Source Analysis (2-8)

Source Analysis

John Ott

Mrs. Noguera

English 1520

09 Thursday 2006

Primary Source: The Effect of Video Games on the Brain, Eleni Kardaras, Observation, February 2, 2006

Secondary Source: Scientific Article: “Dome Improvement”
May 2005 Issue 13.05
Wired Magazine

Video games have often been given a bad reputation of being mind-numbing, and dull. However I am still astonished as to why these games are still being sold on the market! If video games are so “bad” then why are they still being sold to children and adults alike? I’m going to answer these questions as well as provide some information that might explain the real impact of video games on the minds of today.

To dissect these thoughts primary and secondary resources have been given. (I will incorporate more to the study as it becomes available.) A primary source I have used to give direction is an observation entitled The Effect of Video Games on the Brain. In this observation, brothers are documented as they play the video games in real time. This allows for accurate interpretation of the cerebral cortex at work. These children were hands- on, playing the game “Mario Kart” for the Nintendo Gamecube. In the observation these two didn’t function as emotionally connected individuals, one brother was documented hitting, screaming, and swearing, at the other as he had beat him in a race.

Later that day, one of the brothers was playing the game on the exact stage he had previously beaten his brother on. As he had become unsuccessful beating the computer the boy was documented throwing down the controller and crying, “Why are you doing this to me.” at the T.V. screen (Kardaras 1). Some disadvantages of using this study come from the fact that two brothers are only playing this one game. Even though further research is given to supplement the data of brain and beta wave activity, Kandaras has only observed the two brothers playing that game only. Also clear is the point that emotion has played a big part of video gaming, but the question is; is there a long term damaging effect? Though the information given has been deemed accurate, future explanation that will arise from the data I will bring in could put this source down to a few key points.

A secondary resource that is implemented today is the “Dome Improvement”, a scientific article done by Wired Magazine. In this resource IQ is has increased despite mindlessness on programmed on the television. Scientific intellectual breakthroughs are being made even though there doesn’t seem to be a deemed reason as to how this can be so. Scientists such as Flynn have discovered that the general IQ has risen 17 IQ points from 1947 to 2001, and “blacks are sufficiently gaining more knowledge faster then whites when given the opportunities which should be out rightly given to them.” (Wired 2).

In this scientific study it is also explained that environment interaction plays a significant involvement in adaptation of broadening old skills and developing new ones. Needless to say, “the information regarding heredity is not wrong, we just misinterpreted them.” (Wired 2). Now there is no sense of getting bent out of shape because the collective thinks that heredity is the only way to receive a high IQ point. The environment has taught and shown the world that we are in fact as a whole are getting smarter with each passing day, particularly as a generation of kids have grown up learning to solve their way out of dungeons before they learned to read or write. With enough practice, it is possible to figure out how to become masters of the domain and path we choose.

Some disadvantages that come from this scientific study are points that aren’t well interpreted and leveled out yet. Maybe it can be deemed that the level of understanding and self-awareness from learning is still in question.