gene therapy. A study reported in Nature News investigated possible gene therapy for Parkinson’s disease. Parkinson’s disease is a neurological condition affecting motor control and is associated with a depleted neurotransmitter, dopamine. Stéphane Palfi, a neurosurgeon at the French Atomic Energy Commission’s Institute of Biomedical Imaging in Orsay, and his colleagues simulated Parkinson’s disease in monkeys and then injected the monkeys’ brains with three genes essential for synthesizing dopamine. They saw significant improvements in motor behaviour after just two weeks, without any visible adverse effects. “We don’t see any problems in these monkeys,” says Palfi. One animal even exhibited sustained recovery more than 3.5 years later. You can read about this study here.

    3. Understanding brain development. Researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine have identified a key molecular player in guiding the formation of synapses. The paper, published online Oct. 8 in the journal Cell, looks at the interaction between neurons and astrocytes. The relationship is complicated but to quote from the report in science daily “It is commonly agreed that the precise placement and strength of each person’s trillions of synaptic connections closely maps with that person’s cognitive, emotional and behavioral makeup. But exactly why a particular synapse is formed in a certain place at a certain time has largely remained a mystery. In 2005, Barres took a big step toward explaining this process when he and his colleagues discovered that a protein astrocytes secrete, called thrombospondin, is essential to the formation of this complex brain circuitry.

    In this new study, Barres, lead author Cagla Eroglu, PhD, and their colleagues demonstrate how thrombospondin binds to a receptor found on neurons’ outer membranes. The role of this receptor, known as alpha2delta-1, had been obscure until now. But in an experiment with mice, the scientists found that neurons lacking alpha2delta-1 were unable to form synapses in response to thrombospondin stimulation.

    The researchers stimulated neurons with thrombospondin and found, those neurons produced twice as many synapses in response to stimulation than did their ummodified counterparts. Understanding this key mechanism could help explain children’s brains development and why this goes wrong for some children. Understanding the biochemistry holds out hope for future treatments. You can read the full report here.

    4. Computer games and rehabilitation. Every week there are reports on how computer games can help learning. As you will see from previous posts on this blog I am great believer in the potential of computer games for rehabilitation and learning. Just one interesting post this week shows an initiative to help individuals with strokes to regain movement using computer game technology. Read about it here.

    This is just a small selection of the information I am finding on Twitter. It shows some of the advances that are being made to understand and help individuals with neurological illness. You can follow me on Twitter here.

    No Comments
  • There is a lot of debate particularly in the media about the pros and cons about computer use with children. I believe that there are some fantastic potential benefits in developing computer games to teach children. Here are 5 of them:

    1. Dissemination of information- Our knowledge about child neuropsychological development is increasing all the time. But there is a problem communicating this to teachers and parents and applying this knowledge. Computer game based learning allows this knowledge to be disseminated to a large number of children. An example is dyslexia (by this I mean difficulties in learning to read). As neuropsychologists we know how reading develops, what part of the brain is involved, how to intervene to improve reading and how this changes the brain areas involved. And yet there are thousands of children who leave school every year unable to read. Developing computer games to address dyslexia using up to date knowledge is possible. Simple computer based learning can spread best practice to everyone (national and international).
    2. Motivation-One of the problems in teaching is in motivating children who find learning difficult or unrewarding. Computer games designers are the experts in motivation especially for kids. I rarely see kids even with severe ADHD who can’t sustain motivation for computer games. Computer game based learning allows educators to combine these motivating factors with learning.
    3. Effectiveness-It is possible to test the effectiveness of computer games based learning programmes in easier ways than it is to assess human taught programmes. Computer games are a standardised procedure that can be easily tested. In this way we combine scientific method with education to determine which programmes are most effective. This in turn will drive development resulting in more effective games over time. This fits with government priorities in producing evidence based learning interventions.
    4. Addressing reasons for learning difficulties. As well as targeting a direct area such as reading it is possible to address indirect reasons for learning difficulties using computer games. A prime candidate is working memory. Whilst it is possible to target and improve working memory directly (see post), it is also possible to use computer games to minimize the demand on working memory with learning programmes by using techniques such as error free learning. It is possible to reduce the need for verbal instructions for children who find listening difficult. It is also possible to reduce attention demands by using visually stimulating action based games.
    5. Computer are patient. As a teacher or parent it can be very frustrating teaching the same thing to a child who just ‘doesn’t get it’. The child also picks up on this and is often anxious about failure. Computers can be very patient. They will repeat the same procedure in the same tone time and time again. Some clever games can lower or raise the demands on the child automatically depending on how the child is doing. The child can work at their own pace and level.

    Therefore in my opinion for all these reasons it makes a lot of sense to develop computer game based learning on a widespread basis. At the moment I think the field is in it’s infancy. To produce good computer game based learning requires a combination of great games design, cleaver programming to build in some of the important factors discussed above and expertise in teaching/ child neuropsychological development. There are thousands of learning games out there but very few based on knowledge of neuropsychological development, with good game play and research to show their effectiveness. I hope that this will change- it could change a lot of children’s lives.

    For an example of a computer game based learning using neuropsychological knowledge visit my games site- Neurogames.

    3 Comments
  • I have been reading an excellent book on personality research called Personality: What makes you the way you are by Daniel Nettle. It is written for the non expert and is easy to read and full of interesting observations. In the UK the psychology of personality has not been very influential on clinical practice. Most Clinical Psychologists do not assess personality, particularly in children and young people. In addition the study of personality has not featured on many university courses and certainly was not part of my undergraduate degree. However, recently I have began to take an interest in this area of psychology because it makes a lot of sense clinically. The children and young people I see have clear personality traits which fit with the current research. Having read Daniel Nettles’ book I believe that there will be a renaissance in personality assessment and understanding over the coming years. There are three key facts driving this, which are:

    1. Researchers studying personality using factor analysis have come to a consensus that there are five main personality factors, which are:

    Extraversion

    Agreeableness

    Conscientiousness

    Openness

    Neuroticism (emotional stability)

    2. The behavioural genetics work fits with the five factor model and also suggests that these traits have a large genetic component.

    3. There is increasing interest in the neuroscience of personality. The five factors are associated with different neural pathways e.g. Neuroticism (amygdala, hippocampus and R dorsolateral prefrontal cortex); Conscientiousness (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex); Extraversion (mid brain dopamine reward systems).

    Given the genetic and neuroscientific evidence it would make sense to consider personality when looking at development, emotional and social difficulties in childhood.

    There are lots of thought provoking issues raised in the book but I will highlight three that I think have major implications:

    Firstly behavioural genetics studies have shown consistently that shared family environment i.e. parents, have little to no effect on development of adult personality (not sure what the Freudians make of this!).

    Secondly that multivariate analysis shows that children’s personality seems to affect the way parent’s treat them rather than the other way round.

    Thirdly : Personality seems to predict quite strongly, certain life experiences. For example high scores on Neuroticism predicts higher likelihood of divorce and low scores on conscientiousness predicts early death. Nettle argues that personality assessment together with IQ are two of the strongest predictors for how you will do in life. It is important to note that the genetics of IQ and personality account for about 50% of variance and environment is also important. There are ways of course that you can alter your environment to influence your life course. However, I think that it is likely that without intervention the genetic biases we all have will lead us in certain directions.

    If you want to find out what your personality is there is a online test at the personality project website where you can take an anonymous personality test as part of an online research study. More information on personality can be found at the main personality project website.

    No Comments
  • In the past few weeks there have been a number of stories in the UK media about violent behaviour by young people such as Ben Kinsella being stabbed, the robbery, torture and murder of the two French students. In the Times last week there was a story about record numbers of children being excluded from school at a young age for aggressive behaviour. It is difficult to make sense of these stories and they obviously cause concern. I tend to think about the neuropsychological reasons why such behaviour occurs. Obviously there can be a number of explanations for violent behaviour but I thought I would mention three important developmental factors to consider.

    1. Development of Self Regulation. Through development children learn to self regulate their behaviour and emotions. There seems to be a neurological correlate to this. Primitive emotions and behaviours are driven by the brain stem, the hypothalamus and the limbic system, which is present at birth. Over time the cerebral cortex develops to regulate this primitive system. Initially this involves the ventral prefrontal cortex (VPC) and the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). This process seems to happen in early childhood and is associated with reactive control. This is a more sub conscious control involving inhibiting impulsive emotional responses which would include aggressive outbursts. This normally develops through the experience of being parented, whereby the parent provides external regulation which becomes internalized over time by the child. Later (age 4 to 6) the Dorsal-lateral pre frontal cortex develops allowing self control. This results in more effortful conscious control over emotions and behaviour. Children learn to use internalized strategies to regulate themselves. This development process can go wrong for a variety of reasons including brain injury, developmental ADHD and also lack of adequate parenting. The result is individuals who have poor control over emotional impulses including aggressive impulses. These processes can also be temporarily affected by drugs and alcohol. To read more about this developmental process see chapter 13 self regulation and the developing brain by Rebecca Todd and Marc Lewis in our book Child Neuropsychology: Concepts, Theory, and Practice

    2. Development of Empathy- this is the drive to identify another persons emotions and thoughts and to respond to these with appropriate emotion (Davis 1994 Empathy: A Social Psychological Approach (Social Psychology)
    This seems to develop very early in most children’s lives (at about 14 months). It is different to Theory of Mind which seems to be about understanding other peoples thought’s. The classic disorder of empathy is a person described as a psychopath. They understand other peoples thoughts but feel no emotion in relation to this and as a result have nothing to stop them hurting others. Empathy seems to be related to gender in that males are more likely to show less empathy. A few children in my experience seem to lack empathy as a developmental disorder. Sometimes this seems to occur for children with traumatic childhoods with experience of early violence, but in my experience it is rare. It seems to be associated with the inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), which in turn is associated with a discrete network of brain processes involving face processing (fusiform gyrus, inferior occipital gyrus), emotion (amygdala, insula, ventral stratum and other structures) and with action perception (mirror system). To read more about this see chapter 14 social neuroscience by Simon Baron-Cohen and Bhismadev Chakrabarti in our book Child Neuropsychology: Concepts, Theory, and Practice

    3. The third important factor is social processes. Classic social psychology from H.Tajfel has shown how social identity influences group behaviour. Individual placed in a group would quickly begin to favour and maximise the benefits to their group at the detriment of other groups even when they didn’t know the other members of their group. Group identity is very powerful and may explain some of the gang behaviour in inner cities i.e. why gang members hate members of other gangs. Also there are the studies on social influence by Stanley Milgram. In this study volunteers delivered what they thought where powerful electric shocks to others when told to do so by someone in authority. This authority effect may explain the way that leaders in a group will influence other lower members . This is particularly pertinent in gangs with children- the younger children being influenced by older members. These social influences may also explain state controlled violence where leaders get subordinates to carry out violence on their behalf. It seems to me that social influences can override individual brain processes. This is an important factor in gang related violence – much of which is a problem in London UK at the moment. Children will do what older gang members want through the influence of authority and also start to hate other groups/gangs through social identity processes. There are likely to be wider social influences in society but I will leave that to the sociologists to explain.

    These factors don’t explain all the reasons for violent behaviour but they are important and may be helpful in thinking how to prevent violent behaviour developing. Certainly help with early parenting skills for parents with young children at risk would help with development of self regulation. Early identification and treatment for disorders of regulation such as ADHD and brain injury is important. Early screening for signs of empathy disorder is an option to be explored (treatment options for this are at a very early stage). Finally realizing the negative social influences of groups or gangs is important. The social influences surrounding the gang will be more powerful than the individual within the gang (and perhaps by a certain age their parents) can control. To try and prevent violence in inner cities it is necessary to disrupt the gang itself and find other ways for children to meet their social needs. In the meantime unless these issues are addressed in childhood we will continue to have news headlines about young people being killed and others being jailed for life- not a good option for either or for us.

    1 Comment
  • There is more evidence of the neuropsychological benefits of playing action video games in a new paper to be published in July by Matt Dye and colleagues in Neuropsychologia. This paper shows that playing action video games resulted in improvmenets in attention allocation in children and young people. The authors used the Attention Network Test (ANT) which measure “how well attention is allocated to targets as a function of alerting and orientating cues, and to what extent observers are able to filter out the influence of task irrelevant information flanking those tasks”. The subjects were children and young people between the ages of 7 and 22 who had played action games (such as Halo, Metal Gear, Quake, Grand Theft Auto, Medal of Honor etc) and non action games (Age of Empires, Mario, Solitaire etc) for any length of time in the preceding 12 months (note see the paper for a full list of games categorized). The action video game players performed better on the ANT compared to non action game players. The authors interpret the results as the action players having better attention allocation. In my interpretation they seemed to be able to attend to more data simultaneously rather than focus on certain information. The action games players seemed to have faster speed of processing and picked up visual cues quicker.

    This paper adds to a body of work carried out by the University of Rochester showing how computer games change brain function (see examples in web pages by Daphne Bavelier and Matt Dye ). This also fits with other posts on this site. The reason I think that this happens is that computer games involve continued stimulation, seem to act on implicit learning, are structured, follow repeated patterns and are very rewarding ensuring that players practice them repeatedly. All of these factors show the potential of computer games for neuropsychological rehabilitation and for education. It is clear however that not all computer games work in the same way. For computer games to be harnesses in the most effective way it is important to know which parts of the brain are more plastic (i.e. more likely to change) and which elements of the computer games most produce this change. Candidates for areas of plasticity that I have come across include working memory, visual contract sensitivity, attention allocation, speed of processing, visual motor co-ordination and literacy and numeracy development (see Neurogames). There may be other areas. In terms of the type of games, certainty action based games seem to produce changes in attention and visual function. Games requiring remembering short term information are also important. Again there will be others. For any computer game development company out there there are potentially massive benefits (commercially and for social benefit) by getting these elements right. I would be keen to hear of other people’s experience and any ideas about how this can be taken forward.

    1 Comment