Philip Zimbardo: The demise of guys?

Speaker

Philip George Zimbardo is a psychologist and a professor emeritus at Stanford University. He became known for his 1971 Stanford prison experiment and has since authored various introductory psychology books, textbooks for college students, and other notable works, including The Lucifer Effect

Summary

Guys are dropping out educationally, wiping out emotionally with girls and sexually with women. They are 30% more likely to drop out of school, and outperformed by girls at every level of education. Psychologically, they are 5 times more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD and make up 2/3 of special education students.

Emotionally, there is a fear of intimacy and women. Male college students are getting increasingly shy and have difficulty in social situations (especially with females). Boys and men seem to prefer the company of other males, and prefer the internet to spontaneous social interaction.

The problem is video games and pornography. Boys watch on average 50 porn clips a week and play 10,000 hrs of video games by the age of 21. These cause an ‘arousal addiction’ – constantly looking for novelty and new experiences. Arousal addiction is different to more classic drug addictions, where the addict seeks the same experience again and again. This is at odds with real relationships and classrooms, which build up more slowly and subtly over time.

What’s the solution? Philip doesn’t know: this short talk is to alarm not solve. But he believes ‘real’ men are important to keep the species strong and that everyone benefits – especially the women who want men that can make love slowly and properly.

My Thoughts

As Philip says: this talk isn’t about solutions, it is all about shock. The internet certainly has its plusses and minusses: people drawn to easily searching anything that comes to mind, and they will always find a result. This encourages novelty in both sex and education. On the educational side: people craving different sorts of knowledge should be able to be harnessed: an enthusiasm to learn should be seen as an asset rather than a liability. It seems like a weakness in our education system if it is struggling to get people interested.

Philip’s talk references other TED talks, and regarding video games (and especially violent FPSes that teenage boys are likely playing) there are talks that are positive on the benefits of video games to the brain (https://tedsummaries.com/2014/12/30/daphne-bavelier-your-brain-on-video-games/). However addiction levels are distracting from other pursuits.

Daphne Bavelier: Your brain on video games

Speaker

Daphne Bavelier studies how the brain adapts to changes in experience, either by nature or by training

Summary

Fears over children playing video games is leveraged by the media for many headlines. While most children play games, most gamers are adults. Daphne is a brain scientist, so has studied the impact of video games on the brain. She notes that excessive gaming is hazardous to the health, but in reasonable levels is generally beneficial. With the amount of time people can play games, she is looking at ways to leverage this power to solve health problems.

Her main focus for these studies were violent first person shooter action games – such as Call of Duty, which in previous tests showed much greater benefits than other games. Her findings were

  1. Gamers have better vision. This is counter to the old story that too much screen time will harm your eyes – gamers could make out small details better and could distinguish between shades of grey (useful for driving in foggy conditions). Games are now being developed to improve patients with poor vision.
  2. Gamers are better at focussing their attention. Again this is counter to the myths, but gamers can track more objects at a time and focus on tests for longer.
  3. Gamers are better multi-taskers: they can switch from one task to another with minimal cost. They performed better in the multitasking tests than ‘multimedia taskers’ – students who report chatting while listening to music and studying.

Most of these findings fly in the face of common wisdom, and show that scientific testing is necessary to test common knowledge.

Daphne used this to try and improve the brains of non-gamers. She assigned them to play first person shooters for 10hrs over 2wks and tested their ability to mentally rotate shapes before and after. They showed a significant improvement after gaming, and maintained that improvement 5 months after the study.

She is now working with game publishers to better integrate the elements of games that improve our brains while still keeping the games fun. This is not an easy or quick thing to do – since people are wary of past efforts at educational software.

My Thoughts

I must admit I am skeptical of some of the studies shown. During the shape rotation one for example she didn’t mention a control group – is it possible the brain is improving as it gets exposed to the same test multiple times? I had a look through her publications (http://cms.unige.ch/fapse/people/bavelier/publications/publication-video-games/) and couldn’t pick out the exact study she was referring to. I hope I am wrong though – it is an interesting result if it is correct.

I am curious about how her work with the gaming companies will end up. If shooting games are already showing these benefits, is she aiming to tweak the games to focus more on the most beneficial points? Or is she trying to build more of these elements into non-shooter games?

Regardless, love the talk. Gaming often gets a bad rap from the media and other old wives tales (of the sort she debunked). It is good to know this is just another round of fear that strikes every generation as the world changes.