Study: Gamers of 1986 Less Likely to Go To College

April 8, 2011 -

A researcher at Oxford University has conducted a survey that comes to a conclusion that may agitate gamers. Mark Taylor, who conducted the research for the Department of Sociology, asked 17,200 people who were 16 in 1986 about their level of education, their current career and extra-curricular activities during their teens. Taylor concluded that there was a correlation between gaming and a "decreased likelihood" of going to college. Around 19 percent of male gamers were likely to go to college, compared to 24 percent for those who did not play games. The survey also found that 14 percent of females enjoyed games during their teen years, compared to 20 percent who didn't play games.

While Taylor believes gaming impacted higher education, it did not appear to impact careers. Thinq, who uncovered the study, asked Taylor if he believed similar findings would be found in studies covering more recent years, since gaming was not as popular or mainstream in 1986 as it is now.

"It's difficult to say, as we have no data on kids who are growing up now," he said, adding that it would be "completely insane to say that you're going to see exactly the same results replicated across time," and that he would be "very surprised" to see similar results for modern teenagers. "Not many [people] were playing video games [in 1986]. The picture is completely different nowadays. I wouldn't like to make that generalisation at all."

Taylor also told Thinq that he considers himself a serious gamer. He plays around 4 hours a week with his college friends and peers.

"Education is not just about piece of paper you get at the end of the exercise. If people get something out of gaming then that's fantastic. While playing games might not make you any better at your English A Levels, it might make you more interested in programming."

The most important thing Taylor told Thinq is that he is concerned about his findings being taken out of context because he included extra-curricular activities such as movies, going to museums and gaming. The study, he says, represents how all of these activities can affect people's likelihood of going to college, but that a major finding is that "it doesn't bear out further on people's lives," such as what they go on to do in their careers.

Source: Thinq


Comments

Re: Study: Gamers of 1986 Less Likely to Go To College

As I was 16 in 1986, was and still am a gamer, and basically spent a good chunk of my adult life in higher ed, including completing a PhD that involved video games, I'd like to see the questions used to generate this data.  Specifically, I wondering what sort of socioeconomic variables might influence the results of this poll.  Also, since this was presumably conducted in the UK, would the results differ in other nations?

--
Stefan Hall, PhD
Assistant Professor of Communication and Media Studies
8 Dana Hall
Defiance College
701 N. Clinton St.
Defiance, OH  43512

Re: Study: Gamers of 1986 Less Likely to Go To College

BS!

The only reason why I went to college, and got a degree in 3D computer animation was because I played videogames back in the 80s.

Did I ever get a job in the industry? Not really. But I decided what I wanted to do in life at 10 years of age and I'm almost there today. Like a boss!

I just need a job to finish it off.

 

Re: Study: Gamers of 1986 Less Likely to Go To College

Why would this agitate gamers? He explains the limitations, that it's correlation only, that it can't be generalized, etc. Seems like he did about the best study he could with the material he had. That's one data point for future meta research. That's about it.

Re: Study: Gamers of 1986 Less Likely to Go To College

I wonder if his data can help determine whether gaming caused this drop in college attendance, or if low-ambition people were more likely to play games anyway.  Regardless, this study will be taken out of context very soon, if it hasn't already.  Fox News, I'm looking at you.

Re: Study: Gamers of 1986 Less Likely to Go To College

Given the statement about it not impacting careers, it is also possible that gamers of the erra were more likely to be self educated and self motivated, moving on to careers via merits instead of degree.

I can recall my previous company, we had programmers who had been gamers in their youth and were self taught.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Code Avarice's Paranautical Activity make its way back onto Steam?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
NeenekoJust look at how interviews are handled. Media tends to pit someone who is at best a journalist, but usually entertainer, against an expert, and it is presented and percieved as if they are equals.10/25/2014 - 7:38am
Neeneko@MC - Focusing on perpetrator does nothing for prevention, the media and public lack the domain knowledge and event details to draw any useful conclusions. All we get are armchair risk experts.10/25/2014 - 7:36am
Neeneko@AE - no name or picture, I like it.10/25/2014 - 7:34am
PHX Corp@MW and AE The news media needs to stop promoting the Shooters. period10/25/2014 - 7:16am
Andrew EisenWhen I write about these massacres, I don't use the shooter's name or picture. I'm not saying everyone has to play it that way but that's how I prefer to do it.10/25/2014 - 12:44am
Andrew EisenYep, it's why the news media stopped spotlighting numbnuts who run out on the field during sporting events.10/25/2014 - 12:01am
Matthew Wilsonin media research its called the copycat effect. it simply says that if the news covers one mass shooting shooter, it increases the likelihood of another person going on a mass shooting.10/25/2014 - 12:00am
Andrew EisenAgreed. It bugs me that I know the names, faces and personal histories of a bunch of mass shooters but I couldn't tell you the name of or recognize a photo of a single one of their victims.10/24/2014 - 11:51pm
AvalongodAgree with Quiknkold. @Mecha...if that worked we would have figured out how to prevent these long ago.10/24/2014 - 11:32pm
MechaCrashUnfortunately, you have to focus on the perpetrator to figure out the whys so you can try to prevent it from happening again.10/24/2014 - 10:55pm
quiknkoldpoor girl. poor victims. rather focus on them then the shooter. giving too much thought to the monster takes away from the victims.10/24/2014 - 10:15pm
Andrew EisenFor what it's worth, early reports are painting the motive as "he was pissed that a particular girl wouldn't date him."10/24/2014 - 10:12pm
quiknkoldwell then I suck as a man cause I ask for help when necessary :P10/24/2014 - 10:07pm
Technogeek(That said, mostly I was making the smartass evopsych comment because your post seemed like the kind of just-so story that has come to dominate 99% of its usage.)10/24/2014 - 10:04pm
TechnogeekHell, Liam Neeson built his modern career around it. Cultural factors likely play a far greater role than you appear willing to admit.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
TechnogeekSeriously, though, the idea of "because women are protectors and that's why they never commit school shootings" is, at best, grossly overreductive. There's nothing inherently feminine about being willing to kill in order to protect one's offspring.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
MechaCrashThe "toxic masculinity" thing refers to how you have to SUCK IT UP AND BE A MAN because seeking help is seen as weakness, which means you suck at manliness, so it builds and builds and builds until something finally snaps.10/24/2014 - 10:01pm
quiknkoldthere, I'm done. And thats what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldand I am not spouting Evopsych, technogeek. tbh I never heard the phrase till you said it. I'm going off my observations.10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldmoreover, the guy who did this isnt even white. He was native american according to the news report I read. Also that he went for a specific target. That's a much different picture than a certain Sandy Hook guy who will not be named10/24/2014 - 9:53pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician