Older Adults’ Digital Gameplay

Background

Population aging is a part of life and a global trend. By 2050, one in five people in the world will be 60 years of age or older (Akitunde, 2012). In fact, this population segment is growing faster than any other age group and is predicted to reach two billion by 2050 (Aalbers, Baars, & Olde Rickert, 2011; WHO, 2002). Aging adults face declining physical and cognitive capacities, shifts from career or family focus to different interests and activities, loss of long-term companions and social supports, changing living arrangements, and increasing likelihood of chronic and debilitating illness (Kaufman, 2013). Maintaining an independent, positive, healthy, and meaningful quality of life is an ongoing challenge for older adults and yet is paramount for individual older adults and for societies. Cognitive and social capacities have been identified as important aspects of older adults’ quality of life (Kelley-Gillespie, 2009) and are the focus of this paper.

Researchers have long considered physical and cognitive declines to be natural results of aging. However, emerging neuroscience evidence suggests that appropriate training or therapeutic techniques can slow these trends in some ways. For example, Green and Bavelier’s (2008) review of cognitive training regimens concludes that some types of training experience, including digital games, could have widespread effects on perception, motor skills, and cognition. In a randomized controlled study with booster training, Willis et al. (2006) found significant long-term improvements in the abilities trained, although these did not generalize to other tasks. Hall, Chavarria, Maneeratana, Chaney, and Bernhardt’s (2012) systematic review found that most studies reviewed reported significant positive effects on health outcomes from digital gameplay, while Zhang and Kaufman’s (2015) meta-analytic review concluded that “playing digital games is effective in improving older adults’ physical balance, …balance confidence, … functional mobility, … executive function, … and processing speed” (p. 1).

Although we lack a single clear definition of positive aging (Lee, Lan, & Yen, 2011), gerontology researchers have demonstrated that cognitive and social factors may sometimes outweigh physical conditions in determining life satisfaction and quality of life. Cognitive health is an important factor, and researchers generally agree that aging is associated with a decline in many cognitive processes. However, recognizing that the rate of cognitive decline is not fixed, many have begun to explore life factors and interventions to prevent or slow reduction in cognitive functions (e.g., Hedden & Gabrieli, 2004; Kueider, Parisi, Gross, & Rebok, 2012; Mahncke et al., 2006; Wang et al., 2006).

Similarly, researchers have consistently identified social interaction and support as key aspects of older adults’ quality of life. Social connectedness is an important component (Ristau, 2011; von Faber et al., 2001). Declining social capacities are linked with declines in physical, cognitive, and emotional functions (WHO, 2002) and consequently with disease, dependence, and poorer life quality. A qualitative, interview-based study by Reichstadt, Sengupta, Depp, Palinkas, and Jeste (2010) identified self-acceptance and engagement in life as primary themes for successful aging. Rowe and Kahn (1997) agree, arguing that, based on a survey of MacArthur Foundation research, active engagement is key to successful aging, which they define as low probability of disease and disease-related disability, high cognitive and physical functional capacity, and active engagement with life. Adams, Leibbrandt, and Moon’s (2011) critical review of 42 studies concluded that informal social activity was the activity domain that showed the most evidence of influence on older adults’ wellbeing. Forsman, Nyqvist, Schierenbeck, Gustavson, and Wahlbeck (2012) concluded from a survey of over 6300 older Nordic adults that both frequency of contact with friends and trust in friends were significantly related to lower levels of depression.

Technology has great potential to support older adults in living well by addressing their physical, mental, and social challenges and by providing them with stimulating, meaningful, and enjoyable activities (Allaire et al., 2013; Sixsmith, Gibson, Orpwood, & Torrington, 2007). In particular, technology-based games promise many benefits to older adults (Astell, 2013), although research has not yet provided clear conclusions about whether and how these can be realized, in particular due to a lack of rigorous research methodologies (Bleakley et al., 2015).

Digital Games and Older Adults

Older adults take part in many leisure activities using Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs), including playing digital games (e.g., video, computer, and online games). De Schutter (2011), investigating the use of digital games among 124 gamers between 45 and 85 years old, found that 16.1% played digital games more than 2.5 hours per day and 29.5% played one to 2.5 hours per day. In 2005, 18% of gamers (about 1.7 million) in the UK were aged between 51 and 65 (Pratchett, Harris, Taylor, & Woolard, 2005). In 2011, 29% of digital game players in America were aged 50 and over (Entertainment Software Association, 2013a). Twenty-five percent of Americans aged 65 or older played digital games in 2015 (Duggan, 2015).

Many older adults are already active technology users and can readily learn and use digital games (Duggan, 2015; Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2011). Digital games hold significant promise for enhancing the lives of older adults. IJsselsteijn, Nap, de Kort, and Poels (2007) identified four potential areas for games to contribute to improving seniors’ quality of life: (1) relaxation and entertainment, (2) socializing, (3) sharpening the mind, and (4) motivating healthy behaviours such as physical activity. Using a positive psychology approach, Astell (2013) confirms this viewpoint, arguing that games offer social interaction, cognitive exercise, and physical activity to help seniors maintain health and wellbeing. Hall et al.’s (2012) 13-study systematic review found evidence of significant mental, physical, and social health outcomes for older adults. In a specific example, Torres (2011) found that the use of digital games led to a decline in cognitive deterioration in comparison to control groups. Also, Gerling, Mandryck, and Linehan’s (2015) observational study concluded that motion-based video games, if designed and offered in ways that address older adults’ specific needs, can provide appealing leisure activity and promote positive self-esteem among long-term care residents.

Games satisfy a variety of needs for older adults (De Schutter, Brown, & Vanden Abeele, 2015; De Schutter & Malliet, 2014). Adults play games for many reasons, and their motivations vary with their previous game exposure and their physical and cognitive abilities (Brown, 2012, 2014). Zonneveld and Loos (2015) confirmed this, finding that playing a fitness exergame served not just a therapeutic role, improving physical and social wellbeing, but also provided entertainment, excitement and fun as reported by the subjects of the study. Hausknecht’s (2013) online survey of 50 World of Warcraft players aged 55+ found that mental exercise, enjoyment, escape from daily life, and social interaction were each seen as benefits by at least 40% of respondents, with the first three of these reported by at least half.

Games for Fun and Pleasure

Digital games hold promise for improving seniors’ subjective wellbeing and offer an enjoyable way of spending time (Whitcomb, 1990). It is well known that games are engaging and promote flow experience (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Dupláa & Taiwo, 2013; Marston, 2013). Recognizing that the intrinsic value of play and fun for older adults is an important concern, research is confirming that digital games play a role in satisfying older adults’ individual needs, whether for achieving useful outcomes or for experiencing pleasure for its own sake (Brown, 2014; De Schutter & Malliet, 2014; De Schutter & Vanden Abeele, 2010; Iversen, 2016; McLaughlin, Gandy, Allaire, & Whitlock, 2012; van Leeuwen & Westwood, 2008).

Socio-Emotional Factors and Digital Games

Increasingly, digital game playing involves social interaction (Mahmud, Mubin, Shahid, & Martens, 2010). Studies have shown that the social interaction while playing digital games is important to older players (De Schutter & Vanden Abeele, 2010; Khoo & Cheok, 2006; Whitcomb, 1990; Wollersheim et al., 2010). Prior epidemiological, cross-sectional and longitudinal research has shown that older adults with higher frequencies of social interaction report more positive wellbeing. For example, Glei et al. (2005) examined how changes in cognition over time are related to social participation and the extent of social networks. Data drawn from this population-based, longitudinal study revealed that respondents who engaged in one or two social activities failed 13% fewer cognitive tasks than those with no social activities, and those who participated in three or more activities failed 33% fewer cognitive tasks. Glei et al. also indicated that social interaction outside the family might have a bigger impact on cognitive function than social contacts with family. In addition, social connectedness provides opportunities for older adults to deal with stress, receive social support, and connect with friends.

Games offer opportunities for social interaction through group or online play (Hausknecht, Schell, Zhang, & Kaufman, 2015; Kaufman & Sauvé, 2010; Schell, Hausknecht, Zhang, & Kaufman, 2016). Playing digital games can promote positive health outcomes associated with alleviating depression, feelings of loneliness, and isolation (Kahlbaugh, Sperandio, Carlson, & Hauselt, 2011; Li, Theng, & Foo, 2014; Wollersheim et al., 2010). Digital gameplay also provides a venue for developing social capital that strengthens strong social ties both on- and offline (Trepte, Reinecke, & Juechems, 2012).

Cognitive Function and Digital Games

There is some evidence that gameplay can improve aspects of cognition, including cognitive control (Anguera et al., 2013), executive control functions (Basak, Boot, Voss, & Kramer, 2008), and processing speed (Zhang & Kaufman, 2015). Games that require players to make progressively more accurate and more challenging judgments at higher speed, and to suppress irrelevant information, can drive positive neurological changes in the supporting brain systems (Belchior et al., 2013). Since most digital games require hand-eye coordination, sustained attention to a task, and the ability to quickly process visual information by locating specific areas on the screen, players’ visual-spatial and multitasking skills can develop with gameplay practice (Abbott, 2013; Latham, Patston, & Tippett, 2013; Spence & Feng, 2010).

Challenge is one of the main motives that older adults have for playing digital games; thus, digital games and cognition are deeply intertwined and connected (Gamberini et al., 2008). Recently, digital game researchers and developers have focused on improving different aspects of older adults’ cognition (Basak et al., 2008; Bleakley et al., 2015; Whitlock, McLaughlin, & Allaire, 2012). Large commercial game companies have produced games that are meant to enhance cognition (e.g. Brain Age: Train Your Brain in Minutes a Day (www.nintendo.com) and Lumosity (www.lumosity.com), while game-based research projects such as ElderGames (Gamberini et al., 2006) and HERMES (Buiza et al., 2009) have studied ways that digital games can enhance cognitive function and help seniors overcome age-related difficulties. However, experimental studies on digital games and cognition have so far suffered from methodological and theoretical difficulties leading to inconsistent experimental results (Baniqued et al., 2013). Evidence so far seems to indicate that gameplay (as for other activities) only improves skills associated with the specific activity, and the improvement is not likely to last if players stop using the game. Stronger claims have not been proven and there is controversy about the claims made in marketing games for brain training to older adults (Stanford Center on Longevity and Max Planck Institute for Human Development, 2015).

Digital games can facilitate learning (Garris, Ahlers, & Driskell, 2002; Green & Bavelier, 2008). They can also support learning through a variety of motivational features, such as content-based challenges and graduated levels of practice (Kaufman & Sauvé, 2010; Nap et al., 2015). A meta-analysis by Wouters, van Nimwegen, van Oostendorp, and van der Spek (2013) found that digital games were more effective for learning and retention than were conventional instruction methods, particularly when supported by other instruction methods, multiple sessions, and group work.

Debriefing after the gameplay experience is important for supporting learning (Crookall, 2010). In fact, many consider debriefing, or the review and analysis of events that occurred in the game, to be the most critical part of the gaming experience (Crookall, 1995). If our purpose is to develop games that are instructive, the debriefing process allows us to transform game events into learning experiences. Some authors assert that debriefing is a fundamental link between game experiences and learning (Garris et al., 2002).

Perceived Gameplay Benefits and Costs

In order to realize potential benefits from digital gameplay, older adults must be motivated and supported to start and continue playing long enough for the benefits to emerge. This involves a tradeoff between the perceived benefits of gameplay and its costs, such as difficulties with using the technology or learning a game and resulting feelings of low self-esteem (Gerling et al., 2015; IJsselsteijn et al., 2007; McLaughlin et al., 2012). Although players are drawn to digital games by subjective experience, relatively few studies have focused on older adults’ own experiences and the socio-emotional and cognitive effects on them of playing digital games; these studies have reported mixed results. Marston (2013) determined that older adults experienced flow and immersion while playing interactive sports games, but this was inhibited when they had difficulties with the game interface. McLaughlin et al. (2012) also found that players experienced flow states; benefits such as self-esteem, social interaction, challenge, and achievement were identified in their players’ recorded comments during gameplay but were not formally measured. Based on an online survey of players of one casual video game, Whitbourne, Ellenberg, and Akimoto (2013) reported that gamers of all ages played primarily for social reasons, and older adults said that gameplay helped them to improve their visual and spatial skills and their response time. De Schutter and Malliet (2014) identified cognitive and social connectedness needs as two of five types of gameplay motivation identified by older adults but could not directly relate these to the types of satisfaction that their subjects described.

Gerling et al. (2015) and McLaughlin et al. (2012) suggested that difficulties in learning and playing digital games are among the costs that discourage older adults from engaging in gameplay, but they do not specifically address the benefits perceived by those who have avoided or overcome these issues to become more frequent and/ or skilled players. Given the potential benefits of digital gaming in later life, we wanted to explore the relationships between older adults’ gameplay profiles, including self-reported skill level, and the social-emotional benefits, cognitive benefits, and difficulties that they perceive as a result of their gameplay.

Research Questions

The survey research was guided by the following questions regarding digital games in general, without a focus on any specific game genres:

Research Methods

Instrument

This research draws on data from a cross-sectional survey on digital and non-digital game playing that was approved by the local university ethics board. The study used a print-based, mainly closed-ended, questionnaire that was designed by reviewing instruments from the literature, adapting various questions, and creating new ones. The survey questions were reviewed by members of the research team using an iterative feedback process to ensure that they tied into the research questions and the literature and were clearly worded. The questionnaire was then pilot tested with ten older adults and minor revisions were made.

Using nominal and ordinal categories, the questionnaire asked about leisure activities, digital game-playing patterns, and gameplay benefits and difficulties. Input variables relevant to this paper include respondents’ reported gameplay patterns (past history, current frequency and duration, playing socially vs. alone) and their self-reported skill level in play digital games (beginner/ low, intermediate/ middle, and expert/ high).

Outcome variables (Table 1) were the socio-emotional and cognitive changes that respondents self-reported as attributed to their gameplay (15 items, rated increased, stayed the same, or decreased). Individual survey questions are shown in the tables below that report on results for each research question. The cognitive benefits section focused on five broad areas often considered by researchers on digital games and older adults: attention, memory, reasoning, problem solving, and reaction speed. Although this is not an exhaustive list, and each entails a number of cognitive subtasks, these categories are useful for the self-reporting required here.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Outcome Variables and References.

Variable	Reference(s)
What do you think are the greatest benefits of playing digital games?
Mental exerciseSocial interactionEnjoyment (fun)Escape from daily life	Bleakley et al., 2015; De Schutter & Malliet, 2014; De Schutter & Vanden Abeele, 2010; Schell, Hausknecht, Zhang, & Kaufman, 2016; Zonneveld & Loos, 2015
In your opinion, has playing digital games increased or decreased the following for you:
Social and emotional capabilities:
Developing new friendshipsConnecting with current friendsConnecting with familyConnecting with various age groupsDeveloping self-confidenceDealing with lonelinessDealing with depression	De Schutter & Vanden Abeele, 2010; Gerling, Mandryck, & Linehan, 2015; Li, Theng, & Foo, 2014; McLaughlin, Gandy, Allaire, & Whitlock, 2012; Schell et al., 2016; Wollersheim et al., 2010; Zonneveld & Loos, 2015
Cognitive capabilities:
Focusing attentionMemoryReasoningProblem-solvingSpeed in reacting/ responding	Anguera et al., 2013; Basak, Boot, Voss, & Kramer, 2008; Green & Bavelier, 2008; Zhang & Kaufman, 2015

To clarify terms, the questionnaire defined non-digital games and digital games as in Table 2. All respondents completed the first section of the survey, dealing with non-digital gameplay, and the third, which asked about their personal backgrounds. Those who answered that they played digital games completed the second section.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Game Descriptions Used in the Survey Instrument.

Non-digital games	Non-Digital Games refer to all types of games that don’t require the use of digital devices to play. Some examples include social games such as Trivial Pursuit, Monopoly, Concentration, Clue, card games such as Patience, Bridge, Hearts, Crazy Eights, Checkers, and Chess. Casino games such as slot machines are considered as non-digital games since skill is not required.
Digital games	Digital Games refer to all types of video games and computer games, whether played on computers, handheld devices, video game consoles, or other means.

Recruitment and Data Collection

Using a convenience sampling process, we recruited participants from older adults’ independent and assisted living centers, local community centers and seniors’ centers (with permission of center directors), and local shopping malls (with management permission to publicly solicit participants). Each potential participating organization received a recruitment letter asking the director or manager to reply in writing by email or letter if they agreed to participate.

Older adults were approached in the various settings and asked if they ever played any games (non-digital or digital, alone or with others), for example, card games or board games. If they answered positively, they were asked to take 10 to 15 minutes to fill out a printed questionnaire about the nature of their gameplay. If they agreed, they were asked to first read and sign a consent form that explained procedures to ensure privacy and then to complete the questionnaire. If they completed the survey, they were given a $10 coffee shop gift certificate and the option of providing their contact information on a separate postcard to become eligible for a random draw for three $100 cash prizes.

It was clear that the financial incentives provided much of the motivation for participating in the survey. Nearly all those who responded positively about having played games agreed to complete the questionnaire.

Results

Participants’ Personal Characteristics

Four hundred sixty-three participants responded to the digital games part of the questionnaire. Table 3 presents survey respondents’ personal characteristics. Almost two-thirds (62%) of respondents were female. Respondents ranged in age from 55 to over 90 years, with half in the 65-74 age group and just 13% aged 75 or older. Slightly over one-third (36%) lived alone, and the great majority lived at home and were retired. Almost two-thirds (62%) were not working at all, while more than one-third (38%) were working part- or full-time.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

Participants’ Personal Characteristics (N=463).

Background Variable	% of Respondents
Sex
Male	38
Female	62
Age
55-64	37
65-74	50
75-90+	13
Living arrangement
Alone	36
In a couple	36
With family	24
With others	4
Residence
Private home	83
Assisted-living	8
Other	9
Retirement status
Retired	80
Not retired	20
Working situation
Not working	62
Working part-time 1	28
Working full-time 1	10

1

Paid or voluntary

Digital Gameplay Patterns by Age Group

Table 4 shows participants’ gameplay patterns by age group in terms of past history, current frequency and duration, playing socially vs. alone, and self-reported skill level. About half (50.4%) of all participants reported playing for five years or more; the oldest age group had slightly more long-time players, although this relationship was not significant.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 4.

Participants’ Gameplay Patterns vs. Age (n=463): Frequency of Play, Social vs. Solitary Play and Skill Level.

Responses 1	% of Respondents
	All	Age55-64	Age65-74	Age75+	χ2
For how many years have you been playing digital games?	n=442	n=195	n=165	n=82
Less than 1 year	19.50%	23.10%	14.50%	20.70%	11.92
1-4 years	30.10%	29.70%	35.80%	19.50%	(df=6)
5-9 years	19.00%	15.40%	21.20%	23.20%	p=.064
10+	31.40%	31.80%	28.50%	36.60%
Have you played digital games during the past month?	n=438	n=192	n=164	n=82
Yes	85.60%	83.30%	88.40%	85.40%	1.86
No	14.40%	16.70%	11.60%	14.60%	(df=4)
					p=.395
During the past month, on how many days per week on average have you played digital games?	n=440	n=194	n=165	n=81
0	11.80%	14.90%	8.50%	11.10%	12.24
1-2	34.10%	37.60%	34.50%	24.70%	(df=7)
3-4	20.20%	16.00%	24.20%	22.20%	p=.141
5-6	11.60%	9.30%	12.10%	16.00%
7	22.30%	22.20%	20.60%	25.90%
During the past month, when you played digital games, for how many hours per day on average did you play?	n=420	n=185	n=156	n=79
1 hour or less	58.80%	61.60%	57.70%	54.40%	9.6
2-3 hours	34.80%	31.40%	37.80%	36.70%	(df=7)
4-5 hours	4.30%	4.30%	3.80%	5.10%	p=.295
6-8 hours	1.40%	1.10%	0.60%	3.80%
More than 8 hours	0.70%	1.60%	0.00%	0.00%
Have you played role-playing games online with other players?	n=412	n=181	n=156	n=75
Yes	9.20%	9.90%	8.30%	9.30%	0.26
No	90.80%	90.10%	91.70%	90.70%	(df=4)
					p=.878
Have you played social games online with other players?	n=437	n=194	n=162	n=81
Yes	27.50%	26.80%	26.50%	30.90%	0.58
No	72.50%	73.20%	73.50%	69.10%	(df=4)
					p=.748
Have you met new people while playing these online games?	n=433	n=194	n=160	n=79
Yes	15.00%	16.50%	10.60%	20.30%	4.45
No	85.00%	83.50%	89.40%	79.70%	(df=4)
					p=.108
With whom have you played digital games? 2
Alone	n=436	n=192	n=163	n=81	1.48
	81.90%	79.70%	84.70%	81.50%	(df=3)
					p=.477
Family members	n=436	n=192	n=163	n=81	7.63
	33.70%	40.60%	29.40%	25.90%	(df=3)
					p=.022
Friends	n=435	n=191	n=163	n=81	8.35
	22.80%	29.30%	17.80%	17.30%	(df=3)
					p=.015
Members of a club or association	n=436	n=192	n=163	n=81	3.98
	4.60%	4.20%	3.10%	8.60%	(df=3)
					p=.137
Others	n=434	n=191	n=162	n=81	0.1
	2.10%	2.10%	1.90%	2.50%	(df=3)
					p=.950
What is your skill level in playing digital games? 3	n=438	n=192	n=165	n=81
Beginner (Low level)	37.40%	41.10%	38.80%	25.90%	5.84
Intermediate (Middle level) or Expert (High level)	62.60%	58.90%	61.20%	74.10%	(df=4)p=.054

1

Item headings are actual survey questions.

2

Respondents could select more than one category. Percentages indicate the proportion of respondents who selected yes in the category.

3

Intermediate and advanced levels have been combined due to the low number (7.4%) of “advanced” responses.

In terms of gameplay frequency, most participants (85.6%) had played digital games during the past month, and 88.2% reported playing one day or more per week on average. Over 40% reported playing at least two hours per day when they did play. There were no significant relationships across age groups for these responses.

Online play with others was relatively infrequent, with only 9.2% of respondents playing role-playing games online with other players, and only 27.5% playing social games online with others. Only 15% of respondents reported having met new people while playing online games. Again, there were no significant differences across age groups. The most frequently mentioned digital game genre that was played (not shown in the table) was puzzle games (33.3%), followed by card/ board/ tile games (17.6%).

When asked with whom they played digital games, most participants (81.9%) reported playing digital games alone. Just over one-third (33.7%) played with family members, with significantly more players doing so in the youngest (55 – 64) age group (χ²_(df=3)= 7.63, p=.022). Similarly, 22.8% played with friends, with significantly more of these in the youngest age group (χ²_(df=3)= 8.35, p=.015). Just 2.1% of all respondents reported playing with those other than family, friends, or fellow club members.

When asked to self-assess their skills level in playing digital games, 62.6% rated themselves as intermediate or expert. (The two were combined because only 35 respondents rated themselves as expert.) This percentage increased with older age groups, with the relationship approaching significance (χ²_(df=4)= 5.84, p=.054).

Digital Gameplay Patterns by Skill Level

Table 5 reports associations between participants’ gameplay patterns and self-reported skill levels. Intermediate/ advanced players had played for significantly longer than had beginner players (χ²_(df=5)= 58.60, p=<.000). Fully 41.3% of intermediate/ advanced players had played for 10 or more years, in contrast to just 15.2% of beginners. Intermediate/ advanced players had played significantly more in the past month than had beginners (χ²_(df=6)= 72.21, p=<.000), with 32.4% of intermediate/ advanced players, vs. only 4.9% of beginners, playing seven days per week on average. Intermediate/ advanced players also played significantly more per day (χ²_(df=6)= 22.35, p=<.000), although only small percentages of both groups played more than three hours per day.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 5.

Participants’ Gameplay Patterns vs. Skill Level (n=463): Frequency of Play and Social vs. Solitary Play.

Responses 1	Self-reported Skill Level
	Beginner	Intermediate or Advanced 2	χ2
For how many years have you been playing digital games?	n=165	n=288
Less than 1 year	34.50%	10.40%	58.6
1-4 years	35.20%	27.10%	(df=5)
5-9 years	15.20%	21.20%	p=<.000
10+	15.20%	41.30%
During the past month, on how many days per week on average have you played digital games?	n=164	n=287
0	20.10%	5.90%	72.21
1-2	47.60%	26.50%	(df=6)
3-4	20.10%	20.90%	p=<.000
5-6	7.30%	14.30%
7	4.90%	32.40%
During the past month, when you played digital games, for how many hours per day on average did you play?	n=154	n=278
1 hour or less	72.10%	50.00%	22.35
2-3 hours	25.30%	41.00%	(df=6)
4-5 hours	2.60%	5.80%	p<.000
6-8 hours	0.00%	2.20%
More than 8 hours	0.00%	1.10%

1

Item headings are actual survey questions.

2

Intermediate and advanced levels have been combined due to the low number (7.4%) of “advanced” responses.

Perceived Benefits

Table 6 summarizes participants’ opinions about the benefits of playing digital games. Mental exercise was the most commonly selected general benefit of digital game playing (83.0%), with the next most common selection being enjoyment (fun) (selected by 70.7% of respondents). More than 25% of respondents saw social interaction and a general escape from daily life as additional benefits.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 6.

Benefits of Playing Digital Games (N=463).

Benefits 1	% Selecting
General Benefits
Mental exercise	83.0
Enjoyment (fun)	70.7
Social interaction	25.9
Escape from daily life	25.9
Increases in Socio-Emotional Areas
Developing self-confidence	41.9
Dealing with loneliness	34.5
Connecting with family	32.5
Connecting with various age groups	28.1
Connecting with current friends	26.6
Developing new friendships	25.6
Dealing with depression	23.9
Increases in Cognitive Areas
Focusing attention	71.6
Memory	69.1
Reaction speed	65.6
Problem-solving	64.5
Reasoning	58.1

1

Respondents could select more than one benefit.

When asked to what extent they experienced specific socio-emotional and/ or cognitive changes from playing digital games, no participants reported a decrease and only three reported no change. For socio-emotional benefits, they most frequently reported increases in developing self-confidence (41.9%), dealing with loneliness (34.5%), and connecting with family (32.5%). The lowest-rated socio-emotional benefit, dealing with depression, was still reported by 23.9% of participants.

The majority of respondents reported perceived increases in all five specific cognitive benefit areas. The most frequently reported cognitive benefit experienced as a result of playing digital games was focusing attention (71.6%), followed by memory (69.1%), reaction speed (65.6%), problem-solving (64.5%), and reasoning (58.1%).

Respondents reported relatively few difficulties in playing digital games (Table 7). The highest ranked difficulty reported was that the games were too complicated (21.1%). About 10% of respondents reported difficulty using the controller and limited or no access to technology.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 7.

Difficulties of Playing Digital Games (N=463).

Difficulties 1	% Selecting
Difficulties 1
Too complicated	21.1
Difficult to use controller	10.0
Limited or no access to technology	9.6
Privacy	4.9
None	42.3

1

Respondents could select more than one difficulty.

Table 8 reports associations between participants’ self-rated skill levels in playing digital games and perceived benefits and difficulties. Although a higher percentage of advanced players reported general benefits, the only significant differences in general benefits in favor of the advanced skill group were in mental exercise (χ²_(df=1)= 18.56), p=<.000), and enjoyment (fun) (χ²_(df=1)= 4.95, p=.026). Regarding difficulties reported, a significantly higher percentage of beginners compared to advanced level players selected the difficulties too complicated (χ²_(df=1)= 19.57, p=<.000), difficult to use controller (χ²_(df=1)= 8.30, p=.004), and limited or no access to technology (χ²_(df=1)= 12.55, p=<.000), although the numbers were relatively low. However, more than double the percentage of advanced players (54%), compared to beginners (23.8%), responded none to the list of difficulties (χ²_(df=1)= 37.80, p=<.000).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 8.

Relationships Between Self-Rated Playing Skill and Perceived Benefits and Difficulties of Playing Digital Games (n=463).

Benefits and Difficulties	% Selecting		χ2(df=1)	p
	BeginnerSkill Level	Interme-diate or AdvancedSkill Level
General Benefits
Mental exercise	73.2	89.0	18.56	.000
Enjoyment (fun)	65.3	75.1	4.95	.026
Social interaction	21.4	28.1	2.47	.116
Escape from daily life	22.6	28.8	2.08	.149
Difficulties
Too complicated	32.3	14.4	19.57	.000
Difficult to use controller	14.9	6.5	8.30	.004
Limited/ no access to technology	15.5	5.4	12.55	.000
Privacy	3.1	5.8	1.59	.207
None	23.8	54.0	37.80	.000
Increases in Socio-Emotional Areas
Developing self-confidence	40.0	44.1	0.68	.713
Dealing with loneliness	33.1	36.9	0.81	.668
Connecting with family	31.1	33.5	4.14	.126
Connecting with various age groups	25.7	29.6	9.02	.011
Connecting with current friends	26.0	28.8	2.26	.324
Developing new friendships	26.0	25.3	2.76	.251
Dealing with depression	18.1	27.2	4.22	.121
Increases in Cognitive Areas
Focusing attention	64.7	76.7	8.61	.013
Memory	66.2	72.1	2.06	.357
Reaction speed	59.9	69.3	7.11	.029
Problem-solving	48.4	74.6	30.51	.000
Reasoning	44.6	66.7	23.15	.000

Note: Almost no one reported a decrease. Some reported no change.

For six of the seven socio-emotional factors, skill level was not related to reported increases. For the factor connecting with various age groups, a significantly higher percentage of the intermediate/ advanced group reported an increase (χ²_(df=1)= 9.02, p=.011).

A greater percentage of intermediate/advanced players, compared to beginners, experienced statistically significant increases in five of the six specific cognitive skills. The only skill showing no difference across groups was memory; however, it was the cognitive skill rated as increasing by the greatest percentage (66.2%) of beginner respondents and almost three-quarters (72.1%) of advanced skill players.

Discussion

Study Limitations

This research was limited in several ways. First, respondents were volunteers found in locations frequented by active seniors, so we cannot extend these results to those who have more limited physical, cognitive, or social capacities. Second, our data collection did not allow us to link perceived benefits or difficulties to particular types of games played or to whether or not respondents were “hard-core” or casual gamers. Finally, all benefits and difficulties are self-reported and so reflect respondents’ prior experience, perceptions, and interpretations of the survey text.

Conclusions

Digital gameplay has the potential to enhance older adults’ quality of life by providing general enjoyment and fun and by improving their physical, socio-emotional, and cognitive capacities.

The results of this survey research support the use of digital games as innovative and engaging activities to enhance older adults’ quality of life in several ways. The results suggest that benefits, particularly from enjoyment and perceptions of improved cognition, increase with greater gameplay skill. The relatively large sample in this study provides support for our findings.

However, the relatively low perceived benefits of digital games in socio-emotional areas are a concern. To realize the socio-emotional benefits that are cited in the literature for intergenerational games (e.g., see IJsselsteijn et al., 2007), and those of digital games in general, it is likely that promotion, education, and facilitation are needed to support and encourage older adults to play digital games with others. More research on characteristics and preferences of digital game players by age would be useful to increase our understanding of the factors at play.

Finally, we should view the conclusions reached in this study optimistically yet cautiously, since the data are based on participants’ self-reports. Further research is needed using stronger research designs. These should include, where possible, randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs using valid and reliable scales and more objective measures such as performance data. Also, there are many rigorous qualitative research methods that could greatly enhance our understanding. The investigation of digital games played by older adults is a new area and we have much more to learn about how best to realize aging-related benefits, whether experienced or objectively measured.