study
Latest
Robotic tuatara fools males, partakes in social dominance study
Although Wowwee's farm of robotic animals are quite the playful bunch, they aren't exactly prime targets for participating in a biological study of how animals interact in the wild, but Jennifer Moore from Victoria's School of Biological Science is aiming to use a faux tuatara to be the focal point of a new study. Modeled after a highly-regarded and recently deceased tuatara named Oliver, the new creature will purportedly be mingling with others of its kind in order to give a first-hand view on "social dominance and aggression in wild tuatara." Crafted by the Weta Workshop, Robotic Oliver will be used for the first time next month on the tuatara capital of the world, Stephens Island, in order to carefully inspect male mating habits in an effort to "significantly enhance conservation efforts." Of course, utilizing robotic clones for the betterment of a species seems like a brilliant idea, but we should probably all join in unison and hope this same stunt isn't pulled on the human population.[Via RobotGossip]
Study finds correlation between violent scripture and aggression, similar to games
See where this is going? Now even the Bible can make us do it, so obviously video games can. Here's the catch: "We're not saying that just in and of itself violent media is uniformly bad but oftentimes there is no redeeming context to it. If one reads the scriptures with an understanding of context, both historical as well as with a (desire) to hear what God is trying to teach us, you can read it in a different way." What BYU professor Robert Ridge seems to imply is that, when taken in context, the Bible ultimately teaches one to pursue peace and love; whereas, he believes most games lack this overarching theme of harmony. Discerning Bible studiers can actually decrease their aggression -- as for active gamers, well, not so much.The new study, which determined "aggression" by how loud a subject chose to blast an obnoxious sound in another subject's ears, is co-written by University of Michigan psychologist Brad Bushman. Bushman was a member of the American Psychological Association's Committee on Violence in Video Games and Interactive Media when in August 2005 the group issued a report linking violent games to increased aggression. Hmmm ... smell an agenda?[Thanks, Dave]
iPhone price too high?
A recent study shows that the iPhone's price point might drive away potential customers. Macworld writes about a survey by Compete, which tells us more or less what we already know: if they gave away free iPhones in boxes of Lucky Charms, we'd be all magically delicious over those things like white on rice or green on clovers or yellow on moons or pink on hearts, but at $500 we're all "would you take $200-$299 instead? Please?" Analysts in the Macworld article suggest that early adopters might pay a premium before the price drops for the mass market. In related news, David recently posted about a possible contract-contingent price break.
Gamers make better surgeons, study says
According to a new study published in the Archives of Surgery, surgeons who put in their downtime playing video games proved to have considerably higher surgical skills than their non-gamer co-workers, in particular when it came to laparoscopic surgery, which involves manipulating instruments while staring at a monitor. While the study is far from authoritative, with only 33 surgeons participating in it, it nonetheless found that those who played video games for at least three hours a week performed 27 percent faster, made 37 percent fewer errors, and scored 42 percent better in surgical tests than those who had not played video games. The correlation between video games and surgical skills was apparently so high that it proved to be an even greater indicator of performance than either the length of an individual's surgical training or their prior experience with laporscopic surgery. No word if those that snuck in some extra practice in Trauma Center on their DS had an even bigger advantage.
University of Rochester: Action games improve vision
Science Blog covers a University of Rochester study that says action videogames improve visual processing by 20 percent. A group of students played Unreal Tournament and another group played Tetris, which was selected because of its motor complexity but visual simplicity. After regular training with the respective games, the UT players more easily identified the orientation of a letter "T" among a jumble of other shapes in a crowding test. The Tetris group's responses didn't change.The study suggests that action games alter the way our minds process information even after playing; the researchers think that games could help combat certain visual disorders. We just hope that our improved ability to identify objects makes up for our blurred vision after marathon game nights.
Cellphones are dangerous/not dangerous, inconclusive edition
Just when we thought we had this whole cellphones do / don't cause cancer bit was behind us, here comes another study to say that they in fact do. The study, which was put together by Finland's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, suggests that people who used cellphones longer than 10 years were 40 percent more likely to develop gliomas (a nervous system tumor) on the side of the head where the cellphone's radiation would enter the head. While we are aware of several studies that go either way on the matter, Microwave News' editor Louis Slesin thinks it is "compelling evidence" because, "We now have two tumor types found among people who use mobiles for more than 10 years shown by two different research groups." Of course, a rebuttal from the Mobile Operators Association said otherwise: "The findings related to tumor location are difficult to interpret." It's hard to really form an opinion considering the amount of data that consistently contradicts itself, but you can decide for yourself when the findings are published in International Journal of Cancer later this year. For now, we will have faith in our mobiles and pray that later on down the line we're not on the wrong end of the impending "I told you so."
Long-term UK cancer study about to kick off, cellphones in peril again
While we aren't claiming any prophetic abilities, it wasn't exactly hard to assume that just over a month after a thorough Danish study cleared cellphones of any wrongdoings associated with cancers and tumors, we've got a so-called expert lobbying for £3 million ($5.92 million) in funding to prove otherwise. Professor Lawrie Challis, who is in the final stages of negotiation with the Department of Health and the mobile phone industry for the aforementioned dough, seems to think that there's still a "hint of something" that could develop in long-term, heavy mobile users "after 10 years of use." Granted, he has literally books of research disproving this "hint," but as he references cases like asbestos and Hiroshima, he suggests that a study must be done now in order to prevent anything even more dramatic from cropping up in a decade or so. Reportedly, "over 200,000 volunteers, including long-term users, are to be monitored for at least five years to plot mobile phone use against any serious diseases they develop, including cancer, Parkinson's, and Alzheimer's diseases." So it seems the circus begins again, and in the meantime, let's just all cross our re-paranoid fingers in hopes that nothing goes awry (and that a counter-test shoots it down) while this study unfolds.[Via Textually]
Scientist: Minesweeper probably cost economy billions
A Canadian study found that American procrastination is on the rise. The research was supposed to take five years to complete, but after 10 years the scientists are releasing the results -- who's procrastinating now? The study found that in 1978 about 5 percent of Americans thought of themselves as chronic procrastinators and now it's 26 percent.The tools for procrastination surround us -- "TVs in every room, online video, Web-surfing, cell phones, video games, iPods and BlackBerries." Is it procrastination or just cultural attention deficit disorder? Of course, even in this study, video games are pointed out as the culprits for the fall of western civilization. The scientist who is publishing the study, University of Calgary Professor Piers Steel, says, "That stupid game Minesweeper -- that probably has cost billions of dollars for the whole society."
Game violence stimulates 'textspeak,' concludes study of 12
Dr. Chow Yuan-hua, a psychiatrist at the Veterans General Hospital in Taipei, has amazingly, using just twelve subjects, discovered why young adults (and even more mature adults) have such low language proficiency -- why we often shorten our words and confuse numbers for letters. The culprit: vide0 gamZ. V1ol3nt vide0 gamZ.According to Dr. Chow, 'textspeak' is a symptom of gaming. As we spend more and more hours playing violent games, the blood circulation in our brains' frontal lobes significantly reduces, diminishing our ability to carry out higher mental activities, like proper speech. "[Parents] have to try to keep [their kids] away from [violent] games, if they don't want to receive any more 'textspeak' messages," warns Dr. Chow.[Via VH1 Game Break]
Shocking study reveals that activity in gaming fights obesity
Providing a mighty blow to both "research studies" and the value of Ph.D degrees everywhere, the latest rubbish information to come flowing from the Mayo Clinic's research lab is as close to an insult to intelligence as you can get. While it may have been somewhat understood that television can act as a painkiller for children, and that wireless headsets actually don't improve driving safety, this obviousness of this one takes the literal cake. The study, which is proclaimed as the "first to scientifically measure the energy spent playing video games," proved that sitting around while gaming burned the same amount of energy as kicking back and watching the tube, but when engaged in a "camera-based activity" (Eye Toy?), the "energy expenditure tripled." It was also shown that walking on a treadmill while gaming it up also tripled the energy burned, but it showed a "fivefold increase for the mildly obese group" of participants. While these results may be miles away from shocking, the most depressing aspect of the entire study was the conclusion that the results were so awe-inspiring that "they warrant further studies in randomized trials." Now, who's paying for this hoopla again?[Thanks, Mike]
Cellphones finally cleared of cancer charges
We've seen so many chapters of the "dangerous / not dangerous" chronicles with regard to cellphone radiation that we've lost count, but thanks to a Danish study recently carried out on 420,000 avid mobile users, we can finally put those worries to rest (we hope). While it's no secret that mobile phone antennas emit "electromagnetic fields that can penetrate the human brain," we've been yearning for a study such as this to quiet the tin-foil advocates (and ensure our own safety). Researchers from the Danish Institute of Cancer Epidemiology in Copenhagen looked at data on people who had been using mobile phones "from as far back as 1982" in order to draw their conclusions, and after all was said and done, they found "no evidence to suggest users had a higher risk of tumors in the brain, eye, or salivary gland, or developing leukemia." Thankfully, a similar study published earlier this year by the Institute of Cancer Research also concluded that mobile phone use "was not associated with a greater risk of brain cancer." So, there you have it folks, you can safely yap away without fear of mutating into some form of diseased being -- until the next study "proves" otherwise, of course.[Thanks, Billfred]
UK study suggests games contribute to dearth in vocabulary
Teenagers have only half the vocabulary of adults (12,600 vs. 21,400), an issue that can be partially attributed to too much gaming, according to research conducted by Lancaster University's Professor Tony McEnery. As it is presented in the BBC report (we don't have a copy of the research to verify our critiques), there are some obvious issues with how McEnery reached his conclusions. Since his comparison was between teenagers and adults between the ages of 25 to 34. Within that time, many students attend college courses and / or interact outside of a small group of school students, and such time to interact is what McEnery himself suggests increases vocabulary. The lack of a control group in his studies means that most of the correlations he makes have little merit to support them. Perhaps a cross-generational study of similarly-aged groups would be more fitting? What irks us about the study is his conclusion that the problems can be contributed to "technology isolation syndrome," an issue purported to be caused by an "overuse of technologies such as computer games and MP3 players" (quotation attributed to BBC, although presented as a rephrasing of McEnery's words). Online games are interaction. McEnery believes that "kids need to get talking and develop their vocabulary." Sure, Mario doesn't have any five-dollar terminology, but neither do Go or Spider Solitaire. And reading isn't exactly social, either. Might there be other, non-vocabulary skills learned in gaming (reaction time, multitasking, etc.) also beneficial to work? It just feels too much like a scapegoat excuse. McEnery's study came from observations of blogs, questionnaires, and speech. He does opine that the educational system needs improvement to counteract the problem, and we agree that teenagers optimally would equal or come close to their predecessors at a younger age, so that they might one day surpass them. As for us, we learned most of our lexicon from text-based adventure games. So if you excuse us, we have to walk north, look kitchen, look counter, take sandwich, inventory, eat sandwich.[Via Game Politics]
Lefties pwn righties, determines Aussie study
New research conducted by Dr. Nick Cherbuin of the Australian National University suggests that left-handers could be superior at playing "fast computer games." Dr. Cherbuin has concluded that lefties' brains are wired more efficiently than their right-dominated counterparts, helping them to perform better at tasks that require processing in both hemispheres of the brain, including gaming.Unfortunately, the study stopped short of a right-handed vs. southpaw LAN deathmatch. We remain decidedly unconvinced...[Via Eurogamer]
Study: Violent videogames affect kids' brains
Reuters describes a recent study of violent videogames' affect on teens; the study reports that a violent game made kids more emotionally aroused, with less control and concentration, than kids playing a non-violent game.The Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis study compared Need for Speed: Underground and Medal of Honor: Frontline. Kids played the games, then, using a fancy MRI machine, blood-flow was measured to parts of their brains while they performed simple tasks. The study tested only 44 subjects, so it may point to significant results, but it also needs to be repeated with bigger groups.While we might have picked a different non-violent game -- we always crash our NFS cars, and that seems pretty violent -- we hope that this sort of research is also applied to other media before drawing conclusions. If violent games cause kids to go into fight-or-flight mode as the study suggests, can this be linked to real-world reactions or long-term changes? How do kids' responses to movies compare to games?[Thanks to everyone who sent this in.]
Pogue's perspective: megapixel numbers don't matter
David Pogue has faced his fair share of myth-busting duties, but his latest assignment sure didn't have to be done in order to convince us that his unanimous discovery was indeed correct all along. While theorists (and those adamant that bigger always equals better) can theorize forever on why additional megapixels should yield clearer, more accurate prints, the reality of the matter is that extra megapixels are typically not much more than a marketing ploy to lure consumers into making an additional purchase. In his latest test, he took identical photos with anonymous 5-, 8-, and 13-megapixel shooters, and then printed them out on 16- x 24-inch poster paper at a professional photography lab. Then, he surveyed the general public in Times Square to see if the naked eye could actually discern between the varying sensors and the level of clarity -- to no surprise (and to theorists' chagrin), only a single person (a photography professor, mind you) correctly sorted the prints in order of megapixels, and Pogue even asserted that the lucky winner was probably guessing anyway. So, if you still don't believe us, be sure to hit the read link for the full skinny, and save yourself a few bills the next time you're camera shopping by not making megapixels your ultimate priority, capishe?[Via TheRawFeed]
Study: for most, all-in-one phones aren't
Hey, isn't the idea of a cameraphone to have the luxury of leaving your big, fat digicam at home? With a smartphone, isn't the PDA supposed to be history? And doesn't that iPod belong in the circular file now that you've picked up that fancy musicphone? According to a newly released study by In-Stat, phones with extra goodness packed in aren't prompting their owners to leave other devices behind. In fact, over half of multimedia phone owners are still toting a dedicated MP3 player, some 75% of smartphone users lug a PDA as well, and a staggering 80% of cameraphone owners "regularly" carry their digital camera. Will the latest generation of superphones like the Nokia N95 start to change attitudes, or is the concept of a true all-in-one device nothing more than a myth?[Via ZDNet]
Mobile phone use leading to lowered sperm count?
Ok, so we're fully aware of how potentially dangerous cellphones are to the longevity of our brain, and we understand the risk of generating ear tumors if we yap too long, but a new study by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine might have findings that elicit more than just a passing scoff. Researchers analyzing British males have linked "electromagnetic radiation emitted by handsets and / or the heat they generate" to actually lowering sperm count by "up to 25 percent." The study was based around four areas of potency -- "count, motility, viability / morphology, or appearance" -- and it was suggested that users of mobile phones produced "significant differences" from those who refrained from talking on the oh-so-treacherous handset. Even light talkers weren't off the hook, as the study found that occasional communicators seem to suffer from drops in sperm quality, while the big talkers who blew through four hours per day or more on their trusty cellphone had "results" described as "worst" and "poorest." Nevertheless, some doctors are indeed skeptical of unseen variables that must be considered when viewing the talkative crowd, such as the "amount of time they spend in cars, the amount of stress in their life, and the quality of food" they ingest -- so maybe you can just nix McDonald's, still maximize those M2M minutes, and not completely eliminate your hopes of fathering a child someday.
Cellphone offerings influencing carrier selection?
Sure, it's always nice when the hottest, most feature-packed mobile drops exclusively on the carrier you're already using, but what happens to T-Mobile customers lusting after Verizon's LG Chocolate? According to a research study conducted by The Yankee Group, the types of phones offered by wireless providers is having a larger impact than ever before on buying decisions, and while only three percent of those surveyed stated that phone offerings was a primary factor in their carrier selection, over one-fourth of respondents said "more frequent handset upgrades would prevent them from jumping ship." In one particular case, a self-proclaimed "addict" switched providers three times in the span of 1.5 years, as he couldn't resist the urges felt from Audiovox's SMT 5600, JasJar's Qtek 9000, and the HTC Prophet. While this particular individual may have paid merciless fees (nearly $2,000, actually) to break contracts and acquire the latest in cellphone technology, the researchers concluded that "network coverage, reliability and price" still ranked highest in determining carrier appeal -- but cellphone selection is apparently climbing the ranks, and fast.[Thanks, Donald]
iWriter - easily create study tools for the iPod, .Mac and the web
Yea that's right: I said 'study tools' and 'iPod' in the same sentence. iWriter is an interesting little app from Talking Panda that allows you to quickly build projects and study tools for easy viewing on an iPod or the internets. Projects can be uploaded to a .Mac account, and iWriter offers 8 project templates to help students and teachers alike hit the ground running. This handy little app can even record lectures, and a preview pane allows you to see exactly what your project will look like on an iPod while you build it.All this isn't bad for a $12 piece ofUniversal Binary shareware. While a demo is available, Talking Panda receives a ding for requiring an email address to download it (though I can understand a small software outfit's need to reach out to their potential customers). Still, check iWriter out if you're in the market for more better studying with the help of your iPod.[via the intrepid Nik Fletcher]
Cable VoIP calls clearer than landlines?
Thinking about ditching that landline? Are those VoIP options -- especially the free ones -- looking more and more attractive? Keynote Systems, a globally respected internet and communication testing company, has completed a ridiculously thorough investigation on the true audio quality that can be had using VoIP (within American borders), and the results are quite intriguing. To test call quality and remove human error / bias, they had automated machines in apartments nearly 3,000 miles apart call one another 125,000 times throughout the month of August, play a 30 second clip, and let an audio analyzer handle the rest. VoIP hard / soft phones, digital cable VoIP phones, and traditional landline phones were all tested and compared, only to discover that cable company-provided VoIP phones that utilized PacketCable -- an IP multimedia transmission system optimized for coax -- scored a whopping 4.24 MOS (mean opinion score), trouncing the 4.0 found in traditional phone networks. Granted, when viewing all VoIP venues, outliers were found around 2.6, which is fairly unacceptable when a 3.2 MOS is considered the "minimum" for a frustration-free conversation. All in all, landlines ranked second only to the mighty cable offerings, while hard VoIP phones (like the ATS E6501) slid in third, and "soft" services (Skype, for instance) were declared last. While we've personally had great success with the likes of Gizmo and other free internet calling alternatives, our ears certainly aren't sine wave decoders, so if you're thinking of tossing that ole rotary dialer for something with a touch more clarity, you might as well give that cable company a ring.[Via Ars Technica]
