**2.1. Cognitive enhancement of video game players**

The findings from our work concerning the cognitive fitness of video game players and the comparison with non-players are displayed in the consecutive figures. Fig. 1 demonstrates the results of episodic memory. The players scored significantly better on a WAIS-R Digit Span test than the non-players (16.7±0.8 *vs.* 11.3±1.0 digits remembered, respectively). The players also performed better on visual working memory. Here, a significant majority of 19 out of the 30 game users recognized the descriptions of pictures after the longest time break of the 55-85 sec range as opposed to none of the non-players, where the quickest lapses of memory prevailed (Fig. 2, Panel A). There were significant differences in favor of the game players noted in logical reasoning as well, where 20 out of the 30 players accomplished the highest number of positive hits compared with none of the non-players (Fig. 2, Panel B). In these two tests, the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the two distributions of subjects, video game players and non-players, was rejected.

Conceptual thinking also turned out significantly superior in the game players (15.5±1.2 *vs*.10.0±1.0 points in the non-players (Fig. 3). Concerning the decision making, the players displayed better results in decisiveness (19.3±1.9 *vs.* 12.5±2.2 points in the non-players; P<0.001, Mann-Whitney U test) (graphic data not shown) and also had a higher mean score in impulsiveness (19.6±0.6 *vs*. 17.9±0.7 points, respectively) (Fig. 4). Finally, the players' superiority in cognitive tasks was completed by better outcomes in the perception of details (16.4±0.8 *vs.* 10.6±1.0 points in the non-players) (Fig. 5) and in the perceptive processing assessed with a VTS ATAVT Adaptive Tachistoscopic Traffic Perception test (55.2±1.5 vs. 38.0±2.2 points in the non-players; \*P<0.001, Mann Whitney U test) (graphic data not shown).

**Figure 1.** Number of digits remembered by game players and non-players in the WAIS-R Digit Span Test for episodic memory (data are means±SD; \*P<0.001, Mann-Whitney U test).

**2.1. Cognitive enhancement of video game players** 

of subjects, video game players and non-players, was rejected.

functioning.

shown).

The computerized paradigms and psychometric tools above outlined are all well standardized and sanctioned for the assessment of executive-control and emotional

The findings from our work concerning the cognitive fitness of video game players and the comparison with non-players are displayed in the consecutive figures. Fig. 1 demonstrates the results of episodic memory. The players scored significantly better on a WAIS-R Digit Span test than the non-players (16.7±0.8 *vs.* 11.3±1.0 digits remembered, respectively). The players also performed better on visual working memory. Here, a significant majority of 19 out of the 30 game users recognized the descriptions of pictures after the longest time break of the 55-85 sec range as opposed to none of the non-players, where the quickest lapses of memory prevailed (Fig. 2, Panel A). There were significant differences in favor of the game players noted in logical reasoning as well, where 20 out of the 30 players accomplished the highest number of positive hits compared with none of the non-players (Fig. 2, Panel B). In these two tests, the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the two distributions

Conceptual thinking also turned out significantly superior in the game players (15.5±1.2 *vs*.10.0±1.0 points in the non-players (Fig. 3). Concerning the decision making, the players displayed better results in decisiveness (19.3±1.9 *vs.* 12.5±2.2 points in the non-players; P<0.001, Mann-Whitney U test) (graphic data not shown) and also had a higher mean score in impulsiveness (19.6±0.6 *vs*. 17.9±0.7 points, respectively) (Fig. 4). Finally, the players' superiority in cognitive tasks was completed by better outcomes in the perception of details (16.4±0.8 *vs.* 10.6±1.0 points in the non-players) (Fig. 5) and in the perceptive processing assessed with a VTS ATAVT Adaptive Tachistoscopic Traffic Perception test (55.2±1.5 vs. 38.0±2.2 points in the non-players; \*P<0.001, Mann Whitney U test) (graphic data not

**Figure 1.** Number of digits remembered by game players and non-players in the WAIS-R Digit Span

Test for episodic memory (data are means±SD; \*P<0.001, Mann-Whitney U test).

**Figure 2.** Panel A - Visual working memory of video games players *vs.* non-players assessed with a RehCom BILD Test (*χ***²**=30.5; P<0.001); Panel B - Logical reasoning assessed with a RehaCom LODE Test (data distributed on 3-degree Likert scale, *χ***²**=33.3; P<0.001).

**Figure 3.** Differences between the video games players and non-players in the WAIS-R Similarities Test for conceptual thinking (data are means±SD; \*P<0.001, ANOVA).

**Figure 4.** Differences between players and non-players in VTS AHA Attitudes Test for impulsiveness (data are means±SD; \*P<0.001, ANOVA).

Psychological Fitness in Young Adult Video Game Players 129

**2.2. Emotional enhancement of video game players** 

subjects.

When we compared emotional stability between the video game players and nonplayers, as expressed by the level of neuroticism, it turned out that the players were appreciably less neurotic and more emotionally stable. The two populations of subjects not only significantly differed concerning the level of neuroticism, but the players also had characteristically different personality traits. This is shown in Fig. 6 which demonstrates the profiles of the introversion-extroversion continuum, expressed in stens. Extroversion appeared a clearly predominating personality trait in the majority of players (23 subjects), with but one subject scoring in the lowest sten division corresponding to introversion. This profile contrasted with that present in the nonplayers, where ambiversion predominated (15 subjects), followed by introversion in 10

**Figure 6.** Personality traits in video game players and non-players surveyed with EPQ-R questionnaire

More adaptive emotional characteristics of video game players were also reflected in their tackling of stressful situations. The majority of them presented the advantageous taskoriented strategy of coping with stress. Other less adaptive styles of coping were present in a fewer number of players than in non-players; avoidance-oriented 0 *vs.* 8 subjects, distraction 2 *vs.* 13 subjects, social diversion 0 *vs*. 8 subjects, respectively. The only exception here was the emotion-oriented style of coping which appeared in eight players as opposed to one non-player. All these differences between the players and non-players were

(χ2=22.8, P<0.001; reproduced with permission from Borecki et al., 2011).

significant as depicted in detail in Fig. 7.

**Figure 5.** Difference between players and non-players in WAIS-R Picture Completion Test for perception of details (data are means±SD; \*P<0.001, Mann-Whitney U test).
