[–] derram 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
https://archive.is/pHCrg | None :
Study that claimed playing videogames improves your marksmanship is retracted | PCGamesN
'A controversial report which stated that playing shooting-based video games improves your marksmanship has been retracted by publisher Communications Research in a posted notice. '
'Nevertheless, the debate about the influence of violent video games rages on. '
'Markey has even gone so far as to write a book on the subject titled Moral Combat: Why the War on Violent Video Games Is Wrong. '
'However, Dr Patrick Markey, a psychology professor at Villanova University has long been disputing the claim. '
'Ultimately, the disputed data of the original research paper and the variables it presents have not been confirmed and the report now rests in limbo. '
[–] [deleted] 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
[–] Contrabardus 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Not true. That's a false dichotomy.
They could also have been inept, or just had unusual findings that were completely legit that couldn't be duplicated. There are any number of reasons outside of dishonesty that could have led to a false positive. Anything from an abnormal sample, to a math error, to something as simple as a bad control.
This is why peer review exists. It's not just to catch liars and fraud, but also to weed out errors and correct mistakes. In fact, it's more for the latter than the former.
Retractions are common for individual papers and studies, and it's not because there are a lot scam artists or frauds in the scientific community. It's because one little error or unaccounted for factor can change the outcome of a study and taint the results.
This is the Scientific Method working the way it's supposed to.
I would also dispute the article's claim that 'the debate' of the influence of violent video games is 'raging on'. It's over, and has been for a while. It's 'raging on' in the same manner that the debate about the influence of 'rock and roll', 'comic books', 'television', and 'dungeons and dragons' is still raging on.
The debate such as it is, is over. It's just being clung to by fringe nut jobs of the same sort as 'Flat Earthers', people who claim the 'Moon landings were faked', and the Bible is a completely literal account Creationists.
[–] ArsCortica 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I'd ascribe various positive effects to video games, but hand-to-eye coordination with a rifle or other ranged weapon is quite a different thing to the hand-to-eye coordination required to use your mouse and move the crosshair on an enemy's head.
[–] Podd ago
Very true, not very many people aim down the barrel of a rifle with both eyes open for starters so you have to factor in eye dominance. Then there is the added factor of the weight of the gun and how steady the gun is in your hands (assuming you are holding the run and not using a stand or rest). Finally (not really but as much as i want to go into it) is the psyche of pulling the trigger; most people tend to pull the gun just before firing in anticipation of the shot. It takes a lot of practice to be a good marksman.