4 ms·

I'd like some citations for that wildly presumptuous statement.

austincheney 8y ago
Let’s call it repeated observation. Watching people play video games induces a drug like numbness and craved fixation followed by withdrawal once the stimulus is removed. The withdrawal is observable as a lack of cognitive concentration compounded by emotional sensitivity.
- kakarot 8y ago
  Personal "repeated observation" is nothing more than anecdotal evidence. It doesn't mean anything. Watching anything that you enjoy will create a stimulus feedback loop. I like watching let's plays of old games and learning new strategies for old games from people who dedicate large amounts of their time and expertise to that kind of thing. I don't suddenly have a "lack of cognitive concentration compounded by emotional sensitivity" after watching. I experience the same symptoms I would if I had just watched half an hour of television, whether its a sports game or cartoon. If I was intellectually stimulated during this time, then my brain begins sorting and strengthening connections between new and old information. If I have a mental addiction to whatever I'm doing, then some negative impulses may also occur, but that happens with literally anything and is irrelevant to video games. The ideas you're suggesting, that watching someone else play video games creates negative behavior such as "focusing on homework better after sport and worst after game" is some serious armchair psychology that, unless you can provided citations to credible studies, simply has no basis in reality.
  - yesenadam 8y ago
    I don't suddenly have a "lack of cognitive concentration compounded by emotional sensitivity" after watching. I experience... I'm not rude enough to just reply "That doesn't mean anything" to that, but the thought of doing so crossed my mind.
    - kakarot 8y ago
      I'm confused. Are you trying to call me out for negating a personal anecdote with another anecdote? That's the whole point. To show that they don't mean anything statistically. It's not rude to point out to someone that their anecdotal "evidence" is meaningless. It's just a fact.
      - yesenadam 8y ago
        Hi. Well, firstly, facts/honesty can be brutal. Someone's 'just a fact' can be someone else's flaggable offence, as often seen on here. I was threatened with banning for stating 'just facts' just yesterday. (true story!) Ah, sure, I see..but even rereading now, it really doesn't seem your anecdata was meant to be meaningless. Too subtle for me, maybe, I'm no expert. Sorry, I'll butt out now. Edit: Downvoter, could you explain why? Thanks. Edit2: I looked at your recent comment history, it happens quite a lot that you get downvoted for telling people their ideas have no basis in reality, in a way that I guess doesn't seem rude to you, but seems so to me. We have different levels of 'acceptable abrasiveness' I guess.
        kakarot 8y ago
        For the record, I didn't downvote you. Simply having a disagreement is not what that button is for. But I'd love to see another example of a recent comment where I told someone their idea had no basis in reality, because I definitely don't do that. My comment here was specifically rejecting the notion that OP could form such conclusions with only weakly described, negative-biased anecdotal evidence.
        jacobolus 8y ago
        I think the downvotes are because your comments do not make it clear who/what you are responding to or what you are trying to say, and seem tangential to the topic under discussion. Both of them impose extra mental load on readers without any obvious payoff.
        yesenadam 8y ago
watwut 8y ago
Opinion comes from my personal experience with children whether ones that I just observed or was responsible for. Biology is just different during the two activities I guess. I used to defend games until I had to deal with kids behavior after.
- kakarot 8y ago
  During what two activities?

Let’s call it repeated observation. Watching people play video games induces a drug like numbness and craved fixation followed by withdrawal once the stimulus is removed. The withdrawal is observable as a lack of cognitive concentration compounded by emotional sensitivity.

kakarot 8y ago
Personal "repeated observation" is nothing more than anecdotal evidence. It doesn't mean anything. Watching anything that you enjoy will create a stimulus feedback loop. I like watching let's plays of old games and learning new strategies for old games from people who dedicate large amounts of their time and expertise to that kind of thing. I don't suddenly have a "lack of cognitive concentration compounded by emotional sensitivity" after watching. I experience the same symptoms I would if I had just watched half an hour of television, whether its a sports game or cartoon. If I was intellectually stimulated during this time, then my brain begins sorting and strengthening connections between new and old information. If I have a mental addiction to whatever I'm doing, then some negative impulses may also occur, but that happens with literally anything and is irrelevant to video games. The ideas you're suggesting, that watching someone else play video games creates negative behavior such as "focusing on homework better after sport and worst after game" is some serious armchair psychology that, unless you can provided citations to credible studies, simply has no basis in reality.
- yesenadam 8y ago
  I don't suddenly have a "lack of cognitive concentration compounded by emotional sensitivity" after watching. I experience... I'm not rude enough to just reply "That doesn't mean anything" to that, but the thought of doing so crossed my mind.
  - kakarot 8y ago
    I'm confused. Are you trying to call me out for negating a personal anecdote with another anecdote? That's the whole point. To show that they don't mean anything statistically. It's not rude to point out to someone that their anecdotal "evidence" is meaningless. It's just a fact.
    - yesenadam 8y ago
      Hi. Well, firstly, facts/honesty can be brutal. Someone's 'just a fact' can be someone else's flaggable offence, as often seen on here. I was threatened with banning for stating 'just facts' just yesterday. (true story!) Ah, sure, I see..but even rereading now, it really doesn't seem your anecdata was meant to be meaningless. Too subtle for me, maybe, I'm no expert. Sorry, I'll butt out now. Edit: Downvoter, could you explain why? Thanks. Edit2: I looked at your recent comment history, it happens quite a lot that you get downvoted for telling people their ideas have no basis in reality, in a way that I guess doesn't seem rude to you, but seems so to me. We have different levels of 'acceptable abrasiveness' I guess.
      - kakarot 8y ago
        For the record, I didn't downvote you. Simply having a disagreement is not what that button is for. But I'd love to see another example of a recent comment where I told someone their idea had no basis in reality, because I definitely don't do that. My comment here was specifically rejecting the notion that OP could form such conclusions with only weakly described, negative-biased anecdotal evidence.
      - jacobolus 8y ago
        I think the downvotes are because your comments do not make it clear who/what you are responding to or what you are trying to say, and seem tangential to the topic under discussion. Both of them impose extra mental load on readers without any obvious payoff.
        yesenadam 8y ago

watwut 8y ago

Opinion comes from my personal experience with children whether ones that I just observed or was responsible for. Biology is just different during the two activities I guess. I used to defend games until I had to deal with kids behavior after.

kakarot 8y ago
During what two activities?