IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nathum/v8y2024i6d10.1038_s41562-024-01878-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using games to understand the mind

Author

Listed:
  • Kelsey Allen

    (DeepMind)

  • Franziska Brändle

    (Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics)

  • Matthew Botvinick

    (DeepMind)

  • Judith E. Fan

    (Stanford University)

  • Samuel J. Gershman

    (Harvard University)

  • Alison Gopnik

    (University of California, Berkeley)

  • Thomas L. Griffiths

    (Princeton University)

  • Joshua K. Hartshorne

    (Boston College)

  • Tobias U. Hauser

    (University College London
    Max Planck UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research
    University of Tübingen)

  • Mark K. Ho

    (Princeton University)

  • Joshua R. Leeuw

    (Vassar College)

  • Wei Ji Ma

    (New York University)

  • Kou Murayama

    (University of Tübingen)

  • Jonathan D. Nelson

    (University of Surrey)

  • Bas Opheusden

    (Princeton University)

  • Thomas Pouncy

    (Harvard University)

  • Janet Rafner

    (Aarhus University)

  • Iyad Rahwan

    (Max Planck Institute for Human Development)

  • Robb B. Rutledge

    (Yale University)

  • Jacob Sherson

    (Aarhus University)

  • Özgür Şimşek

    (University of Bath)

  • Hugo Spiers

    (University College London)

  • Christopher Summerfield

    (University of Oxford)

  • Mirko Thalmann

    (Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics)

  • Natalia Vélez

    (Harvard University)

  • Andrew J. Watrous

    (Baylor College of Medicine)

  • Joshua B. Tenenbaum

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

  • Eric Schulz

    (Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics)

Abstract

Board, card or video games have been played by virtually every individual in the world. Games are popular because they are intuitive and fun. These distinctive qualities of games also make them ideal for studying the mind. By being intuitive, games provide a unique vantage point for understanding the inductive biases that support behaviour in more complex, ecological settings than traditional laboratory experiments. By being fun, games allow researchers to study new questions in cognition such as the meaning of ‘play’ and intrinsic motivation, while also supporting more extensive and diverse data collection by attracting many more participants. We describe the advantages and drawbacks of using games relative to standard laboratory-based experiments and lay out a set of recommendations on how to gain the most from using games to study cognition. We hope this Perspective will lead to a wider use of games as experimental paradigms, elevating the ecological validity, scale and robustness of research on the mind.

Suggested Citation

  • Kelsey Allen & Franziska Brändle & Matthew Botvinick & Judith E. Fan & Samuel J. Gershman & Alison Gopnik & Thomas L. Griffiths & Joshua K. Hartshorne & Tobias U. Hauser & Mark K. Ho & Joshua R. Leeuw, 2024. "Using games to understand the mind," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(6), pages 1035-1043, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:8:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1038_s41562-024-01878-9
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-024-01878-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-01878-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41562-024-01878-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:8:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1038_s41562-024-01878-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.